Why can't Sketchup have a good UV mapping feature built in for complex models?

I am getting annoyed that Sketchup doesn’t come with a good UV mapping feature built in with the software itself. Almost ALL the Sketchup models I encountered made paint jobs using the mesh instead of UV mapping (For vehicles at least and they look horrible!) I know there’s UV mapping plugins for Sketchup, but they don’t have the feature where you can SEE the UVs and how they’re positioned (Similar to other 3D programs). I had to use another 3D program to make the UV map so I can make paint jobs for the models I make. I wonder when would Sketchup would get a GOOD UV mapping feature built in so we can see the UV map like something in the image below?

Just so happened that this interesting topic on SketchUcation appeared:

1 Like

It would be nice for a feature like this to come to Sketchup.

It would be a great addition to SketchUp Pro.

It’s a feature worth paying for if you need it.

Would you pay for a commercial extension for SketchUp that adds pro UV mapping features ?

If so, how much do you think it should cost (max) ?

If not, why not ?

Pay for it? How about no? I don’t like paying for stuff. Almost everything you can do with Sketchup is free. I never bought the paid version because there’s features that I really don’t care about except for the pro exporters (Although some people went the “naughty” route and made free versions of pro exporters). I think the UV mapping features should stay free, like the primitive UV mapping features it has built in.

So you expect it for free. You think you’re entitled to it?

I’m not paying almost $700 (Can’t afford that kind of money) if Sketchup decides to include an advanced UV mapping feature. I want it free!

So you are entitled to have that feature in SketchUp for free? There’s no incentive for Trimble to invest in a feature you’re not willing to pay for.

I agree, I cannot either.

That is why I am trying to turn the discussion towards the idea of a more affordable paid extension that users could use with either edition (Make or Pro.)

There are 3rd party paid import & export extensions (that can run under Make.) IMO, I think Trimble should also package their native importers and exporters, individually by filetype, as paid extensions for Make. Say about 25 dollars each. Make users could buy only what they need.

The more users helping to fund the maintenance and development of SketchUp, the better. (And it may help keep the cost of the Pro licenses from rising any more, for awhile. Perhaps even reduce it back down to 500.)

Just saying: Trimble SketchUp Make is licensed software, for non-commercial use, only. There has not be “Free” SketchUp since Google SketchUp 8.

It costs to develop and maintain software. We programmers need to be paid. Customer service is expensive. Running this forum site and the SketchUp help website is not free.

It is not fair for the minority of paying customers (Pro licensees) to “foot the bill” for a world full of Make users. Yes, it is my opinion, but it is shared by others.

Pro users have filed many feature requests that they need, that are “in line” ahead of this one. In many cases they’ve been waiting years for such features to be implemented. There might be some of these paying customers who’d be upset, if a free feature benefiting a small group of non-paying customers, (ie game designers, for example,) were to be implemented before other features “on the list” that have been long awaited.

(That is not to say that better UV mapping has not been requested before by the paying customers,… it has, and is likely one of those long awaited features “on the list”.)

I am speculating here, that when it comes, it is likely to be a native feature in only the Pro edition. Ie, that Make is a basic edition, by design, … and we should not really expect any “high-end” features to be added to it’s toolset.

So (in my mind) that only leaves two possible scenarios. A mid-range more affordable “Craftsman” edition that has some more high-end features, and who’s license would allow sole-proprietor commercial use,
… or paid extensions, bought as needed running under Make (but still non-commercial use of SketchUp.)

So,… the 2nd scenario of a paid extension, can be implemented now, via the Extension Warehouse.

I ask to anyone reading who’s interested:

If better UV mapping was available with a paid extension for Make, how much do you think it should cost, or how much would you pay for adding this feature to Make ?

I think that vertex tools and sub d have been priced accurately. These are very specific tools as would be a uv unwrapper. So along those lines. I have absolutely no problem with paying for an extension. Some you buy some you don’t that’s the beauty of them. Sketchup is the core with amazing add-ons that can advance those workflows that want to be advanced.
It would be great develop a uv unwrapper either as part of PRO (obviously not part of make) or as an extension.
It’s a huge ask of the mind and available time to learn new software. I would gladly give you some cash to make this easier as I would like to explore games engines to produce final visuals and movies.

1 Like

Blender is your solution until wrap-r drops. It’s free, and hits all your check boxes. Good luck!