it looks better if you crank it up, if set to 0x, which is preferable for working, especially with large complex models, it looks worse, at least on my machine. I would hope it’s a graphics card discrepancy that might be fixed in a later release, but I’m not optimistic.
Exactly why do you think it is preferable?
Even on large models, I don’t have any problem. Perhaps it’s your graphics card and/or its drivers. I notice you haven’t completed your profile with that information.
development from earlier post below - This works as it did in 2016, WITH ONE EXCEPTION: after copying an object, you need to change from move to select mode before changing the layer. Otherwise the current layer is changed.
So it’s not the mac version - so I can live with it.
They dumbed down the layer tool for 2017. In every prior release, you could use this to change the layer of selected geometry. Now you have to use the entity info window, which is hugely annoying, because leaving this open means it’s constantly re-populating, which is not only distracting but slows everything down, at least on the Mac, which has always functioned this way. Now the only thing the layer dropdown is good for is changing the current layer, which anyone with good practices knows should almost always be set to Layer0.
Sorry to say I find all of these comments about the mac version to be false! It is easy to change a layer association in entity info (same as Windows). Although there is no export/import button for shortcuts that’s because they are kept in an easily accessible.plist file that you can copy or overwrite (unlike windows, where they are saved in the registry and not easily accessed. And Ruby and extensions are fully supported.
Which anyone with good practices knows shouldn’t be done. All geometry should remain on Layer 0.
I didn’t realize there was a profile section.
I’m running an NVidia quadro p4000 with 8gb, but on a 30" monitor. Some of my models are quite large (like downtown seattle) Perhaps it’s a personal preference, I don’t like the fuzzy linework aesthetically, but I also find it less informative. Just like the tilde in front of a measurement that isn’t exactly that number (this is brilliant, by the way) overlapping lines that are the tiniest bit non-collinear appear different. Now all the linework looks non-collinear
I prefer the layer window, but regardless, when I change the layer in the entitiy window, the layer name is also editiable in the same field, so I’m constantly renaming layers when I think i’m using a shortcut. I guess I just don’t understand why it doesn’t work the same on both platforms.
Good suggestion Tommy!
On Mac, for reasons known only to the SketchUp developers, the focus stays in a text field until you click somewhere else. This is a constant source of layers, scenes, components, etc. whose names are a shortcut key or blank! We Mac users have complained about this for years to no avail. In general the Mac SketchUp UI has stood still for quite a while while the Windows one has evolved.
You can normally turn off just the leader. You may as has already been suggested have a problem with your graphics driver if this doesn’t work for you.
Have you tried one of the FlatText plugins from extension warehouse? It allows you to put text on a surface without a leader, using editable 3d text with no extrusion. It uses simple font glyphs, so doesn’t add hugely to the model edge count.
I wasn’t aware of that plug-in, or editable 3d text. thanks!
Make offset and follow me honor arc curves and apply the offset distance vertex to vertex, not perpendicular between the corresponding edges.
(I would even say the current behavior is a bug)
When drawing a circle, how do I toggle between midsection and vertice radii?
Follow Me along an arc.... issue?
Follow me not working as expected
AGHHHHHHHHHHHHHH NO RIBBON EVER
most stupid wasteful bit of interface design ever invented !
I agree completely! AARGHHHH ARGHHHHH!
Allow Camera Movement During Crossing and Window Selections
Given the user has the camera is set in Parallel Projection and one of the six orthogonal Standard Views
Then, enable the camera to Pan and Zoom while dragging a Selection Box L-R or R-L
As it is, even the slightest camera movement cancels the select operation.
Related to camera movement:
- orbit locking toggle via shortcut and icon and a saved state for certain scenes.
- allow for more inferences to work well on edges and faces perpendicular to camera in parallel perspective mode.
Solve these two issues and we can easilly model in plan view, as we do in 2D software.
