The "tracing" of a component, imported into a project from an outside
source, is routinely done as a matter of convenience and is a common
practice to speed up a project, with any design software, and is one of
the reasons for an "import" feature.
Furthermore, it is inarguable that if the software contains the tools to
effectively "trace" a component, it therefore has the tools/ability to
"draw" it instead, should you chose to do so, as this software indeed does.
Your argument in that regard falls flatly on its face ...
With regard to the 'seat", it was plainly stated why it was not
contoured ... and, even then, for you to bring it up and pretend/insist
that a shop drawing be a photorealistic image to have any value in
woodworking is misleading, irrelevant, and a ploy to bolster a feeble
On 4/10/2010 7:42 AM, Morris Dovey wrote:
> For things that are essentially boxes - like kitchen cabinets and,
> perhaps, your entertainment center SketchUp has acquired a
> substantial following.
> (Well, duh! I never
OK, then ... it was an ignorant attempt to imply it.
In short, I gave you a clear, factual and accessible example containing
nothing remotely resembling your "...things that are essentially
boxes...", and which nicely illustrates the ignorance of the software
behind the remark.
Your arguments thus far do nothing to disprove that.
Yeah fine. Give this easy one a whirl:
Draw parabola with curve length of 96" between intersections with the
latus rectum (a line through the focus perpendicular to another line
passing through both focus and vertex). Points separated by 0.0100"
along the x-axis, and accurate to +/-0.0005". I don't care whether you
draw or trace, only that all requirements be met, so that I can export
it as a DXF (the format needed for my 'Bot) and machine it accurately.
Oh really? I just re-read the entire thing (4th time) and still don't
see that. Perhaps you would quote that plain statement to make it easier
for me to find.
I not only didn't "pretend/insist" - I never made such an assertion. I'm
not sure what exactly your problem is, but please stick to the truth.
The fact is that I don't care at all about the graphic presentation -
only that the exported DXF meet accuracy requirements. If you assumed
that I was after a pretty picture, then you assumed wrong.
No. There was no such attempt - ignorant or otherwise. That issue was
your contribution to the discussion - not mine.
Let's see. I said:
"For things that are essentially boxes - like kitchen cabinets and,
perhaps, your entertainment center SketchUp has acquired a substantial
Which part is false or misleading? - or are you in a snit because I
omitted other capabilities you think the OP is likely to need for his
Eh? Why should I have any interest in proving or disproving anything?
Obfuscation par excellence ... and totally, and ridiculously, irrelevant.
Yep, it's indeed a mystery why you bothered in the first place. You've
made it plain in the past that you have little use for the software;
that you don't use it; have minimum experience with it and are ignorant
of its capabilites for the most part.
So, what's behind this obsession with taking snide shots at every
opportunity that presents itself?
Hell, it wasn't even a good troll, so why bother muddying the water with
A little self reflection might be in order there, Bubba ...
I'm a little late to the party, but 'snide shots', 'obsession',
'troll' and 'ignorance' are not words I can associate with the Morris
Some self reflection is in order, however, but I am a bit confused as
to who should be doing the reflecting.
Here ya go, Bubba. Let me help you out:
"For things that are essentially boxes - like kitchen cabinets and,
perhaps, your entertainment center CNC has acquired a substantial
A ridiculously ignorant, superficial remark, showing a decided lack of
depth of understanding, eh?
Now, live with it ... lol
I wondered about this a little myself. Then I remembered his
daughters eye surgery and a few other comments so I'm going to cut him
some slack. He's usually very helpful, and shares his info. Shit
happens on usenet where everything is lost in translation. These are
two great people so I think it will work out.
Perhaps irrelevant to you, but has real relevance to others (a _lot_ of
others!) Photos here:
It's a real project. No one much cares whether it's relevant to you. I
was merely curious to find out if you and SketchUp were up to the
challenge - and received a clear enough answer.
I've made clear that I felt it seemed to be a weak tool for some real
problems I was trying to use it to solve, and when I did so I limited my
comments to my specific problem.
Back when I had access to a.b.p.w, I posted SketchUp solutions (the last
I can recall was for dado set storage) and have had SketchUp
illustrations on my web site for quite some time - along with a credit
that some of the drawings had been produced using SketchUp. See
If a couple of years of use is "minimum experience", then your statement
is true, otherwise false.
I'll assume you're telling the truth, and so will feel free to warn
newbies that the resident SketchUp disciple pronounced two years of use
You exaggerate - I've passed on most of the opportunities, but now that
I know you're so emotionally involved I'll try to do better. :)
On another subject, what are you hearing that is new about "spray on"
This was big news about five years ago in the green building seminars,
and then disappeared into the noise.
Went to another seminar a couple of weeks back and it was brought up by
the organizers again as a "rapidly emerging technology"?
Seems that some manufacturers are coming out with windows coated with a
spray on product?
