SketchUp Hooks Up With Google Earth

zmarties writes "Having recently bought the company and 3d design product SketchUp, Google has now taken the next step of releasing a free personal version of the SketchUp software. Currently available for Windows XP, with a Mac version 'coming soon', the program allows for simple drag and drop design of 3d models - which amongst other uses can then be displayed in Google Earth. The pro version remains available for commercial use, with lots more features. Google are also introducing 3D Warehouse, designed as a repository for 3d models created in the program. The models can be viewed in Google Earth via a network link, so you can see geolocated models as you browse the world, rather than having to explicitly download them. Google has pre-populated the warehouse with a number of models which range from complete complex buildings, such as the Taj Mahal, through to individual design elements such as traffic lights and furniture."

Comments

Vs. SketchUp Pro

[chroma]

Unfortunately, the pro version offers one critical feature that the free version doesn't:

• Access to the following 3D export formats: DWG, DXF, 3DS, OBJ, XSI, VRML and FBX.

If you're going to have something manufactured from a SketchUp design, you'll need to be able to export in a format that can be read by something other than SketchUp. I'll save you the trouble of looking it up: the Pro version is $495.00 for both Windows and Mac. You can get a free trial of the pro version, though.

Re:Vs. SketchUp Pro

[Anonymous Coward]

That was one of the first annoying things I saw - the skp format is a nice binary format - probably nice and proprietary. In other words, look at Sketchup - but don't touch if you want access to your data.

Re:Vs. SketchUp Pro

[eMartin]

"In other words, look at Sketchup - but don't touch if you want access to your data."

Do you do 3D work?

Some of us do. These days, we mostly "access" our data with 3D software. Not text editors. *Most* 3D programs use proprietary formats to store data specific to their own features.

With that said, Sketchup offers several import and export options to other standard 3D formats, and can be extended with plugins to support more.

Re:Vs. SketchUp Pro

[Anonymous Coward]

No, the PRO version has the ability to export to several standard formats. The free personal version does not.

Of course, almost anyone using it for "personal use" is going to be fine with just being able to access it in sketchup. Heck, most people using for personal use it won't have access to software that can read the other formats, which by themselves generally start at around $300 or so. The OP is complaining that people aren't giving their work out for free (as in beer or speech) to companies that are willing to fork out the money for programs that can read .dwg (AutoCAD native format; the LT [Light] version starts @ $899 IIRC), .3ds (Autodesk 3DS MAX format, don't remember the cost) and other formats that also require expensive software.

Sketchup is a toy and a tool both. As a toy, it can be used to create incredible looking models that can be shown off to friends via printing and screencapturing. This does not require coversion to other formats. As a tool, it can be wonderful for allowing a person to change a structure on the fly to match their requirements, and is (potentially) worth the money they spend on it.

Incidentally, I am a draftsman/designer by trade, and while I do think that the software is in general overpriced, the market is not exactly a monopoly anymore. If the price for software is too high, the items will simply not sell. Also, Sketchup is a great program for 3d modeling of some types of objects, but for 3d models of structures it is not the best tool for the job. The simplest and most useful software for that (that I have used) is Chief Architect, by ART Inc; Chief sells for $1295 for the cheap version (that lacks several very useful features) or $1995 for the full version.

If you want free CAD, try QCAD on Linux or IntelliCAD on Windows. But they aren't fully featured yet; apparently, nobody has been able to pay the people working on them enough to keep them working hard enough to make the program match AutoCAD.

Re:Vs. SketchUp Pro

[DragonWriter]

There are free programs that import and export many of the widely-used formats, so it is not accurate to say that the formats require an expensive product (other than on the SketchUp end) to work with. Sure, the product which makes each of the big formats popular is expensive, but that's not the same thing.

Re:Vs. SketchUp Pro

[Anonymous Coward]

Trust me. The free programs may be able to convert formats, but they usually lose important information (textures, etc) and can't actually edit the changed file very well. What good is it to convert the file format if you can't change the file?

Re:Vs. SketchUp Pro

[stienman]

Given that it exports to google earth, and the google earth format is understood (if I understand correctly) then one should be able to create a program to convert from google earth to a number of other formats.

The limitation remains on features that don't get exported to google earth.

-Adam

Re:Vs. SketchUp Pro

[smartsaga]

And if you are a student (see SketchUp's licensing page) you can get a one year license (which can be turned to full one year license at no extra charge) and after renewing it for 4 years you get the full thing. The nice thing about that is that you don't have to pay extra for the upgrades because your one year payment is for whatever version is out (if I remeber correctly).

Also, for those looking to just jump to buy SketchUp, it is not a solids modeler, is a facet modeler. If you need ACIS modelers, well, look at CAD programs like AutoCAD, TurboCAD, and others.

With SkethCUp you can render JPEGS, PNGs, and AVIs (supports DivX), too. Pretty cool for presentations and stuff.

I strongly recommend you visit their forums (slash dot em!).

I think http://www.objectivenetworks.net/ WAS the website with free models for SketchUp which included furniture, electronics, outdoors, buildings, plants, people, etc, etc, etc, etc...

Have a good one.

