Anyone have experience with using relatively heavy files in SU for iPad with a new M5 pro?
I do not want to use iPad as a regular workstation, but I do have to often source vintage pieces for projects that having a full size laptop isn’t really feasible. I have an older ipad pro that I severely gut models for or save a handful of flat 2d views to and scale pieces inside of to get an idea of fit/feel. Would love to be able to load full models in ipad and add pieces in the field. I’ve linked a file below to show the LOD I am trying to work with.
If anyone has an m5 ipad pro and can verify if this is workable, or even openable on that machine, I would love to know feasibility before buying a machine that serves only a very narrow (but important) scope for me.
As a general note, usually a “slow” SketchUp model cannot be “fixed” by throwing new hardware at it. The performance difference between a mediocre and an ultracool whizbang (Adobe term) device is usually barely noticeable.
Thanks guys. I had some level of inkling that might be the case, but IF anyone has the ultra whizbang iPad, I’d love to hear how it goes on that machine. For better or worse, I am stuck in ultra high level of detail for all models forever. It’s something our clients expect, and because we’ve done it before, it can be done, and nobody really wants to hear from me, we can kind of show you what things will be like, but not all the way. I do realize there are apps that can handle higher LOD better, but SU is so much more comprehensive, and I definitely don’t have the time to experiment with other platforms unless work dries up. So for now, hardware does make a massive difference. This isn’t the largest file I have to work with by any stretch, but it zips along fine on desktop and laptop. Also, I would bet that I’m due for a purge on this model, but it won’t take me down any significant amount. Texture shrinking would probably make a bigger impact (and also a bigger, sadder impact on the quality of renders).
You weren’t many characters away from being neither lazy nor combative. But the fact of the matter is you were both. It would literally have been as simple as saying that’s a very large model. I can’t see any reason for a model to ever get that large. There are a ton of threads about reducing file size on here. I think the only way that you’re going to see the performance you desire is to follow one of those threads.
Your comment was the equivalent of saying I’m going to search the sketch up forums and call out people that I think are stupid and tell them that. It is antithetical to the concept of having a forum of peers who help each other. I am constantly grateful for people who share their knowledge experience and care for the platform. This was none of that.
A step further in lack of laziness would be to even say have you considered reducing your polygon counts, splitting your model into multiple submodels so that you can have higher level of detail in those Sub models have you considered using only low polygon models for your sketch files are you using components instead of just 1 million different groups? If you intended to help people understand that smaller file size equals a happier, ketchup experience there are 1 million ways you could’ve said that, but you chose not to.
I have multiple reasons why the options I listed above as ways to slim down my file size don’t really fit for me my clients or the company I work for. I understand that puts me up against kind of some tough technical challenges, some of which may never be overcome by software updates and or increasing hardware performance. I am OK with that reality. And for the sake of this post, just wanted to know where I sit in that reality.
FR, that’s trash on my part. Could 100 have transmuted or skimped those. Definitely a rush job on presentation day, that I should have done better with. or cleaned up after.
FWIW Dave, I like what you had put, and don’t think it’s wasted.
There were intentionally edges that were tagged (Visual Merge concept from ConDoc, which is actually a great problem solver for many instances where single plane geometry isn’t feasible), any tagged faces (and subsequently probably many edges as well) were likely in components I downloaded and didn’t properly clean up. That is admittedly a problem of mine, which I do try to be thorough with, but miss from time to time, and I definitely have components saved to my local library that almost certainly have this problem that will always fly under the radar.
With appliance garage, yes, I have to show open for this project, but it’s not always, and to your point, I could have and probably should have just used a couple of 2D items in there to tell the story, that wouldn’t have pulled client out of the story.
Great point on the toilet. Not sure what would be the fastest way to remove that geometry, but I 100 agree, it isn’t important.
The second second set of drawer pulls in this case is two different cabinet options, one of which is going to be deleted (along with the tag for that set) after client selects layout.
Regarding Tags, this has been an issue for me. I am using ConDoc to do multi-tags, since SU has no way to tag items more than once (aside from endless nesting) it uses the tags in a back door kind of way which hides objects associated with that tag instead of just turning off the tag. It has kind of incredible power, but also can get weird when opened on a machine that does not have that plugin. Until SU has native multi-tag, it still feels like the best approach I’ve come across.
No, hence “for what it’s worth”. I would be hopeful that an M5 iPad will do well with the example model.
As you know, a small model can be demanding. This happens to be a big file that isn’t so demanding. We’re not going to say that 600 MB files will work, when a 10 MB file might fail.
