Hi Martin,
Thanks for the detailed feedback on add location! There’s a bit of context that might help set your expectations a bit:
- Add Location functionality is not tied to new SketchUp releases. We constantly release Add Location changes to all supported versions, so you won’t see anything changed or fixed by installing a new Desktop release, and most of your points are not SketchUp 2026 issues.
- Add Location use is currently expected to be users who are creating a site context for their project, not an extended area of many km2. A single import can cover about 2.5-3km2, creating a model with ~100k faces and consumes ~1.8GB RAM. There’s no indication that there are a large number of users who are limited by this and the lack of any posts in Topics tagged addlocation complaining about it back this up. However it’s good that you created this post as a feature request so we can see if this receives a large number of votes.
The 200m is not an altitude, it is a scale bar (just like google maps shows in bottom right hand corner). The current maximum box size is restricted in order not to generate massive models that can cause RAM issues with SketchUp.
We have discussed adding something like this quite a bit, but it would always be an estimate because the terrain data is not regular, and also customer interviews suggested this would be too technical/confusing for many users.
As covered, very large area imports has not been demonstrated to be an issue for large numbers of users. If this changes, we can add it.
What’s the use case for power of 2 textures? Why would satellite imagery be used as a pattern?
Default location being an estimate of the user’s location was deliberately chosen, and requires no storage. If this is a big pain point for many people, we can prioritise this.
This is because SketchUp uses the UTM map projection. Why is this an issue?
User testing showed that this was less confusing for most people than jumping straight to the import context. I find the extra click a bit annoying too, but I guess we are in the minority…
2050x2050 was required to work around some visual artifacts that we got at edge joining textures in SketchUp with 2048x2048. The other sizes are I expect due to the size of import chosen, source map tiles get cropped to fit the users selection area.
Why do you want to resize the image tiles after import? By “use a lot more memory”, do you mean graphics card VRAM, or something else? It would be good to see some examples of when this causes a hardware issue.
Why do you need to manually join up the map imagery? We made the import tool snap to the edges of previous imports so that there would be no need for manually joining and aligning the imports.
I don’t understand this point, you can always exit add location with the Cancel/Close button, and if you want to remove the location from a model there is a “Clear Geolocation” button.
This is part of the SketchUp template model. The default template can be changed to remove the scale model.
This sounds like an export issue? 2 million polygons sounds like a very large file, what’s your RAM usage, that could be hitting limits? Bugsplats would be a way we can investigate this.
When you say “full white screen” do you just mean the add location window, or the whole of SketchUp? We don’t see these internally. If you can share the RAM/CPU usage of SketchUp with a time stamp of when they happen and a screen shot of what is happening we can investigate this.
Best regards,
Dan