Re:Vs. SketchUp Pro

[LetterRip]

"Trust me. The free programs may be able to convert formats, but they usually lose important information (textures, etc) and can't actually edit the changed file very well. What good is it to convert the file format if you can't change the file?"

Blender can handle 3DS, OBJ, and a number of other model formts fine without loss of the type of information that sketchup exports (some sketchup users use Blender to render currently since Blender is superior to sketchup for rendering tools).

LetterRip

Re:Vs. SketchUp Pro

[oPless]

The format is binary, and looks like some M$ Serialised format

No doubt someone will reverse engineer it and build a 3ds converter so everyone else can import the models.

Ahh summer of code is coming up :o)

Guess where this is going

[gasmonso]

I'd imagine a huge opensource type project where people contribute their own models of places into this. Then eventually the entire planet will be mapped in 3D.

http://religiousfreaks.com/

Re:Guess where this is going

[Trigun]

And all the girls will have huge boobs.

Re:Guess where this is going

[DerekLyons]

I'd imagine a huge opensource type project where people contribute their own models of places into this. Then eventually the entire planet will be mapped in 3D.

Yeah, with about as much accuracy and reliability as the Wikipedia or the IMDB.

Re:Guess where this is going

[Sigg3.net]

the entire planet will be mapped in 3D.
And even there Americans will be sicker than Brits.

But seriously, we all know SketchUp stole the patent for their 3D world from the Duke Nukem Forever Mapeditor®. Do no Evil?

Guess where this is going-SimCity.

[Anonymous Coward]

"I'd imagine a huge opensource type project where people contribute their own models of places into this. Then eventually the entire planet will be mapped in 3D."

Oh lovely. We're going to SimCity the planet.

free trial..

[joeldg]

if you have not tried out this program.. download it now..
the push/pull tool is amazing and so intuitive it is like .. "magic".. has been a long time since I have been that impressed at a program.

read some of the reviews out there and see what people are doing with it. The online galleries are inspiring..

you can import almost any model, export to almost any kind of model..

amazing amazing program I have been using for a few months now..

Re:free trial..

[bhtooefr]

Cue annoying testimonial about how this is the first "easy" 3D modeling app that I can understand...

Oh, wait. It is the first easy 3D modeling app that I can understand. ;)

Re:free trial..

[Anonymous Coward]

Another thing news-reading nerds may like about SketchUp--- built-in Ruby scripting!

Re:free trial..

[joeldg]

yes yes...
I am not normally a modelling app fanboy, but having no idea what I was doing, I modelled the building I live in and did it in under and hour.. so, I got very impressed...

and google owns them, so.. actually, cue the /. google-fan-boy-dom

Re:free trial..

[shawn(at)fsu]

modelled the building I live in and did it in under and hour..

I live in an empty appliace box that is almost a perfect cube so this really doesn't mean much to me.

Taj Mahal?

[Anonymous Coward]

The first priority should be putting 3d models of naked women sunbathing on rooftops.

Re:Taj Mahal?

[mrchaotica]

The Taj Mahal is a tomb, you insensitive clod!

Re:Taj Mahal?

[uradu]

Or preferably on the Taj Mahal.

Re:Taj Mahal?

[klang]

Lara Croft, sunbathing on the rooftop, then!

Linux version...

[slashflood]

in 10000000... 9999999... 9999998...

Re:Linux version...

[Anonymous Coward]

I think you are missing a few zeroes from the starting count.

Re:Linux version...

[johno.ie]

Assuming you're counting down in seconds, it should be out around the end of August.

I've tried the free trial version and in only 4 hours I did the tutorials and slapped together a pretty detailed 3d model of my house. On the other hand I've spent over 24 hours messing with blender and barely managed to get a few cubes attached to each other.

Re:Linux version...

[Billly Gates]

Nah I just use emacs insteads

Re:Linux version...

[loksipan]

I don't need anything this fancy. I'm looking for a simple drawing tool to create 3D projections in 2D directly without rendering - i.e. isometric, oblique, single-point, two-point, exploded mechanical projections, as well as 1st and 3rd angle as normal. A wireframe drawing app where rear-lines can be hidden or revealed as preferred. http://www.technologystudent.com/designpro/drawdex .htm Yes, you can do these with any 2D drawing tool, but I'm looking for something that's a little more intelligent, and quicker to use, where you don't have to set-up your own construction lines or work out x,y displacements to get a specific angle. Something where I can just drag a box - as you would normally to create a reactangle - only this time along a 30 degree axis to give one face of a cube. Better than a stretch box, would be the ability to extrude a curved or segmented line along a particular axis to give a wavy surface - or a cut, like a chamfer or bevel. I'd like the ablity to draw & stretch circles and rectangles along selectable axes - 0, 30, 45, 60, 90, 120, 135, 150 degrees - with a perspective view. I'd like something not so rigid over whether the whole polygons I draw stay intact or not, where I can delete/hide line segments formed by intersections at will to get the look I want. With something like this I'd be doing exploded mechanical concept sketches as easy as I can sketch them out on a piece of paper. Whose got the time to study a manual? I need intuitive action and I need it now, not in three hours time. lok

Re:Linux version...

[Anonymous Coward]

Whose got the time to study a manual?

"Who's".