I'm not much involved with PV panels, but I do try to keep an eye on
news:alt.solar.photovoltaic for developments - and the concensus there
seems to be that coatings aren't yet ready for prime time.
Well, it could be that the folks in a.s.p were right, or it might be
that producers were pricing products higher than the market was willing
to pay for what they got, or even that the expectation of falling prices
for silicon panels made the technology less attractive - or all of the
Methinks that's a favorite label for "anything that might make me some
green in this lousy economy". :)
If you come across something that looks/sounds really good, get a sample
and check it out. If that's not possible, get a demonstration. If they
can't even do that, keep your wallet in your pocket and invite 'em to
call you when they're ready.
Why not? Just remember that only so much energy is delivered to each
square foot. Current silicon panel efficiencies run in the 10% ballpark,
so purchasers are going to need substantial window area to get
worthwhile amounts of electricity.
It wasn't by accident that I chose to build passive solar heating panels
- where efficiencies in the 80% bracket are reasonable.
Your freind has not given the latest version of Sketchup a chance.
I have been using CAD programs since 1986. I used AutoCad LT from
1996-2008. I have been using Sketchup exclusively since 2008. I am not
First off as with any drawing program experience and or formal training is
an asset. There are numerous tutorials on line that will teach you what you
need to know for free. I highly recomend Sketchup. I recently designed and
built a bedroom project, 6 major components with probably 700-800 seperate
parts and I found the program drawings to be completely accurate.
While not the most sophisticated drawing program, most any wood working
project needs no more than what Sketchup has to offer.
First you take the word of someone else instead of making up your own
mind about a particular program; then you don't want to spend money, or
your time, on learning a skill to do what you are asking others to
advise you on?
Best stick to your paper and pencil ...
If you're familiar with drafting, a program called CadStd will get you
going right away. It's basically computer drafting. A little quirky at
first, but once you get used to the interface it's easy to use.
Sketchup takes a bit to get used to, also. I had to take the time to get
used to the 3D aspect, but didn't find anything too difficult. The
interface is a little quirky as well, but not terrible. (Zooming, for
example, is done by selecting the Zoom tool and moving the mouse up or
CadStd has a Lite version that does quite a bit, or a Pro version for
around $50. Sketchup is free, with a Pro version that costs around $500
(I think). For the base program in either case, you're out only your
time to try it.
Never teach your apprentice everything you know.
"Puckdropper" <puckdropper(at)yahoo(dot)com> wrote in message
Actually if you learn the short cuts with the Sketchup program it becomes
much easier to use. I seldom use any icons at all as all can be assiciated
with a keyboard command or mouse jesture. For example, I have always used
a track ball mouse because IMHO it is much quicker to draw with. To zoom I
simply rotate my middle click wheel and hold down the wheel to orbit.
Placing the curser over the spot I want to zoom concentrates the zoom at
that point and rotating the ball with my thumb enables me to orbit at that
At minimum, a mouse with a wheel works better for most any modern
software of this type. All you have to do to zoom is move the wheel, or
hold it down and move it, and the mouse, to zoom and orbit.
There are a lot of other "input" devices used by CAD jockeys that work
I routinely use TurboCAD before starting any woodworking project (w/
the exception of a cutting board, etc.).
I have tried Sketchup and I also found it difficult to use/learn
coming from TurboCAD. If I invested more time I'm sure I could learn
to use it, but I couldn't see investing the time considering I already
My 2 cents from a Turbocad user:
Unless you plan to use the CAD program often, don't bother. There is
a serious learning curve.
In the company where I worked for a long time, some of the paper and
pencil draftsmen never were able to make the change to CAD.
If you intend to do it:
You need to have a large vocabulary of "special" words to utter under
your breath to bleed off frustration, unless you have mentor handy.
Once you have spent the time and have done the tutorials that some
have suggested, you can't really expect to stay current if you only haul
the program out once a month or so.
To keep myself barely reasonably current, I almost force myself to
invoke the program for even small simple things. I am still finding new
buttons to push after several years at it.
One of the big problems, to me, is that there are so many nesting
levels for all the commands, shortcuts, etc.. You have to learn many of
the them by rote. This means repitition.
And, every time they upgrade, they seem to do it for the highest
level of power users; those who spend a lot of their life at the keyboard.
And some commands seem to be moved around with each upgrade, too.
Okay, no problem. I won't upgrade anymore. Oh yeh? A few years later
they stop supporting that level, or they only put the newbie tech guy on
Not to say "don't do it at all", but just to make you aware.
Using a CAD program, to me, is like using a PC based spreadsheet was 20
years ago. I found that, as soon as I added a few numbers together, I
wondered what would happen if I doubled it, averaged them, etc.. ---The
So I started opening my spreadsheet program (Lotus 1-2-3 1A) whenever I
even started to do some math.
It's the same with CAD. Once you have taken the time to get the
basics of the part/assy on the screen, the sky's the limit in playing
"what if?" there, too.
Dick Snyder wrote:
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.