Moving Materials within Components

materials
advice
components

#1

Having some trouble with my projected material when it’s nested within a component. The component is a section of a larger landscape. I used projected material to get the landscape to fit the contours but when I separate out a section of it like the image below, the projected image shifts, when I enter the component, it’s in the correct place again. Any ideas how to fix this? Cheers.

Edit 1: Link to model https://www.dropbox.com/s/9yabwgeqxeptsio/Smooth%20Mountain.skp?dl=0


#2

Could you share the model? Makes things easier (=less difficult) to find an answer to the problem.


#3

Hi there, link to the model below. It’s quite a large file, 70MB.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/9yabwgeqxeptsio/Smooth%20Mountain.skp?dl=0


#4

Thanks for the file. I’ll look at the ‘Material’ issue later.

Not related to the problem but maybe worth mentioning:
Create a new layer, say ‘vegetation’ and assign it to the forest (component#9 is huge to display).
Then when turning off ‘vegetation’ rotating, panning and zooming is much smoother while working with the model.


#5

Hello @yipschin

I’m looking at your model along with @Wo3Dan

The model is sluggish.
As Wo3Dan says, assigning Groups and Components to hidden layers will make the model easier to navigate.

There are several other issues to address as well.
Item 1 may well be the cause of the projected material problem.


1) Distance
The model is located some 546km from the Origin.
SU’s OpenGL rendering engine will not perform well at such a distance from the Origin.
Move the model to the Origin.

2) Group Axes Location
As mentioned above, the two terrain Groups are some 546km away from Origin.
However, their internal axes are located at the Origin.
Again, OpenGL rendering will have issues at such a distance.

See this video tutorial about the Axes Tools plugin used to fix the problem.

3) Over-modeling
Use simple low-poly geometry to model small simple objects.
Overly complex geometry has a tremendous impact upon model performance and in the end, bloats the file.
Example:
The bridge railings extruded from 24-segment circles are overkill.
8 segments would suffice. Even fewer would be fine if closeup views aren’t necessary

4) Modeling Techniques
Model performance depends upon how you build and organize the model.
See this compendium of performance modeling tips at the SketchUp Sage site.
How do I make SketchUp Run Faster? — SketchUp Sage


#6

Thanks @Geo, resetting the axes to something closer to the actual model has fixed the material issue. The DWG import was way off the origin and I had no idea that that’s what causes the jittering.


#7

Hi @yipschin,

It’s not clear what you’ve done.

Moving the model’s drawing axes near the model does not move the inalterable World Axes.
You need to move the model to the World Axes Origin, not attempt the other way around.

Then, edit the terrain Groups and use SketchUp’s native Axes tool to place their internal group axes near their geometry vs. 564km away. It’s either that, or use the aforementioned Axes Tools plugin.


#8

Hi @Geo,

I used the axes tool to set the world axis closer to the model but I see what you mean since I can reset those axes back. I’ve reset the axes and moved the model back to the origin.


#9

That’s the way @yipschin. :+1:
Most likely you’ll notice navigating the model is somewhat smoother.


#10

Good to see that with @Geo’s help you have sorted out the ‘material’ shift problem.
Is there a particular reason for having a bottom surface as detailed as the terrain surface? It’s a copy of the top with all its faces and hidden edges. Way too much. If you could simplify the bottom surface, you would decrease the model file size and make it better to manage. Just a suggestion.


#11

You are correct, it is a copy of the top surface. I had some issues with gaps between the terrain and the paddy fields. Used vector push pull on the terrain to basically make the walls of those pits. My computer is quite high spec so it runs without any lag and the model would only be used for a few more weeks before we start over again in a smaller scale. Having said that, I have just deleted the bottom surface and that reduced the file size by about 20MB.