To answer your question, it looks like you want a CAD program, not a modelling program.

SketchUp rendering

[pubjames]

Everyone should try SketchUp out. It is great - you can make a scale accurate model of your house in no time.

The only problem with it from my point of view is that it isn't really made for rendering - its output is fairly blocky visually. Which brings me to my question - has anyone successfully used SketchUp to create complex models that they've then rendered in another application? If so, how did you do it and do you have an example image on the web we can see?

Re:SketchUp rendering

[wordsofwisedumb]

SketchUp works pretty well exporting to other programs for rendering. I am an architecture student, and many of my classmates export its models to Cinema 4D, some textures actually crossover. I have also seen exports to Lightwave and Maya, all very successful. It is best to try to find an importer plugin for the rendering program you are using as exporting from SketchUp to other programs turns all geometries into triangles. If you do not have any other rendering program, SketchUp can actually look very nice if you turn off the edges and profiles under the display settings palette. A little photoshop on the rendering can do wonders as well.

Re:SketchUp rendering

[zxnos]

that is the intent of sketchup... ...say it with me, SKETCH. it isnt made for slick renderings, the point is to get a decent representation to a client for a low cost. another benefit is its sketchiness. when a client sees hard lines, they are less apt to approve something - or add input - for fear it is a final, you must do exactly this version. if you want to develop a design collaboratively, a sketch is the best thing for you.

Re:SketchUp rendering

[eMartin]

"The only problem with it from my point of view is that it isn't really made for rendering..."

That's not a problem at all.

A lot of people get into computer graphics and try to find one software package that does everything really well, but it just doesn't exist (or at least, they would get their work done a lot quicker with multiple tools).

SketchUp is a modeling program, and for certain types of work, it is very good at what it does, and offers several export formats to let you work with other programs for the other stuff (rendering, curved surfaces, etc.).

Personally, I've been using it for architectural modeling for about 4 years along with Rhino for curved surfaces and Maya (previously Cinema 4D) for rendering. No, I don't have work online to show, but you can browse the gallery forum at sketchup.com to see what others do with it.

Re:SketchUp rendering

[bsy_at_play]

i don't think the images are all that blocky, though limiting the number of polygons make smoothly curving surfaces difficult/not as nice. http://www.bennetyee.org/bathroom/ contains a sketchup model that i made to help communicate what we want with contractors. of the complex shapes that i had to make, the lighting fixture took the most time and the sink is the least realistic. i didn't include additional surface images and only used the ones provided (with some stretching for the glass tiles), but i think it turned out pretty well.

Re:SketchUp rendering

[HiVizDiver]

And the beautiful thing about it is that you can affect the "sketchiness" of the drawing, with extension lines, jitter, etc. Makes it look almost hand drawn.

Check out the Gallery portion of the forums, there's some amazing stuff being done with this program.

http://forum.sketchup.com/forumdisplay.php?f=9

And the cool thing is that it's *3D*, not just a simple drawing tool - it exports nicely (well, mostly nicely) into AutoCAD - but then again, I own the Pro version. ;-)

Re:SketchUp rendering

[TWooster]

Want a renderer?

A free renderer?

Try Art of Illusion. (I think it's http://aoi.sourceforge.net/ but I may be wrong, and too lazy to google).

You can export out of Sketchup in .obj format and import into AOI. AOI has a very generous and quality renderer, with some interesting features.

Also, there is a very complete Sketchup to POVRAY exporter. It isn't my cup of tea, so I don't use it, but it's huge and rather comprehensive. It is, however, something of a hack. I believe you can find a link to it through the Sketchup Ruby Library: http://amazone.crai.archi.fr//Ruby/RUBY_Library_De pot.htm

Sketchup also has import-export ties to a lot of drafting programs and other 3d programs. It is becoming something of a standard for architectural mock-ups.

Even though I use Sketchup a lot, and I think it's a great program, it does have its issues:

A) The automatic welding can be a pain
B) The layering system leaves some to be desired -- I have written scripts to remedy this (SKP has a Ruby interface that is well done). Specifically, you can have lines and faces in a "group" that are on one layer, but the group object itself is on another -- this can be very confusing, and become very difficult to organize your layers properly. I have a script that will "layer segregate" a group to the group's containing layer.
C) Can't extrude curved faces, even if it's only in 2-d (a cuve on a plane). Though you can get around this by selecting the curved edge, offseting, and then extruding upwards.
C2) No true curves -- it's all line segments, hence polygonal, hence you can't retain detail
C3) There is, however, a way to make parametric objects -- I've toyed with the idea of creating a parametric library, maybe even attempting to implement a deformation stack, but it would be quite a colossal kludge, even if cool.
D) Lighting sucks -- give us a "camera spotlight" or at least one positionable light.
E) Shadows occasionally have inversion issues (lighting gets "inverted".. very odd)

All things told, though, Sketchup is well worth these rather minor limits, and with scripting, is quite extensible. AND cross platform! Great stuff.

Re:SketchUp rendering

[mgblst]

My god man, where do you live, in a closet? How many people do you share that place with. make room, make room!

