No more new features?



Yea its unfortunate that that is the mentality of many :frowning:

Adding features in a responsible way does not mean you are messing up the software.



I don’t like long posts or I would have told the joke about economic systems. The one that ends with, in Russia, if you have one cow and your neighbor has two, you shoot one of his.

Back in the day, the forums used to be much more helpful. Some of the most frequent posters, with a lot of depth, are really judgmental and limiting in their approach. Used to be there was a fellow on payroll who very kindly set the tone and patiently explained the nuances.

At least Trimble answers questions and lets you know they are working on issues, sometimes. The real issue is the institutional shortsightedness about UI design.

Enough bitching. What sort of work do you do? I’m a sculptor/furniture designer myself. I actually killed myself designing this Altar in SU before I paid a friend to get it right in Rhino so I could send it out to CNC.



Jim Lewis

Springwood Studios
(formerly Icarus Furniture)

154 4th St
Troy NY 12180



Sketchup can do 90 % of that piece of furniture. Where it fails is the spiral . That would really be bad if you had a full head of hair. You would pull it all out. If a tool can do 90% of something and lacks that other 10% why not fill in the hole?? Its so easy to say oh it just not the right tool. Well why can’t it be?? Its the drop dead easiest modeling program out there but is lacking some simple key features. I hate Blender and just don’t even want to open that program. I like to be creative and that thing just doesn’t promote creativity.

Jimmer57 - I work in Residential Architecture Monday-Thursday and Game Design Friday-Sunday :slight_smile: . You have some cool stuff on your website. That link you posted is missing the dot for .com. Just an FYI


When I teach, I try to remind everyone that SketchUp (or any design software) is just a fancy pencil or pen.

If you used to draw lots of elevations and parallel lines, plans, etc. - you would eventually have invested in a quality drafting table. If you designed lots of things with circles and curves you would likely have had a whole host of plastic templates in your drawer… etc. etc.

With that said - if you are pulling alot of nails, use a crow bar or flat bar or any specialized tools for the job - and maybe give the hammer a rest.

Same goes for software.

If you want something as close to a pencil / pen as you can get, but with the options the computer adds to the equation (edit, undo, multiple tools with the same interface, no more spilling your ink or lead dust on a nearly finished drawing, etc.) - then out of the box SU is where its at for things that a surface modeler that likes parallel and orthogonal shapes. If you find yourself drawings lots of curves or meshes or what have you - plugins (like that drawer with your curve and circle templates in it) - might be the right add on to your basic pen and pencil set. Or you might decide the other software does the job more effectively…


Following your analogy, I have a box of 100 nails and a hammer that I have had for 16+ years. That hammer works on 90% of the nails but there are 10 nails that I have to go buy another new hammer for with a 4-5 month learning process just for those 10 nails? For basic modeling my ideal hammer should work for all the basic nails. Especially the nails that have been around for a long time. Software also should not stay stagnant like a hammer. It should evolve or be replaced by a better piece of software.


Of course I don’t want that ■■■■ otherwise I would use Blender. Why are so many people scared of adding a few key features??? Seriously tell me

Oh I keep forgetting. I want components that can cut through the model. IE if I have a 9" wall and plop a window in I want it to cut through the wall ( both sides ) and update when I move it. Maybe just have a threshold when creating the component to detect if its a flat plane or has thickness. Is that so scary?

Currently we have

All I want is this


And all for free because you are entitled to it. I don’t see that you have much reason to complain since you are using SketchUp Make.


You know whats funny about those two knife images is that the 1st one can be modeled in Sketchup very easily while the second would be pretty hard to do due to the spiral thing. LOL I love the whole Swiss Army knife thing. It is the perfect analogy!!!


Spirals are easy in SketchUp…


This is a comment on how FRs are too often stated:

Please, please, please never use the phrase “it would be easy to” or equivalent. Unless you are intimately familiar with the implementation details of SketchUp and its source code, you have no basis for judging whether something will be easy or difficult. The fact that it has been done in some other application tells you nothing about what would be required to add it into SketchUp. Even experienced programmers are notorious for underestimating how much work a code modification will take.

So, go ahead and state your Feature Requests and grumble about what SketchUp does or doesn’t, or should or shouldn’t do, just leave out the statements about effort.