It doesn’t even have to be a standard view. As long as it’s parallel projection it would work the same. Perspectives though wouldn’t be possible since moving the camera even the slightest would change the 3d frustum defined by the 2d selection box.
This is a fairly long list but I think theyre all very important (have put a lot of thought into this).
Anyone in a professional AEC enviuronment will probably understand all of these requests.
- Lineweights and line styles
- A 3d warehouse with better quality components Pro version of sketchup default sets of furniture, building elements, etc.
- ability to import GIS files using a schema (SHP, MXD, etc.)
- ability to utilise an official geographic coordinate system besides WGS (with relative model origin)
- layer groups, better filtering of objects
- a standardised & flexible interface for all extensions, (eg all must include a button, a possible shortcut key, etc) and be able to be put into a flexible toolbar (a toolbar or command bar builder).
- useful & valuable extensions that are created by users should be absorbed into the Sketchup ecosystem, certified and maintained by Trimble, not just left to the original creator to maintain. I have built company workflows around certain extensions only to find they can become incompatible or obsolete with recent sketchup versions. Sometimes I have to purchase large complicated extensions just to obtain one simple tool (eg a materials take-off).
- Modeling using ‘levels’ (like in Revit)…(hopefully people know what that means??)
- more ‘under the hood’ functions to allow better material takeoffs, scheduling, phasing/4D BIM-style processes. The extensions out there are decent but seem to be constrained by what sketchup allows.
Fully agree on all points but 6, 7 and 8.
Different plugins do very different things and for some e.g. a toolbar button would be redundant (e.g. my material memory which is designed to only be used with shortcuts). I can see how many developers are struggling with UX and how UX recommendations would be very much appreciated, just as long as it’s not rules written in stone being forced onto developers.
Plugin developers own their creations. It’s sad when a plugin is no longer compatible with a newer version and the developer no longer maintains it but if SketchUp confiscated people’s work I think many developers would be very concerned and not at all as enthusiastic to keep developing when they no longer feel they own their own work.
That said there could be a program to encourage developers to open source projects they no longer have the time or interest to work on.
- One of the things I really love about SU is that you are free to draw anything you want, whether it’s a building, a spoon or a space station. Other programs like Revit, ArchiCad, The Sims and the like forces you into one specific direction. When I first tried SU I was amazed of how I could place a door horizontally and the ground and apply a grass texture to it. I think this sense of freedom would be limited if SketchUp introduced such a specific concept as levels or floors that is only relevant for architectural modeling in gravity. I don’t know what such a feature would do that cannot be down with groups either (hiding floors above the current one while showing those below?=). Whatever it is I think it’s better suited as a plugin than as a core feature.
re 6) I guess a configurable toolbar/menu system would be a good start then. Some extensions (eg Scale Tools) are hidden under pointless submenus. Worse, some extensions rely on a ‘program within a program’ just to access simple tools which could be done with a keystroke.
re 7) Using Scale tools as an example; If it became so popular that virtually every pro user installed it, and Trimble decided it should be added into Sketchup Pro (along with extra features eg"scale by reference"?), would they just go ahead and do that? I’d hope so.
re 8). Definitely! Constraining drawings to ‘planes’ or levels would only be an option, as it is primarily used in building, structure design (and documentation) only. I wouldnt mess with SU’s natural modelling process. A Levels-like outcome can be acheived with a combo of 'invisible gluing planes" , sections, layers, scenes and Layout views… but a “Levels tool” could be more powerful and far easier. A really good extension could do the job (but then we have yet another workflow created around a program built by 1 person who may not care to provide ongoing support).
As an aside, I guess my Feature requestes depend on what SketchUp is trying to be? A professional design package for buildings, structures, civil works, etc? …or to just stay as a “quick easy modelling tool to play around with concept designs”? I’m using Sketchup to do a similar job to Revit/etc and am often able to do better work than others can with $80k worth of “professional” BIM software, but…my gosh it’s a lot of trial and error (14 years) figuring out workarounds to things because certain core functions are missing.