This is what makes Google kewl

[GillBates0]

While there's definitely a market for a product like Sketchup, Google usually goes a step further and introduces features that may not necessarily make money for them, but are cool to use and fun to understand for regular geeks and lay-users.

In this case, it's the free version of Sketchup, the free design warehouse and "geolocation" feature within the free version of Google Earth. Quite cool, IMHO.

Re:This is what makes Google kewl

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh Google is getting a return on this.. nothing they are doing is 100% "for free". You just don't notice it.

Re:This is what makes Google kewl

[Anonymous Coward]

I thought the downside was that they're still making all non-Windows people feel like second-class citizens.

It's kind of understandable for apps they had to write from scratch, but this was a great Mac app they *bought*. Why do you hate us, Google?

I'm planning the ultimate BF2 map

[Anonymous Coward]

With spawn points at the equator, and one tank at the North Pole and a jeep in Antarctica. Get your double-tapping fingers ready.

Who gives

[Anonymous Coward]

a rat's ass? Until google can bring some of their nifty little offerings, including Google Earth, to linux I could really care less. For a company that uses linux internally to develop as well as run the largest and most popular search engine to shun linux users is just wrong. Granted we may not be the 95% M$ is but hey we wouldn't mind some attention either.

Re:Who gives

[bhirsch]

We call it return on equity. If Linux had higher market share, developing applications for it would have a higher ROE. Google develops software with other people's money. Those people do not want to see their money being used to develop a product that yields a low or even negative ROE.

You can make the argument that if more apps were available for Linux, it would have higher market share. Unfortunately, not every company is (in fact very few are) interested in evangelism.

Even if Google developed for Linux and could yield the same ROE from developing for Windows, the risk of investment would be much higher while the return would not change. Ergo, it is not a sound financial decision.

(Of course there are many other methods of measuring return, but I think ROE is most significant in this case since it represents the money that the stockholders put into the company. In other words, it is the bang for their buck.)

Re:Who gives

[coinreturn]

You gave enough of a rat's ass to respond with your linux ranting. If you really didn't care, you wouldn't even have clicked through to the article. You can always "uncheck" the Google box if you don't want to be informed of all things Google.

Re:Who gives

[gstoddart]

We call it return on equity. If Linux had higher market share, developing applications for it would have a higher ROE. Google develops software with other people's money. Those people do not want to see their money being used to develop a product that yields a low or even negative ROE.

And you can safely assume that any software which was initially written on Windows would need to be completely re-architected in order to be able to run it on Linux. There are probably few or no libraries etc which would make it easy to run on both -- unless you designed it like that from the beginning.

You can make the argument that if more apps were available for Linux, it would have higher market share. Unfortunately, not every company is (in fact very few are) interested in evangelism.

Indeed. Any many of us who are still supporters of OSS have capitulated and decided we need a Windows box and a FreeBSD/Linux/whatever you like machine.

The software I can run on my UNIX machine, I do. The stuff which is cool enough to install on my XP box (oddly enough, almost all of it free stuff) goes there.

Sure, in an ideal world, all software would be platform agnostic. The reality of it is, it's HARD to make graphical platform agnostic and still get any performance out of it. Especially if it was written on Windows first.

Most notable item present in the warehouse

[technoextreme]

I think the building that caught my attention the most is this one:
http://sketchup.google.com/3dwarehouse/details?mid =ce29f8b2336ba53f89c520fb34a01ba6
Most notable for being heating the neighbors accross the street into the 90's and blinding drivers as they drove across the road. Anything else that catches your eye? It seems to be at this point a bunch of outdoor items like a birdfeeder.

Re:Most notable item present in the warehouse

[jakemiller2004]

Be sure to check out Form Fonts for some nice components. http://formfonts.com/ Its a subscription site, but pretty cheap for the content they offer.

Blender is Already Free

[plaidhacker]

I recently wrote a KML (Google Earth) export script for Blender.org. Blender is certainly less intuitive than SketchUp, but its undeniably more powerful, as well as open source. It supports importing and exporting a number of other industry standards, so you could use it to transform models you already have.

Blender KML Export
Blender.org

Re:Blender is Already Free

[pubjames]

Blender is certainly less intuitive than SketchUp

You said it!

We need an Open Source modeller that is as easy to use as SketchUp. That would rock!

Re:Blender is Already Free

[idlake]

I think it should be possible to incorporate many of the UI features that make SketchUp so easy to use into Blender without too much work.

Re:Blender is Already Free

[saltydogdesign]

Wings has a pretty low learning curve, but can be hectored into doing some neat stuff.

Re:Blender is Already Free

[slapout]

Check out Blender: Noob to Pro. Once you get used to it, the interface makes a lot of sense.

Re:Blender is Already Free

[l3v1]

Easy to use != powerfull. Blender is mostly not for the occasional wannabe but more for the somewhat willing to learn occasional hobbyist up to a somewhat professional level. Right tool for the right job.

Re:Blender is Already Free

[connor_macleod]

Are we starting to see the 'birds eye view' of a new virtual earth/matrix/metaverse/second life?

Re:Blender is Already Free

[Anonymous Coward]

I've used it for several weeks (including going through every tutorial I could get my hands on), and Blender's interface never made any more sense to me. When your learning curve is measured in months or years, your product sucks, full stop.