Well put. Especially, many of the FRs relating to organic modelling would probably require changes to the fundamentals of SU (like switching to a solid/NURBS geometrical model). I am not saying that such a change would be unwelcome. It would also solve many problems of importing/exporting to other applications that have a deficient support of mesh objects.

Hole-cutting to thick walls was already demoed in the Pre-Google @Last days (the Fat Faces feature that never made it into a release).



I want components that can cut through 2 faces too… I have work arounds, and process flows that let me do it without too much trouble, but yes, that would be great.

But then there are a million other folks out there who don’t model architecture, and want to make spirals, or lofted surfaces, or video game characters… so, its no win for the dev team.


Dave - some of those are beautiful just from an art perspective…


Thank you, sir.

I could see the benefit of cutting through multiple faces, too. There are other things I’d like to see happen first. I think the SketchUp and LayOut teams do a great job adding capabilities and features. They’ve done a bunch of stuff that can’t be seen that should make it possible to add features. We’ve already seen that with PIDs and dimensions in LO. I expect that’s the tip of the iceberg and we’ll see more features that are possible because of the under-the-hood improvements.


Agreed. The dimension fix alone has been huge for me!

Yeah, the cutting through a ‘wall’ is low on the priority - but it would be nice if solid components could correctly intersect other solid components in a way that you could control when making the component - similar to Glue to and Cut Opening…

Obviously this would all apart with nested components (windows, doors, etc…) - so I know its not an easy problem to solve without some software trickery happening (and then a user smart enough to implement it from scratch, when building components…)


I understand how you did the screws. But how did you do the 4th? That one seems to have been pretty tough to do in Sketchup. Also the 3rd and 5th don’t count since something was used for lights and materials :slight_smile: Changing the width of the circle as you use follow-me on an arc just isn’t possible in sketchup. Like on the Swiss Army Knife the end of the cork screw would not be very easy to do. Same with the piece of furniture. The width changes thru the spiral.

See wouldn’t it to be nice if Sketchup looked like that in picture 3 or 5 ?


I like SketchUp and don’t want to go back to the old CAD ways. And Yes, it is great to be able to produce good 3d and 2d content for my architecture clients using SketchUp & Layout.

BUT… Its getting a bit annoying having to use workarounds (year in - year out) because some basic concepts that were implemented 10 years ago haven’t progressed at all. For instance:

Hole-cutting components that would cut through solid objects would be a great feature indeed. Yes, I can do it by hand but for easy editing of a design this would be a big time-saver.

The same for some sort of running dimensions. Yes, you can add/edit dimensions one by one but why not make it more easy & smart?

Linestyles in SketchUp (dash/dash dot/custom/etc). Yes, there are some plugins for that but native tools to make/edit/offset them would be great.

Materials: would it really make SketchUp too complex if some ‘more modern’ features would be added?

I can go on but my point is: I want to get my job done more efficiently and the expectations of clients are growing every year.


You can buy my eBook. There’s a tutorial in it on drawing the entire flame final. :wink:

Why don’t they count? The models for those were drawing in SketchUp. They were just rendered in another application but the geometry is pure SketchUp.

So you’re trying to say I didn’t create these in SketchUp? You would be incorrect.

It would indeed be easy to do. In fact it wouldn’t be a whole lot different from the flame finial.

That also wouldn’t be difficult to draw in SketchUp unless you’ve already decided it’s impossible.

I prefer to let the rendering be done by another application.


This whole thing is suppose to be on features added to plane Jane Sketchup. I put the smiley face as a joke as I understand it was render elsewhere but really reflective materials, bump maps and emissive materials would really be a nice standard feature. No rendering just materials like how UE4 handles them. No lights that actually cast shadows to keep it simple but in the future baked in lights would be nice. The point is that we will never see anything like that in Sketchup if there is no roadmap towards any new Tool or feature.

I will look into your tutorial on it. I am very good with Sketchup but anything that organic, unless its built in another program and imported into Sketchup, is not that easy to do ( maybe I will be proved wrong ) . I have watched tutorials on a guy who made cool cars is sketchup with cutting planes and stuff and the end result is cool but its like building a hill with one man and a shovel.


How do you know there isn’t? There could be all sorts of new features coming but as a publicly traded company, the employees can’t and won’t tell you what they are before they are released.