I’m complete into all of that, but most of us simply don’t have the resources for bringing 3d gear into construction site or having a guy on the roof seeing where he’s going to nail his board in 3d…
Also, it’s not me, a user who is inventing tech, I’m just a guy choosing the most practical way of doing my things.
2D docs are simply still needed because this isn’t still our kids 3d world, it’s still, in great part, what we inherited from our parents and grand parents. Not all of it is to be wasted.
The fact that you say you don’t need thick lines because you should use occulus rift instead, says it all.
And what if I’d tell you that thick lines would be useful in occulus rift too? Then would you approve it? Or occulus is just for virtual worlds over imposed on real worlds IF they have no lines?
All tools which makes a design more clear to an owner or a constructor is a useful tool. Sometimes is seeing the virtual thing very explaining, sometimes a cross sections with different material indication (hatches and line weights) gives more or better information. It is not OR but AND!
My issue isn’t so much about line weights, but the way they look on various monitors. I have two monitors the same physical dimension. One is 1920x1080 native and the other is 4K, but I am running it at 1920x1080 because everything is way too small at 4K. However, I noticed that even though the resolution and physical size is the same on both monitors, the lines still appear much more faint on the 4K monitor. I don’t understand why. It’s essentially unusable.
I’m using a Macbook Pro with one monitor connected to HDMI and the other through the mini-DisplayPort adapted to HDMI. I triple checked that both monitors are running at 1080. Any ideas?
Yes, but I don’t see what that has to do with this issue. That’s for color and white balance. Has nothing to do with line thickness that I can tell. Thanks for the suggestions.
Check out these two screenshots of my Sketchup window. I took the first one on the external 4K monitor that is set to 1920x1080 resolution. Then I moved the same window to the other external monitor that is the same physical dimension, but is 1080 native running at 1920x1080. The window appears the exact same physical size on both monitors, but the axes are clearly much easier to see on the second monitor despite them running at the same resolution. The same applies to all edges drawn.
I’ve swapped the HDMI for the mini-display port and that makes no difference.
I am trying to use sketchup on my surface book pro. I find that the lines (especially guides and hidden lines) are very faint and hard to see which makes it more difficult to use sketchup on the surface than on my desktop monitor where the same lines are more distinctive. I would like to fix this if possible… I am not familiar with the calibration of luminance. Can someone elaborate on how this might be done on a surface book pro?
The need for lines of various thicknesses in 2D presentations, or realistic or artificial colors on faces, shadows, perspective or not, are ALL graphic conventions used to convey a design concept to someone who hasn’t previously seen the design, or who may not be competent to read a “blueprint.”
I’m all for constructing a building model using all the components (at least to the level of detail that avoids ambiguity) in my computer and handing a thumb drive with the result to a builder with the means to read and understand that model. I am working on a house right now where the contractor is totally gung ho for that … but few of his subcontractors are interested. ALL PRESENTATIONS TO THE CLINET were SU models (simplified) that he looked at in SU Viewer, and approved. He asked for 2D PDFs only to show his friends who didn’t have the skills to use even Viewer.
Still … the only reason now to produce 2D imagery is for the building department. And I am going even odds that line weights matter little to them.