Once you get used to it, the interface makes a lot of sense.

Isn't that just the apologist's way of saying "the interface makes no sense"? It's lying by repeated assertion.

I mean, replace "the [Blender] interface" with "Ada", or "communism", and the sentence still works.

Re:Blender is Already Free

[MilenCent]

Ah, I found that Wikibook some time ago. Although it contains many omissions (and contains much that is apocryphal, etc), it made Blender seem almost comprehensible to me.

I still need to get more practice in before I can become proficient in it. A lot more, probably.

Re:Blender is Already Free

[mgblst]

it contains many omissions (and contains much that is apocryphal, etc)
 
Don't you hate that. if only there was someway you could make corrections!

Seriuosly though, if you see anything wrong, or could add something to it, it would be greatly appreciated (by me at the very least)

Re:Blender is Already Free

[jdray]

How about an import utility? Or is it already there?

Google sure is expanding

[ComradeSnarky]

They seem to be expanding into new product areas all the time. Search, blogs, maps, email, Picasa, now this. They're trying to take over the world!!! I haven't used this program before so I dunno how good it is, but the Google Earth functionality sounds really cool.

Cycas comparison?

[snopes]

I've used a program which runs on Linux called Cycas for quite a bit of scale floor plans, but have found the interface frustrating and as a result never dig into 3D much and rendering at all.

Has anyone used both? Is SketchUp useful at all for something like a detailed floorplan, or just for big primitive, blocky structures? Is it really so unbelievably easy to use that it's worth booting into XP?

TIA-

Re:Cycas comparison?

[AdamWeeden]

Has anyone used both?

For the sake of honesty, I must say no.

Is SketchUp useful at all for something like a detailed floorplan, or just for big primitive, blocky structures?

I've used it for floorplans before and found it quite easy.

Is it really so unbelievably easy to use that it's worth booting into XP?

I think so, but, again for the sake of honesty, I admit I have little problem with XP and use it as my daily operating system.

Re:Cycas comparison?

[l3v1]

I admit I have little problem with XP and use it as my daily operating system

He wasn't interested in the usability of XP, he was interested in whether this is worth the boot into XP for a try. I did the reboot, I tried it, and yes, I think it's worth the try, I hoenstly liked it pretty much. It's no Maya, it's no Blender either, but it's refreshingly easy to mock up some models in it. As many others, I also started with a house to see how easy it can get, and it left me quite pleasantly surprised.

Re:Cycas comparison?

[Anonymous Coward]

I used Cycas3D to draw up our kitchen before we remodeled it. The interface is a bit odd, but it does the job. Cycas uses pov-ray to do any 'realistic' renderning, and it uses it well. You can get some very impressive rednerings with cycas but it may take you some time. My kitchen ended up looking MUCH like the rendered drawing (which is the point I suppose).

SketchUp, on the other hand, is MUCH easier to use and you can create the same "model" in a faction of the time. However, the rendering and lighting options don't SEEM to be as good. A sketchup -> povray interface would be REALLY interesting. So far, all the sketchup renderings/graphics I've seen look like cartoons.

I think it's a bit of a trade-off between ease-of-use and the end-result. I would like to dig into SketchUp a bit more though.

Re:Cycas comparison?

[Anonymous Coward]

Sketchup is not made for technical 2d-drawings. Its concept relies heavily on OpenGL-Polygons and surfaces. It is great to produce intuitively 3d-sketches, but I would not want to draw anything in 2d with it - too slow, the 3d-concept gets in the way, lines don't take the color of the layer (because the surfaces do), none of the many tools you are used to when using eg autocad.
that being said, i'm still looking for a useable cad software under linux, too

Not interested until they use an open format

[expro]

They are being as bad in this respect as Microsoft, it appears.

Re:Not interested until they use an open format

[TWooster]

This is a troll if there ever was one. According to this logic, the free/trial versions of Maya, Softimage, 3ds (does that have a free version?), or just about any other feature limited "demo" (for that's more or less what this is), that can only export to objects that even the FULL versions can't read are "as bad as Microsoft".

This has nothing to do with Microsoft. This has nothing to do with DRM. This has nothing to do with "restricting a user's rights". This has to do with offering a free version of a $500 piece of software, with relatively few limitations. One of those is that you cannot interoperate with other 3d software, meaning that it cannot be abused as a commercial copy.

If you REALLY want it, write a Ruby script to export to .OBJ. That capability is still there. Don't spread FUD.

Starship Enterprise in Google Sketchup

[xmas2003]

Somebody did this nifty Enterprise model - would look good integrated in Google Earth ... or Google Mars ...

Re:Starship Enterprise in Google Sketchup

[elFisico]

You are of course aware that any Enterprise-type starship will break up upon entry into the atmosphere. So if we want to incorporate any ST on Google Earth, Moon or Mars, it has to be shuttles or Voyager-type ships...

First Impressions

[kebes]

Just downloaded the program and am playing with it. My first impressions:

Pro:
Very intuitive interface. Unlike most 3D modelling programs, you can start creating and coloring objects immediately. You can create simple layouts very quickly, and then use the neat "tape measure" tool to measure distances. This is absolutely great for making a model of a room to consider different layouts for desks or whatever.

