|
Post by squirmydad on Apr 12, 2009 8:47:24 GMT -9
Is it possible to do precision designs. In my experiments ,I found it next to impossible to draw anything with any accuracy at all. how do you draw without grids, guides or measurement tools?
It might just be me, but there has to be some sort of snap-to function, or grid alignment tools. I know I get lost wen working in the isometric view as well, but that has more to do with my personal brain damage than the software.
What I'd like os to be able to design on virtual graph paper, with regular snap to lengths. Is this possible with sketchup? JIM
|
|
|
Post by Aestelon on Apr 12, 2009 12:31:33 GMT -9
I must admit, I've always found the same thing with SketchUp; you can make good looking 3D models, but it's very difficult to make accurate ones with specific measurements, even though it should be possible. I find it's a lot easier to use an actual CAD program. Currently I do all my 3D work (like the dice tower, for example), using an old (way out of date) copy of AutoCAD. There is, however, a free (in both senses) program called (appropriately enough) FreeCAD you could try using. It's only available as source code, so you need to compile it yourself (that's supposed to be pretty easy, although I haven't worked it out myself yet ), but if you can do that, it might be worth a try.
|
|
|
Post by squirmydad on Apr 12, 2009 16:07:01 GMT -9
I've been messing around with some of the tutorials, but I just get hopelessly lost once I get into free form modeling. I'm still not sure what would be the biggest waste of time, learning to use a 3D software package to design simple structures ,or just taking the time to do it by hand. JIM
|
|
|
Post by Floyd on Apr 13, 2009 6:37:58 GMT -9
I find that once you get a feel for (insert your specific 3d app here) that it is way easier to visiualize a model in the app, then create it by hand if you do not have an unfolding software package. I have not played with GoogleSketchup to know how accurate the measurment system works (unless you are forking out the cash for the Pro version).
I used to use Truespace on the Mac. They released version 5.5 (i think) for free. And it works well, fairly simple and easy to follow tutorials. A pretty intuitive system for building and "painting" textures onto surfaces, as well as vector mapping.
~F
|
|
|
Post by Bhoritz on Apr 26, 2009 11:59:52 GMT -9
I think that this depends more on how you use the program. Remember that in Sketchup the dimensions of what you are working on appear on the lower right corner and that you can input a measurement yourself (what you are doing is going to snap to the measurement you put in).
|
|
|
Post by squirmydad on Apr 26, 2009 16:04:39 GMT -9
Yea, I think I need to sketch out what I want before hand, then design the thing in inches , then scale it down afterwards. Plus I have been trying to design things that are too complicated in the fist place. I think perhaps I'll try to use to design the shell of a car.
I am spoiled that I can just ask one of you guys to do it for me though:) JIM
|
|
|
Post by Bhoritz on Apr 27, 2009 6:58:14 GMT -9
Hi Jim, in a way, you can work in any scale you want. You can, for exemple, make your model in real size (working in meters for exemple) and then scale it at 1/72 or wathever; or, if you prefer, you can work in cms, mms, inches,... it doesn't make any difference in Sketchup. For the problem of making the parts the size you want, remember that you can always select something (a line, a plane,...) and input its dimensions or rotate it at a set angle. If that doesn't work, you can put a point somewhere if you need to snap something there. Mostly, Sketchup tries to guess what you want and tries to snap to it (either in direction or size) with its induction engine. Sketchup works best in the isometric view because you have more induction choices. If you have an idea of what you want, post it here, I would gladly make the basic frame (well except if it is the full Versailles castle in miniature )
|
|
|
Post by Aestelon on Apr 27, 2009 13:03:58 GMT -9
Or I could knock out a CAD version.
|
|
|
Post by squirmydad on Apr 27, 2009 13:57:35 GMT -9
Yea, I think the only real way I'm going to learn google sketchup is to actually just sit down for a week or two and practice. It would be nice to test out some building concepts I have. I need to learn how to return to a standard view, because once I start rotating and messing with the zoom I get totally lost. And like Aestelon points out I can dump it onto your guy's laps.
|
|
|
Post by Bhoritz on Apr 28, 2009 9:38:22 GMT -9
Just click on one of those buttons to change the view. The first one is the isometric view but the others are those from above, front, sides, back of the model
|
|
|
Post by squirmydad on Apr 28, 2009 10:11:00 GMT -9
Now where did those buttons come from???
I think I really just need to take some time and practice. JIM
|
|
|
Post by Bhoritz on Apr 28, 2009 11:21:39 GMT -9
I think they are just the standard buttons appearing above the main view (not in the toolbar), but I could be mistaken, my workplace being heavily customized. If you don't see them, go to >View >Customize Toolbar Sketchup is basically very easy to learn. A very few hours are enough to make wonderful stuff. If you have enough time, look at those tutorials: download.sketchup.com/downloads/training/tutorials50/Sketchup%20Video%20Tutorials.html
|
|
|
Post by Slick on Apr 28, 2009 17:46:30 GMT -9
I'm coming in slightly late to the discussion but here is my 2 cents.
I would take the time to learn a 3d program it drastically reduces build time rather then doing it by hand. Sketchup is a Great program considering its free. I use it for all my models and to get the scale correct I pick an easy setup and just run with it. I go for the standard metric production design in mm and set the snap to 1mm. At 30mm scale 1mm is great. There are some things that sketchup does weird though when your looking to unfold stuff depending on the program you want to use. I always open my sketchup stuff in metasequia and save it as a .mpq and then open in pep for unfolding. For some reason this reduces the number of errors in building.
