Hybrid Mode causes "lost" lines when geometry is viewed behind transparent or water surfaces

Hey DaveR…

I guess LO team is still working on this “bug” ??

Why wouldn’t they just have a Vector mode that supports materials?


I expect so. Since I’m not on the team (as much as I’d like to be) I’m not privy to exactly what the status is.

They do. It’s called Hybrid.

that’s the one with the “bug” in it… that started this whole thread…and still acts the same way now as it has for years

I just don’t see why anyone using LO would want “jaggy” raster-based line work in their drawings?

1 Like

Look. I told you I’m not on the SketchUp or LayOut teams. I’m not an employee of Trimble, either. Please don’t get upset with me.

Textures in SketchUp are raster images not vector.

As for the jaggies, are you referring to what you see while working in LO?

It’s not uncommon to see the jaggies when you are working in LO because by default the display resolution is set to Medium. PDF and image exports can be set to higher quality output.

Are you still using SketchUp 2018 as indicated in your profile?

easy mate…not getting upset with anyone, just thinking out aloud :slight_smile:
Yes…still using SKP PRO 2018… didn’t see any real improvement, or advantage in 2019 other than dashed lines.

…and I am aware of the different settings when you export to PDF, though the “high” setting produces very large file sizes…so there is that trade off.

I do realize this file is just a test example…but if the model isn’t too overly complex…tracing over the lines while in raster and then switching to hybrid is also an option. (please see attached)

Tester_001_TraceOver.layout (1.5 MB)

Tester_001_TraceOver.pdf (733.0 KB)

Charlie_v tracing over in Layout is not really an option for 99% of my illustrations…however exporting multiple images of raster materials, vector line-only and shadows then getting “stuck into it” in Photoshop layering it together. It just gets painful when the client makes changes…I tend to leave the “water” out… a lot…lol.

I suspected so…but oh my that would be tedious…hopefully this gets sorted out soon!
Edit: Very nice work BTW


1 Like

No need to trace. Below, I have created two versions of the same scene: One normal view, set to hybrid rendering. A second identical view, set to wireframe view with dashed lines, and vector rendering. I then overlaid them in LayOut.

That’s getting close to a result Mr. Anssi, thanks for the tip… though I’m hoping to only have the “missing” lines display through the transparent surfaces (green in your model) and not the entire wireframe of the whole model showing through the SKP solid surfaces.

I’m wondering if this “bug” has been fixed in SU / LO 2020, as I still have yet to upgrade due to the amount of time its going to take update and re-install all my extensions.

I guess only one way to find out…

It has not been fixed.

It is doable with overlaid scenes, but I have to hide the transparent faces to get a usable hidden line scene

so frustrating still not being fixed…I’m no programming genius, so I can’t comment on “why” they haven’t addressed this bug yet… Hey…@Trimble are you listening?

If only my models were that simple…but thanks for giving advice Mr. Anssi

I’m on SU2020 v20.1.228 on a Mac and this issue seems to still exist - just transplanting my recent post in another thead relating to this:

By reading all the workarounds, that’s great but that shouldn’t be the way we’re spending our time with LO. Hopefully it’ll be looked at and is a relatively simple fix that doesn’t break a bunch of other things. @Trimble ?

Unfortunately…this seems like a fix Trimble is NOT too overly concerned with fixing anytime soon. Its frustrating because I use SKP PRO as an Aquatic designer, and having water (transparent) surfaces is almost 100% of the time in my models. The work-arounds are time consuming and just that…“a work around.”

It bugs me that if my screen can show a perfect render of lines and shadows both behind and beyond transparent surfaces, then why does Layout struggle to replicate the same imagery…I mean are they not meant to be companion software, both utilizing the same GPU and CPU, but in LO we have to choose between 3 “modes” of which none actually come close to capturing what the screen shows in SketchUp.

My work-around is to take screen shots of the image in SKP and then import them as an image into LO. It only works on perspectives and…where I don’t have to dimension any views…ugh!

This and the NEW subscription pricing model, may finally force me to abandon SKP after nearly 16years of using it. Double UGH!

1 Like

Totally agree - I think it’s just that the majority of Pro users do not need to output viewports in hybrid or vector which I can see why but for those of us that do, it certainly is annoying especially when it should just be something that is by default. Below, my response to @colin to this issue in another thread:

Well, it looks like you do some excellent work in your field, displayed by your screenshots above and it would be shame to lose a pro user like you to another software but with the new subscription model and other mounting annoyances that plague LO and its integration with SU on so many levels, it’s easy to see why after so many years, you’re finally at that tipping point.

Thanks for your comments on my work. I fell in love with SKP from the very first beta offering back when it was owned by AtLast software. It was a perfect match for how we “bend” sheet metal, and manufacture our Stainless Steel vessels. It served well as a very quick modeller for Concept Development with the ability to export to .DWG and .DXF formats for further construction models in SolidWorks, AutoCAD, etc… Over the early years it progressed nicely with subsequent version updates, with decent improvements and additions to the main software, nearly all of the time justifying the increases in its cost.

Now, like many others on here…I’ve seemed to reach the “tipping point” as you mentioned. Any users, and especially the PRO users, now have to decide whether to jump ship once and for all…or roll the dice (once again) and hope for future release versions to have more than one or two obscure features, when its something that is relatively basic and standard on other 3D platforms, …in order to justify the perpetual $$$ outlay.

As a designer, my job is to design, not trouble shoot work-arounds, or find ways to accomplish basic imagery or understand the intricacies of managing, updating and verifying certificates for numerous add-ons, extensions etc…I appreciate the 3rd-party dev peeps, but again I feel SKP development team has lost site of the PRO users, and our need to keep abreast with other 3D software offerings.