Con:
As in many cases, simplicity leads to limited designs. To make anything complex would be a nightmare. Also, I can't see any way to make things look "slick and cool" or to render them in anything but a simplistic cartoon-like style. It has none of the elegant programatic control of something like POVray, for instance.

Overall I think it's a neat toy that some people may enjoy, but I think anyone serious about 3D will give it a pass (including, I'm guessing, the Pro version). On the other hand, I would like to see some open-source projects get some inspiration about the interface from this program. An add-on to POVray for creating simple shapes (with the more complex work then being done in code) would be nice.

Re:First Impressions

[Anonymous Coward]

There should be a way to add textures or something like that to add detail to the outside of a building. Maybe if you had a digital camera and could take pictures of the building from 8 angles, the computer could automatically make it look correct from any angle the software views it from.

I would also like to see Google add real weather data, seasons and night and day into the program. You would need a lot of satellite images for the 4 seasons though.

Very cool program though.

Re:First Impressions

[zxnos]

but I think anyone serious about 3D will give it a pass

as an architect, i use it all the time. i can spend 4 hours in sketchup creating a decent model with people and trees for a client to see the massing and a walkthrough of their house or office building. all kinds of other studies can be done quickly in sketchup.

or i can spend 16 hours in formz or some other rendering program. guess what the client usually wants early in the game... ...when marketing the slick image comes in. but then i can import the sketchup image and apply textures, lights, etc.

Re:First Impressions

[oxfletch]

> Also, I can't see any way to make things look "slick and cool" or to render them in anything but a simplistic cartoon-like style.

It has texture mapping.

Re:First Impressions

[ckswift]

Overall I think it's a neat toy that some people may enjoy, but I think anyone serious about 3D will give it a pass (including, I'm guessing, the Pro version).

I don't know about that. Take a look at their case studies. There are some pretty good models in there.

Re:First Impressions

[saltydogdesign]

I think anyone serious about 3D will give it a pass

Well, I don't think it's really meant to compete with, say, modo or Lightwave. But it makes a nifty pre-vis tool.

Re:First Impressions

[Anonymous Coward]

I did my diploma thesis in architecture with it. This was quite a large project. When you get used to the grouping logic and the way this software "thinks", you get very quickly very far.

Your results are not photorealistic, but they neither have to be pseudo-sketchy nor comic-style either. With a bit of touching up, the pictures are not necessarily bad, just abstract - instead of the now ever-present faky glossy images. I actually really like it.

Just stay away from the hideous shingle maps etc ;-), use carefully colors and transparency, some shading...

Whats more, in my student version at least existed some export filters for 3ds or autocad, which did work quite well, so you are not limited to actually rendering your image in sketchup but can use any program you like.

I'd love to see some sort of an open source sketchup that maybe runs even under linux ... maybe this move will give the software the publicity it well deserved for the last three years, so enough addicts will give it a shot ;-) I wish I knew more programming (and had the time ...)

greetings
thamane

Re:First Impressions

[casparro]

I was very sketptical of this software at first, being a lifelong 3D studio junkee, but after giving it a try I was completely blown away. First of all, the interface is so simple I had my dad, who knows nothing about computers, up and running in hours. He began building houses and scenes with ease. As for myself, I found the "quick to production" nature of the software for prerending of initial scenes. That and there is tons of free and professional existing models for this fun program just check out their 3D warehouse or http://formfonts.com/. Everyone should give this a try!

Does Google have a Linux strategy?

[erroneus]

I'm not quite as married to Google as other users although I use Google to search almost exclusively. But I'm disappointed that there is no Linux version of Google Earth. Now another Google offering that's not Linux. Frankly, I'm disappointed.

Re:Does Google have a Linux strategy?

[Anonymous Coward]

screw linux

Re:Does Google have a Linux strategy?

[maxume]

Yes. Google uses Linux extensively. They also support one of the premier browsers on Linux. I imagine the demand for the pro version of SketchUp on linux is basically non-existent. Why would they bother with porting the free version?

Re:Does Google have a Linux strategy?

[saltydogdesign]

No Amiga version either. What the hell's the matter with those people? How do you explain a company making free software and not porting it to niche markets with little demand???

Re:Does Google have a Linux strategy?

[Ash-Fox]

> How do you explain a company making free software and not porting it to niche markets with little demand???

Slashdot is a niche market?

Re:Does Google have a Linux strategy?

[saltydogdesign]

a) You're damn right it is. How many Slashdotters do you think there are?

b) Since when are all Slashdot users also Linux users.

Re:Does Google have a Linux strategy?

[Ash-Fox]

> How many Slashdotters do you think there are?

Enough to take down websites just by giving them a link.

> Since when are all Slashdot users also Linux users.

Slashdot users do EVERYTHING. How else could you explain their superior knowledge on law, computing, radio, telecommunications etc. ?

By the way, my previous post was meant to be a 'ha ha' joke.

Anyone tried Wings?

[Peepsalot]

I haven't had a chance to use SketchUp yet, but from the screenshot it looks slightly similar to Wings 3d
http://www.wings3d.com/

I may be completely off comparing the two, but it's definitely a fun program to play with anyways. Open source and more intuitive than other alternatives such as blender IMHO.