Nate
PS: Or like you said earlier all you have to do is ask (and supply us with sketches) and a few of us could whip up something for ya!
|
|
|
Post by squirmydad on Apr 28, 2009 19:49:23 GMT -9
The real issue is time. Do I really want to take a week of evenings to learn this stuff for making 3D buildings right now. 'm definitely going to need to generate some 3D models in the future, but for the time being I am just going to be a figure flat cranking machine for a while still.
Anything I do designs will be exceedingly simple, so it fits what I want to do perfectly, and is within my budget to get the enfolder plugin and maybe upgrade to the pro version.
For now I'll just fiddle with it as I get time, or burned out drawing.
I did want to see how easy it would be for me to get you guys to do the 3D stuff for me based on drawings and measurements. If I can find someone who is proficient and can whip this stuff up in minutes, and is willing to work for free figures, that would be a win for me.
I can usually tweak most models once I get them in their unfolded form. And I do have a large library of personally designed basic shapes to use for my own projects as well. Back in the Paperworlds days, I made hundreds of basic shapes, rods, cones, spheres, etc. in all sorts of sizes. all I need do is open them up and join them to make new structures. But unique shapes or large structures would be better made on demand.
I begin work on the time machine tomorrow... JIM
|
|
|
Post by Aestelon on Apr 29, 2009 1:23:25 GMT -9
This sort of thing? I haven't added the tabs yet, but this took about half an hour to draw in CAD. Even fits onto a single A4 sheet. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Aestelon on Apr 30, 2009 14:50:01 GMT -9
By the way, here's the above car, built up. It's probably a bit big, but I was using a Transformer for dimensions rather than an actual scale vehicle.
|
|
|
Post by squirmydad on Apr 30, 2009 15:25:28 GMT -9
How did you unfold it for printing? I thought you couldn't save in a good format in he free version?
If you up to it, I can give you a bunch of vehicle sketches to make simple models just like you did. These should be sort of futuristic, yet normal vehicles. I can then take these simple designs and do the texturing and maybe make some burned and damaged versions as well. Give me the weekend to develop some sketches. JIM
|
|
|
Post by Aestelon on Apr 30, 2009 15:40:40 GMT -9
Sounds cool.
I didn't actually do this in SketchUp, I used AutoCAD. Essentially I knocked up a quick 3D version of the model, then used the dimensions to measure out the net form. "Unfolding" was pretty much done in my head, and then refined on screen.
After the weekend's cool. I'm gonna have a houseful of people over the weekend, so I'm probably not going to be online much anyway.
|
|
|
Post by Aestelon on May 4, 2009 7:57:33 GMT -9
For the record, everyone's gone now, so I should be able to get started ASAP if you've got any sketches ready to work on.
|
|
|
Post by squirmydad on May 4, 2009 8:13:41 GMT -9
Sorry, some real life junk came up over the weekend and I didn't get anything done.
Better than sketches I'll email you some reference graphics to work from. I can compensate you with free figure sets for your help. JIM
|
|
|
Post by Aestelon on May 4, 2009 12:59:32 GMT -9
Seems fair to me. Send it through to the e-mail address I signed up to the forum with (the Googlemail one). That's my main address nowadays anyway.
|
|
|
Post by Slick on May 4, 2009 19:42:57 GMT -9
Jim one way I got around a good saving format for unfolding is to save as a google earth file (.kzm is think). If your using pepakura these files tend to have loads of errors or distortions. One way I have found to bypass this is to open the model in metasequia and save it in meta (.mpq i think). For some reason meta seems to fix a bunch of errors in the saving process. Or you could just send me the google sketch file and I can export it as any file you want and send it back . Nate
|
|
|
Post by Bhoritz on May 5, 2009 7:34:34 GMT -9
I don't really understand why you need to change the format for unfolding. You can unfold directly in Sketchup with the Waybe plugin. Did I miss something?
|
|
|
Post by Aestelon on May 5, 2009 9:27:36 GMT -9
To be honest, it sounds like Jim's issue is less to do with unfolding and more about getting the models the way he wants them in the first place, which, given my own experience of SketchUp, I can relate to. I'm sure it's possible to get the kind of control he and I both like, but if the learning curve makes it hard to get there, then it can be prohibitive. I must admit, my biggest issue with SketchUp is that it tries to be intuitive, but I find the things it's intuiting aren't the things I want it to intuit. As I've said, I personally find it much easier to use a CAD program to do the model and work out the unfolding in my head than it would be to learn how to do what I want in SketchUp, and then find (and possibly have to pay for) a program to unfold the model for me. But then, that's largely easier for me because I'm already experienced with CAD, and I've been doing both 2D and 3D stuff with it for nearly ten years, so that doesn't involve me actually having to learn anything new. By the way, Jim, I've just realised you may not actually have my Googlemail address - I thought that was what I signed up with, but I used my Hotmail, which I seem to only be able to access now and again. Stupid thing. If you e-mail me the stuff at als[dot]brainstorm[at]googlemail[dot]com, I'll get it a lot more easily.
|
|
|
Post by Dagger on May 5, 2009 11:04:16 GMT -9
I haven't tried it, but I've read that Pepakura (sp?) can be used to unfold SketchUp models. Pepakura is free...
Also there a lot of tutorial videos on YouTube that show how to do various things on SketchUp... watching some of the things people do with it is pretty mind boggling to me...
|
|
|
Post by squirmydad on May 5, 2009 15:12:16 GMT -9
My issue is more due to my relationship with 3D in general. For some reason I can deal with 3D objects in real life, especially food shapes. But as soon as I get into virtual 3D space I get totally dyslexic. What I am trying to do is design a 3D object in 2D, but then view it in 3D, but that is just simple views. I just need to take the time to learn the views buttons, and not do anything in 3D mode.
I;m just not doing anything with that right now simply because of time. For now, I am laser like focused on the 2D figure flats. At some point I'll get to the 3D stuff. JIM
|
|