The dwg export experience in SketchUp is rather dire, so a plugin that does it better would obviously be very welcome! Would love to test. That said, to answer this honestly:
I’d like to ask whether $25 per month is too expensive for a plugin
That’s $300 per year, which is basically the same for a SketchUp Pro subscription itself, so it just wouldn’t make sense to me. I’d actually, personally, not consider a subscription model for an export plugin at all. I think I would consider paying something like up to $150 for a permanent license depending on the complexity/feature richness of the plugin. For comparison, Curic Section is $60 (permanent). Some complex plugins like Profile Builder are around $80 (permanent), Artisan is $99 a year, a full on rendering engine like Enscape is ~$50 per month…
BUT, my perspective might just be very skewed due to the extremely poor currency conversion rate in my country (Turkey)—the worst in the world along with Argentina iirc. People from the US etc might have wildly differing views.
Wow, this is exciting stuff happening here !
Until the BIM revolution really happens, this functionality, or set of functionalities seems pretty important to those of us in the building industry as many partners still need decent dwg files from us & as many have said before, the current dwg output from SU is not up to parr…
As to the financial aspects, i’m going to be cheeky and suggest that Trimble should pay @CoraZ for all the hard work as the current export facility is so lacking ! This is something that has been needing attention for a VERY long time, as many posts on here and elsewhere attest.
Anyway, all the best.
In export it’s not really about autocad versions, in my view, because what gets exported is basic geometry that could easily be represented all the way back to autocad 2000 in the same manner. I would not set support for older than 2014 as a priority, although there´s always some people that uses older software because autocad does not get that much better for every version. I would say support for older formats could come later if people request it.
Not sure if I understand the question, but exporting with an offset value to match map 0 is important only for the site plan, and the plan where you show building coordinates. For a floor plan view and a building section one must be able to use the scene axis system as dwg origo.
Also, at least in my country, site plan data is actually scaled differently, so that when I receive a dwg containing areal data it’s usually with meters as unit. Maybe I dont do it the best way, but I always end up scaling it 1000 times to get a 1:1 file in millimeters.
Proper closed polylines is the best of course, so I will take away these from my mockup if I revise it.
This is cool. If one work with a well set up sketchup template file that already has most of the materials one will use, then it would be nice to also re-use the settings for the Material to Hatch conversion.
For my own workflow I will not actually use hatches for the most part. The main autocad tradition in Norway for production drawings is to make line drawings, except for walls, that might have a fill. It used to be the norm to use the autocad index colors to represent the most common layers. Outer walls would be Cyan, Inner walls would be green (index color 3) But that was before, and nowadays you get autocad drawings with all kinds of ridiculous color schemes.
dwt is really just a autocad template file, It could be useful, so that one can convert into a file with preset Autocad styles for dimensioning, text, and settings for ltscale. Also then one could have title blocks present in the export file, as one gets when exporting out of Layout.
Getting what you already have, proper polyline export with layers, could maybe be a cheaper option, and then pay more to unlock advanced features like full control of how the dwg looks, and efficient batch exporting. There are some aggression, always, around subscriptions, but I like it, it ensures the continuous development and updates.
I could not say, I dont really work with the interior people much.
super: I will make a update to my suggested mockup.
The newest version that PowerCADD 9 can save is 2010. I don’t know specifically what the newest is it can open, but I would guess 2010 to be safe. I’m always having to ask consultants to save back to 2010 for what they send me. What PowerCADD 10 will do when it emerges is anyone’s guess at this point.
I’ll be straight forward here and say that I couldn’t use it at this price point. As @farukahmet said, the price is too steep for small offices but also for large organizations and it’s the same as Sketchup Pro.
I would consider that most of us have been using Sketchup for years and we have lived with the DWG import and export pain points since the start. If the plugin is reasonably priced your user base will grow a lot because the pain points are real. If the plugin is too heavily priced and requires a subscription, the user base will shrink.
Also, don’t forget that this community is based on Sketchup being first free, then low priced, compared to the high cost of other architectural software and, that most plugins are also free and only some fundamental ones are paid, but most without subscription.
I invest in plugins, but avoid subscriptions. I want to be able to rely on my plugins, no matter what happens with my ability to work and earn money. I would rather use your plugin than other methods, but it’s not mandatory that I use it.
I would consider paying the subscription on some occasions, for some work where the workflow with CAD would be absolutely needed, but I wouldn’t pay your plugin permanently nor would I use it with all collaborators. If it was a fixed price, I would always use it and would distribute it to all collaborators.
So, do what you think is fair, and I’ll adapt my workflow and relationship with your plugin as I see fit. Your plugin, if it complies with what we need, will be very useful.
Above is one of the most used free CAD software for editing drawings in this community. I, personally, don’t need anything else than that for what I do with DWG files. As you might see it requires R11-2013.
DWG Trueview is able to convert drawings, but I would rather avoid using it. I have to, sometimes, but I wouldn’t like to have to use is everytime I want to check an export or refresh a Xref.
I don’t care much about DXF but it would make total sense to import all versions of a DWG. As I said above, I can always convert using Trueview but that is an extra step I’d like to avoid.