VRML back on the agenda ?

[axonis]

Maybe this is where the old VRML school of thought will pickup again, how long until avatars, proximity tiggers, animation etc are added to google earth ?. Im shure there is an advertising angle for virtual bill boards etc.

The downside

[Anonymous Coward]

While there's definitely a market for a product like Sketchup, Google usually goes a step further and introduces features that may not necessarily make money for them, but are cool to use and fun to understand for regular geeks and lay-users

The downside to Google's approach though is that it has a tendency to kill the competitive market for the technologies that they make available for free. On the one hand, this is an issue of natural selection, if you're weak, you won't survive. On the other hand, people have blasted companies that have monopolies in the past with killing third parties by introducing "free" or "built-in" functionality that already exsists in the market. The most obvious example being IE. As Google continues to bring about these technologies for free, it's good for the consumer in the short term, but is bad for other third party developers in the short term, and could be detrimental to the consumer in the long term.

Re:The downside

[l3v1]

tendency to kill the competitive market for the technologies that they make available for free

That is _exactly_ why open source (well, in this case it isn't open source, but it's free nonetheless) and free software encourages innovation. An idea is taken or is available free so you can't seem to get money from asking money for it ? Try to have a new, better idea. That's the whole point, it makes you think outside the box for a minute. For most people it indeed only takes only a minute because they just can't even imagine that this can work.

Tried it under CXOffice

[gsasha]

Kinda works: the editor window appears to be OK, and it is actually pretty fast (does it use 3D acceleration????)
However, the toolbar icons and menus don't show up at all, making them accessible only through tooltips. Completely unusable :( Hopefully, somebody will fix some bugs, be it Google or Codeweavers.

Re:Tried it under CXOffice

[Crizp]

Do you really need 3D acceleration when the complexity of what you're making amounts to, say, a hundred thousand flat-shaded polygons, max? I'd think any CPU above a PIII-500 would be able to software-render that with 20~30 fps..?

Re:Tried it under CXOffice

[Slashcrap]

Do you really need 3D acceleration when the complexity of what you're making amounts to, say, a hundred thousand flat-shaded polygons, max?

Oh no, I'm sure it's just so much easier to write all of your own low level drawing and shading code instead of just using DirectX or OpenGL like everyone else. I can see you've given this a lot of thought.

OT: Your link

[Tim C]

You already have the link in your homepage URL, there's no need to append it to every message you post as well. (And if you feel you must, making it your signature would be easier for you and more considerate to those who disable signatures in order to avoid that sort of thing)

Re:OT: Your link

[mrchaotica]

Hint: He's doing it on purpose. His entire (short, obvious) post was just an excuse to post the URL.

A bit of perspective

[siphonophore]

At times like this you've got to just stop analyzing it and say "Holy Crap that's cool"

SketchUp rendering-Wings3D

[Anonymous Coward]

Why not use Wings3D?

Pizza Delivery Drivers Rejoice!

[Ubertech]

All we need is for all the buildings in our cities to have models made. Then, we can impose those on Google maps. Combine that with in-car Internet, GPS, a direction finding divice, and a heads-up display. Then, you can get in your car and ask it how to get to a location, and the route with visual and audible directions will be on your windshield.

This should cut down on pizza delivery times, becasue we all know that hot fresh pizza is the real reason for any of this technology to exist.

Somebody get me a patent. It'll make billions! 8-)

Re:Pizza Delivery Drivers Rejoice!

[jlseagull]

Yeah, but then you'd be driving the Deliverator for Uncle Enzo. :)

Re:Pizza Delivery Drivers Rejoice!

[Anonymous Coward]

Which is - just in case you've been living under a rock - a Snow Crash reference.

Re:Pizza Delivery Drivers Rejoice!

[mrchaotica]

This is freakin' awesome, if you're into Augmented Reality (like I am). Just think of all the cool things you could do if you combined it with stuff like this!

Re:Pizza Delivery Drivers Rejoice!

[Ubertech]

That was in the back of my mind somewhere, but it's been a while since I read that 8-)

Re:Pizza Delivery Drivers Rejoice!

[Ubertech]

The ideas are endless. Paintball may be fun, but think of the meatspace possibilities for FPS gaming.

Re:Pizza Delivery Drivers Rejoice!

[mrchaotica]

Yeah, like AR Quake, which was made by the same people as the stuff I linked to before.

Thus begins the Metaverse...

[jlseagull]

Is there a waiting list somewhere for the Black Sun VIP passes? Where do I sign up?

what fun

[coaxeus]

I have made my house in 3-dimensions! (well, my dream house) http://neverhost.net/temp/house.jpg

Re:what fun

[PeeShootr]

That sucks.

Re:what fun

[BattleApple]

Apparently, we share the same dream of having two enormous slabs of ice on the lawn.

It does what it says on the tin!

[happywillo]

Although looked down on by serious modellers, I find that sketchup models are better recieved by clients. I spent years with 3D Studio and lightscape trying to make realistic models that never quite seemed believable and now use sketchup as a tool to give clients an impression rather than a finished "as bought item". I find that it is perfectly suited to my discipline as it is just a maquette rather than a "disneyfication" of reality that most modelling programs achieve. The surfaces, shadows and light refraction may look real, but in the end the building always looks too crisp against the background photos used for montage (so lets stop pretending!). Just my few cents worth as an Architect/ IT manager for a firm of Architects.

