Pro Tech Support suggested I should post this for discussion.
I build architectural, town planning and interior design models and I often use 3D Warehouse to supplement my designs with people, vehicles and objects (to ensure correct proportions and plan better environments).
I really appreciate that so many people contribute to the warehouse… but it is often a frustrating waste of time trying to search for a suitable model.
Users are allowed to upload useless models that are NOT DRAWN TO SCALE, with poor, or misleading descriptions and / or high poly counts for complex objects that should have been separated into components and repeated.
As a Pro user, I pay a LOT of money for the software license. Why is there no quality control?
Here are some suggestions that users could consider AND* developers could implement*, to improve the “share to 3D Warehouse" process:
- Provide a checklist at the point of sharing, i.e.
- Correct Scale ︎
- I’ve added a 2D person as a scale reference ︎
- Purge unused ︎
- Low Poly ︎
- Repeated elements are components ︎
- Original Work ︎
- Attribution _____________________
- If the user ticks the appropriate boxes, then then the model is tagged accordingly and rises to the top of search results
3a. If the user does not tick anything in the checklist, the model is not accepted….
3b. or it is down-ranked
- In 3D Warehouse, add a downvote button next to the like button.
Thanks for your consideration, constructive comments or suggestions for improvement
I’ve added a link to simple model I made of a collection of pots (real-world products) as an example of what I would consider to be a useful model to share.
(Ivyline Artstone Pot Planters | 3D Warehouse)
Because the whole point is that anyone is allowed to upload anything. That does mean that there is a great deal that is either too basic or too complex and things that are just not right. It would be a tall order to expect developers to police the Warehouse.
By “not drawn to scale”, do you mean not drawn the right size? You draw in real world dimensions in SU. You only scale when you output things.
I applaud the wish to improve things but I think you would need a completely different user model of the warehouse to achieve what you want. And you might (not unreasonably) have to pay for models professionally created.
Simon, many new users don’t know or don’t bother to model at real world dimensions. It’s quite common to find components that are model way too large.
I do agree that there’d need to be a different arrangement for the Warehouse and probably an extra charge. Something like FormFonts.
Never look a gift horse in the mouth
The way I envisage it working is that most of the effort is done by the user at the point they wish to share the model, and would just require some back-end or server-side development to automatically classify the model according to how many items were ticked off in the checklist.
I used to love the random stuff that appears in the warehouse… and coming across wildly oversized things was funny… for a while… but when you’re paying for a pro license, it gets a lot less funny.
When I say they’re not drawn to scale, I mean not “1:1”, i.e. not real world size… often not anywhere near real world size. I don’t understand how that happens, given that Bryce et al are there to provide a reference… but it does, so I’m suggesting a few extra steps at the point of sharing.
If users don’t want to complete the checklist, then their model should not appear near the top of the search results. This would NOT require “policing” by the staff.
Some people will lie when they complete the checklist, so there should also be a downvote button, which other users can click on if they download this model and have a bad experience. So if the developers can provide the tools, then it becomes a self-regulatory system.
My best solution for the issue: Don’t use it, there are other places to download quality items. It may be a pay site…but
You make a good point, but in my use case, I can’t justify spending another couple of hundred per year for the occasional model - on top of my SU Pro license.
I’m not asking for anything too complicated. SU already has a comprehensive checklist tutorial, but the kind of people who share bad models are not the kind of people who watch 17 instruction videos first.
I’m merely asking for a summarised checklist to become an obligatory part of the upload process.
Your comments about the money you spend on SU are out of place. You pay as you write for SU subscriptions, not for 3D Warehouse. You want - enjoy. you are not satisfied - do not use it. Sometimes I use it and thanks that I do not have to model myself. If something is not available, I am looking for a different model, but I would hardly demand great quality from people for free models. As I wrote above: Never look a gift horse in the mouth
I admire your persistence @mwcs1 . However, I have stopped making FRs because, over many years of occasionally doing so and studying those made by others, I have concluded that developers don’t take that much notice of them. I am sure they do read them and may even sometimes respond to them here, but it has always seemed to me that they prefer to plough their own furrow. So unless your furrow happens to coincide with theirs, you probably won’t get anywhere. This forum is mainly for users to get answers from other users so it may be a bit hopeful to expect it to change the product. You really have to like the product despite its shortcomings or walk.