We can’t work in Sketchup with models that are too far from origin as a lot of errors will start to happen. So, we find an alternative reference point and move it closer to origin. We often do that so we can coordinate with everyone else working in the project. However, if we could export a plan and open it in CAD exactly at the right coordinates, we could integrate much better with other people that are not even aware that working far from origin is even a problem.
Landscape architects, urban planning teams, municipalities and other entities require these coordinates to be georeferenced. We can’t do that with Sketchup. If your export had a datum (as well as your import) we would be able to solve the issue.
I don’t see the point of having closed polylines, but I don’t mind it.
Overall that’s not usually how people draw in CAD so I don’t think it’s mandatory. Maybe some special cases need polylines like areas, or property boundaries.
The only geometry where I feel I would consider that as a nice additition is in sections. All visible geometry doesn’t need to be closed polylines.
What would be interesting would be that curves would be exported as curves, and that arcs and circles would be exported as arcs, circles or ellipses and elliptical arcs. If you’d pull that off, the accuracy of our DWG files would be much higher than what we can do right now as all our arcs get converted to lines. This annoys people working with me a lot
That is actually not true. It depends on the developer. Subscriptions are a steady means of income that will be guaranteed to the developer, even if nothing else is there to develop. I personally don’t like them and use them only for software that I absolutely need and avoid depending on software that uses the model. Thinking about it, at the moment, my only subscription based software I use is Sketchup.
I wouldn’t subscribe at this price, it’s not a tool I would use on a regular basis, between 2 to 4 times per year, not all the projects I work on require to be presented on dwg, just the ones that must be approved by the city hall, the rest of the projects I have are small redesigns, interior designs and arch viz, paying 300 for something im going to use 3 times per year isn’t worth it for me, I would gladly buy a perpetual license and probably fees for updates if they´re worth it, I don’t want to be attached to another subscription, sketchup, enscape and vray are enough for me cause I use those softwares/plugins all the time. I´d have to keep exporting to dwg like I´ve done for 10+ years, from Layout then “post production” on Qcad Pro.
By the way Qcad Pro costs 40 dollars the perpetual license with free updates for a year, I used to pay 300 per year for Draftsight that is a complete software not a plugin until I found Qcad Pro.
Anyways that’s just my opinion and I really wish you have a successful business, I´m sure that more people will find it worth it to subscribe to your plugin.
This is great! I would love to participate and help out!
Does your plugin require a section for each dwg export like Curic or Skalp?
Does it draw all of the geometry on correct layers beyond, say for an elevation view? It seems the closed loop poly lines might start to stack up depending on what is visible.
What I really need is for a section geometry to be closed loop with hatching similar to Curic with all geometry beyond drawn as loose line work based on the visible edges on their associative layer. For example, in a plan view it would be great to see a set of stairs with the visible treads drawn to a stair layer and countertops and plumbing fixtures drawn to their layer as well.
Thanks for putting the effort into this! While it could be amazing to somehow make the SketchUp model → ACAD plan set a possibility; for me this would be a huge improvement in exporting workable drawings for other engineers and collaborators.
This sounds like a huge wishlist for me - I’m back and forth between AutoCAD (Architecture) and SketchUp multiple times a week. Getting the layers back and forth would be heaven… Also, as I saw above, keeping the origin consistent. I just saw the message, so I’ll try and look at all the responses this weekend.
But please please please get it out for MacOS as well as Windows.
and please please don’t make it $25 a month.
I occasionally need to export to dwg depending on the client or other consutants needing to use my drawings, but it is not an every day/week, or even month thing that would make this worth the expense.
I would suggest that if all geometry was tagged, and all geometry was closed polylines, not just whats in the section cut, that should defintely be better than just getting that for the section cut. That way the client or consultant can organise, say a site drawing, however they want, and geometry can go back and forth between SketchUp and autocad, without loosing important properties on the way.
But polylines or not, tags are the most important feature.
I find the development of this plugin interesting, especially for the ability to export all views in one step. However, a price of €25 per month seems excessive, considering that SketchUp Pro costs about the same. Having a plugin for a single function at the price of SketchUp might not be an effective strategy.
I would recommend a more affordable price, similar to other plugins without a subscription. For example, the Curric series, which includes many features, does not exceed €50 and has no additional costs. Despite being a plugin with an affordable price, it has been very successful in the community.
**In addition, I would like to know when the plugin is scheduled to be released.
I found a plugin that exports 2D dxf with all the layers information, it´s called Skema 2D projection and costs $15 perpetual license. It´s a no brainer for me.
Do you know if it respects Sketchup Section Fills and Origin points?
There is also this one that seems rather nice, not only for DXF export, but because of the whole workflow it offers for streamlining Scenes for Architecture and the great connection it provides to Curic plugins:
Yes, the next update can create AutoCAD hatches, polyline for Section Cuts if using Curic Section and maintain Origin points. It will be release tomorrow. Subscribe fee just 5 usd/month, free trial in 30 days before charge.
We want to invite you to try it! I will make further iteration depend on you feedback. If you are still interested. Plz leave me your email in the below google sheet and I will send you the installation package and tutorial.
I would say support for older formats could come later if people request it.