It does already work that way. You can also turn off the auto render to avoid accidental refreshes, or even lock the viewport.
1 Like
I knowā¦But when you, for example āexplodeā a section cut (so thereās no direct to the SU-model anymore) LO becomes super snappy. Maybe you should try it and see the difference for yourself. Complex plans I always explode because only then LO is useable for me. 
1 Like
can you share a complex planā¦?
Hi Paul, thanks for helping me, but Iām afraid you canāt as long as you canāt compare it with my setup. And maybe you can live with a bit of slugginessā¦what is acceptable to you doesnāt have to be acceptable for me (on my setup). And I am most definitely sure that the documents I work with are as sluggy on your computer as mine. I just donāt believe that DaveR has no problems and has a snappy LO working or that you have a system that works like lightning. I have tried E V E R Y T H I N Gā¦from Nvidia settings to run LO as administrator etc etc etc. It remains unacceptable slow. Sorry.
3 Likes
I agree. Using layout for large projects is incredibly inefficient. Youāll end up spending half your time waiting than actual work. Every time i use it i end up googling how awful the experience is in one way or another and end up reading through posts like these while waitingā¦ In fact itās why iām here now!
The files i use are about 50 to 100mb, yet seems like anything with complex geometry kills Layout performance in an instant. Itās a huge time suck and extremely frustrating.
I hope they figure out out someday, it would really be a complete suite if they didā¦ I think until they do it will always take a 2nd seat to the other industry standards. For large projects anywayā¦ at least anything bigger than a shed.
4 Likes
Note that there is this talk from Nick Sonder, who is known for doing complex LayOut. You could add to the questions to ask how he manages to get better performance from LayOut. medeek and Julian have already added questions that will be interesting to hear what he says.
2 Likes
This is awesome, iām going to post a question there. I did one of his workshops at Basecamp 2016ā¦THATās the guy to ask.
Side note: During the workshop we didnāt get super far because of several laptops crashing when trying to work in layout 
Edit: That workshop was 2018, not 2016. Feels so long ago!
1 Like
Iām working on my presentation this weekend, so the more input before the better. Iām currently running 6 new projects so Iāll probably pick one in the early stages to show the design process. Then, Iāll focus on the opposite end of detailing in construction documents. Thereās a lot to pack in so hopefully I can keep my 3D mouse in check!
What is the native resolution (ppi) for Layout ??
Thatās half the problem with the programā¦I canāt seem to figure out what the BEST ppi is for Layout.
That and the laggy performance even with all the ātweaksā down to the settings etcā¦
My computers (MACS) keep getting fasterā¦Layout is getting worse.
I found this quote from Marc, from 6 years ago: āRoughly speaking, Low = 96, Medium = 150, High = 300ā
I tested something, and it seems that setting the Display resolution to Low does help Raster models quite a bit, but doesnāt affect Vector render mode viewports. Although you are warned that Vector will take longer to render, once itās rendered itās less demanding, and better detail, than Raster. The High setting with Vector viewports performs better than Low with Raster viewports.
thanks for the info Colin. Are you saying āHigh setting with vector performs better than low with raster viewpointsāā¦in relation to displaying and viewing (appearance) or performance, such as speed, less laggy when using native tools, or laying out the viewports etcā¦?
I understand the difference in PPI for any raster images that I may want to import, though I guess I still donāt grasp the ānative resolutionā for say a Tabloid document in Layout. Lets say I have a raster image file I want to import at 10" tall and 16" wideā¦I think that what youāre saying is I have to decide how well I want that to display in Layoput Vs. the increase in overall document size, based on what resolution (96ppi, 150ppi, or 300ppi) i bring it in at?
One thing i canāt agree with is the LOSS of detail with Vector modes, as any and all lines disappear when viewed through a transparent surfaceā¦such as detail lines behind glass, window etcā¦ Then only RASTER mode will show all the lines, but they become jaggy and stepped. Big failure of Layout.
Raster does let you view materials and transparency, so Iām not arguing that Vector is the best choice visually. But in a simple mouse wheel zoom in and out of the page, Vector performs smoother than raster, and is not affected by the display resolution setting. Raster performance is proportionate to the resolution setting, with Low being the fastest, but still not as smooth as Vector is.
I understandā¦
I use a lot of water in my drawings, that Vector or Hybrid mode DOES NOT show the line details beyond / below the transparent surface. Then iām forced to use Raster mode to show these lines, at the cost of unwanted jaggy and stepped lines even with Display and Output turned up to HIGH (under pages) in layout.
Obviously performance is critical to commercial use ot ANY software, but second to that and some would argue first and foremost is refined and clean display of line-work in said illustrations.