I might even take my own advice from now on.
I share your skepticism, but Pro Tech Support specifically suggested I should post this. I guess if enough people engage… and put effort into finding a solution… then they will consider it.
In the past, users have explored:
filtering by size
a rating system
flagging bad models
comments and reviews
And SU have created a lengthy checklist that users should complete before sharing (if they take the time to search for the tutorial).
All of these suggestions have flaws, but if we chip away at it, then we get closer to something the developers can implement.
There’s also the environmental impact to consider. If the majority of models are good, it can save processing time… but if the majority are bad, then that’s a lot of wasted energy on cooling & downloads, and wasted bandwidth.
Agree, there is some rubbish in there, but often some hidden gems within someones opus. a Thumbs up/down rating might help?
Something like that might have legs. Rather than trying to force Trimble to do policing, or uploaders to comply, get end users to rate. Might be good to go a bit further than just thumbs up. Maybe a short set of tick boxes for the kinds of things the OP suggests?
And a short checklist of why that specific user is trying to downrate a model.
@mwcs1, you made some valid points but don’t say you somehow payed for the 3D Warehouse models. They are free to be used and you could have known when paying for a SketchUp license.
A good short checklist before uploading could help filtering out bad models. (for instance yours above)
Aah, the old ‘just’ require something I have no idea of the complexity, time, and money involved in implementing.
I’m sure you love it when a client asks at 4pm on a Friday if you can ‘just make a couple of minor changes’.
What things would you contribute to the system? Why or why not?
As a person who’s drawn a good deal of components professionally, I know that I could be in legal trouble if I uploaded my models into the 3D warehouse, because that’s giving away IP that belongs to the company. Professional users (by definition) are likely in the same position; people pay for the Pro version because it’s a source of income, so anything they contribute to the 3D Warehouse is giving away free work. Would you do that, despite the fact that you “pay a LOT of money for the software license”?
I would say that this ethic ought also to prevent you from using any free content by others in your own work.
In my world, a client often asks if the builder could “just do x”. Translations:
Client - could he do it for free.
Builder - ooh, goody, goody, an extra.
Yep, that’s my world too!
could imagine, that having a tag in the model information (derived from the file (header)) showing, that the model a) was made with the Free/Make version or with the Pro version and b) contains imported geometry might give a hint concerning the quality to expect… not sayin’ the Make users do create sub-par stuff only.
For ‘voting’ the comment function can be used already, somehow.
What I like about Sketchup Warehouse, is the ‘open source’ collaborative element. There’s the potential for everyone to build on each other’s work and learn from each other, to save time. We’re each making different ‘Lego-like components’ and contributing to the ‘big bucket of Lego parts’.
So, if there are elements of my work that might be useful to others (and no IP issues) then I’ll contribute to the warehouse, and conversely, If I use an element of someone else’s work, then I’ll give credit.
Obviously, for a lot of Pro work, that’s not possible… but I do a lot of work for non-profits and charities where the budget is tight / non-existent, and copyleft licenses are applicable. These organisations can’t afford to subscribe to FormFonts, etc.
Aside from Pro work, I also use Sketchup for personal DIY projects, planning room layouts, etc. So if someone’s already drawn an IKEA bookcase - at the right size - bonus! I’m sure IKEA does not mind that free advertising, and it helps a lot of people.
So, if I draw an IKEA sofa and want to share it, then I wouldn’t mind optionally ticking a few boxes in a checklist at that point. If I don’t complete the checklist (i.e., because my sofa model is the size of California and the upholstery contains hidden satanic messages)… then I can still upload it, but it will not appear at the top of the search results. This benefits other Warehouse users and it benefits IKEA.
Please note: I contacted Trimble directly with my request, but Pro Tech Support suggested I post in this forum for consideration.