This is where I feel Layout drops the ball big time.
If only they had a setting to ādisplay lines under Transparent surfacesāā¦then I would be using Hybrid mode all day long.
Is that a bit of code someone (smarter than me) could write?
Iām a designer at SNL and everything is about speed. LO is terrible. Itās just about unusable and I donāt have large models. Having to zoom in and out is torturous. This needs to be addressed.
10 Likes
Every comment I see from the SketchUp team seems to be a excusing this issue by trying to explain it away or give some tips. Itās not us. Itās the program. Layout needs to be fixed. Iā lose time, money and sanity because of Layout. I love SketchUp and have been using it for over 6 years exclusively. But if this isnāt fixed or at least addressed in the next version, Iāll have to find another software.
Itās literally the only software on my gaming computer that is slow. I can render high definition renderings faster than I can turn a page in Layout. It doesnāt matter how efficient I am at modeling because my entire project grinds to a halt when I move into Layout.
Please donāt make any more excuses about how itās not a fair comparison and just fix it already!! It doesnāt work! Itās broken! Itās not coded correctly! I donāt know how many ways we have to say it!!
3 Likes
As a developer on LayOut, I fully agree that LayOut needs to be fixed. We are spending as much time as we have available to improve various areas of performance in LayOut, and we are exploring every avenue to find a way to make using LayOut a much better experience. I donāt have a timetable for when any performance improvements will be rolled out, but be assured that we are working on it, and we arenāt satisfied with the current LayOut experience.
Adam
12 Likes
This is the kind of response we want to see. I agree wholeheartedly with @easton1. Make Layout a priority; itās the bottleneck of the entire design process.
Even if itās an entire re-working of the program, I think everyone here would be okay with that. I know I would be. Iām not sure thatās necessary as I know nothing about software development but the bottom line is there has to be a seamless design process from 3D modeling (SketchUp) to plan development (Layout). At present, the 3D modeling is wonderful. The plan development is awful. I think as a developer you should take some pride in the fact that SO many people want it to work SO badly that they are willing to come to forums like this to seek a solution instead of abandoning it altogether. Fundamentally I do love the program as itās supposed to work.
Thanks for your response. I think keeping users updated on the progress as you work on it via the newsletter would be a good thing. Even if the work is not complete, keeping us posted will be better than hearing nothing at all.
7 Likes
[quote=āadam, post:76, topic:119318ā]
As a developer on LayOut, I fully agree that LayOut needs to be fixed. We are spending as much time as we have available to improve various areas of performance in LayOut, and we are exploring every avenue to find a way to make using LayOut a much better experience. I donāt have a timetable for when any performance improvements will be rolled out, but be assured that we are working on it, and we arenāt satisfied with the current LayOut experience.
Adam
Thank You for this (rare?) bit of candor!
As you know, you are not the only one dissatisfied with LayOut. I know you are working hard and doing the best that you can, but ā¦
When you say you are āspending as much time as we have availableā, how much time is that?
We need you to convince Trimble to give you the budget and staff and time NECESSARY to get the job done, not just āwhatās availableā ā¦
You apparently see the need, make them see it, (and fund it)! Please?
1 Like
[quote=ālbandrews1, post:77, topic:119318ā]
Make Layout a priority; itās the bottleneck of the entire design process.
Even if itās an entire re-working of the program, I think everyone here would be okay with that. I know I would be. Iām not sure thatās necessary as I know nothing about software development but the bottom line is there has to be a seamless design process from 3D modeling (SketchUp) to plan development (Layout). At present, the 3D modeling is wonderful. The plan development is awful. I think as a developer you should take some pride in the fact that SO many people want it to work SO badly that they are willing to come to forums like this to seek a solution instead of abandoning it altogether. Fundamentally I do love the program as itās supposed to work.
Nicely Framed lbandrews1!
I agree with the idea of an āentire re-working of the (LayOut) programā. Rather than continuing to add little patches and grafts to LayOut, maybe Trimble needs to bite the bullet and do a total ground up CODE rewrite!
I think Trimble has resisted this to date for some combination of the following reasons:
- Itās too expensive
- Itās too time consuming
- They donāt have the right staff to do it
- They donāt think its really necessary
Regardless of the reasons, itās overdue and needs to be done!
3 Likes
I want to add something here. It seems that the majority of my problems come from importing a high-resolution image into Sketchup (a floor plan jpeg for example). Then, when I import my model into Layout the program bogs down. I can mitigate or mostly eliminate the laggy nature of Layout by taking the jpeg into Photoshop and reducing the resolution.
Hope this helps someone.