SketchUp hooks up with Google Earth?

[bk4u]

hope they used protection

SketchUp's sweet

[XenonOfArcticus]

It's a bunch of great guys in Boulder, Colorado (not too far from my company in Morrison). Their product kicks butt. If you want intuitive 3D modelling, get it. It's pretty cool that they have released a free version for Google modeling. I don't think it's really monopolistic/anticompetitive, because the free version ONLY works with Google Earth. It can't export to anything else useful. You still have to buy the $500 Pro version for that. And $500 is a bargain for what you get.

Yes, their freebie version is useful for people who want to model their own house and not use it in Google Earth, but really, you can't say they're shutting out anyone here by making it free -- there's Free Software like Blender and Wings3D that have been out forever that filled that niche too, and so far the market for 3D modeling tools has failed to collapse. (The difference being that ANYONE can learn SketchUp in a few hours. Really.)

Commercial diclosure and plugs: My company makes an add-on foliage library for SketchUp and a Google Earth Exporter for our 3D Landscape visualization software. But I don't get diddly for kickbacks from Google/SketchUp. I really do think they have a kickin product.

Similarity to Flash

[Markavian]

I just gotta say how amazingly similar this is to use Macromedia Flash, and I think its great. I was wondering if these guys were inspired by Flash. Seriously, its like drawing in Flash but 3D.

If the pro version wasn't so expensive I'd be much keener. The speed to build and publish ideas and models is fantastic, but as long as you can export to other 3D apps then rendering and utilisation of those models isn't a problem.

Whatever, this is a bit technological leap forward in 3D modelling in my opinion. I hope we see this more and more in the future, and I think its great that Google is helping by making it available to the masses - they've certainly seen the potential.

Google to implement Second Life over http

[GOD_ALMIGHTY]

Think about it. Everything Google is building is going to allow you integrate many of the features articles are talking about with Second Life. Only you'll be able to do it over HTTP with AJAX and their web service APIs.

The map server can be used to create worlds, the 3d stuff can be used to populate them. They can create new environments based on domains, so the real world domain might only have real world details. But they could also build another model for say Google Groups Clubhouses®©. We've been seeing people use Second Life for these purposes, what if Google made it so anyone could integrate a Second Life type feature into their website or web services application?

Re:Google to implement Second Life over http

[mrchaotica]

The best thing about the stuff Google makes, in my opinion, is that they don't focus on a particular application of their ideas. Instead they create building blocks with well-defined APIs that others can use to create a multitude of things that even the smart guys at Google wouldn't have thought of.

Re:Google to implement Second Life over http

[Slashcrap]

Think about it. Everything Google is building is going to allow you integrate many of the features articles are talking about with Second Life. Only you'll be able to do it over HTTP with AJAX and their web service APIs.

Dude, while I'm certain that Google Maps uses AJAX I am not entirely convinced that Google Earth uses AJAX. Lack of a web browser being the main impediment.

Re:Google to implement Second Life over http

[GOD_ALMIGHTY]

Generic statement, should have been more precise. Google Maps uses AJAX, same backend, different front-ends. All part of same plan non-evil world domination.

Is Google Earth a play for the future virt world?

[bnf]

Is Google positioning to be the repository and data source for the snowcrash like virtual world which we will interact with?

Google is two-faced

[villekesekene]

Google has it's summer of code thing and Google supports Linux and OSS all the time, but none of it's apps are open source nor available for Linux!

Re:Google is two-faced

[l3v1]

It would make their image more shiny among FOSS people, but still, it's no necessity for them to be totally open source. They are pro-Linux all the time, they spend quite some money on FOSS/Linux support, and that's quite something.

Slight ?

[Catskul]

Was that supposed to be a slight ? ...because to me it sounded like an immense compliment.
"No entire planet 3D map" vs. "Wikipedia quality entire planet 3D map"

Why yes, I do think I will chose the latter.

Perfection will never happen because it is too expensive. Wikipedia is accurate and reliable enough to be extremely useful, and just as importantly, free. For that I am thankful.

Re:Slight ?

[DerekLyons]

Was that supposed to be a slight ? ...because to me it sounded like an immense compliment. "No entire planet 3D map" vs. "Wikipedia quality entire planet 3D map"

I imagine from a certain fanboy point of view, yes - it could be considered a compliment. But from a realistic point of view, Wikipedia's coverage (outside of episode guides for The Simpsons and Star Trek) is spotty to say the least.

Perfection will never happen because it is too expensive. Wikipedia is accurate and reliable enough to be extremely useful, and just as importantly, free. For that I am thankful.

No one is asking for perfection - but I am asking for accuracy and usefulness. On not one single topic that I am knowledgeable about would I send people to the Wikipedia. [1] Even just random page jumping shows a preponderance of stubs, grammatical and logical errors, and information that outright wrong where it isn't misleading. It *seems* accurate and useful to the geek fanboi because it's accurate and useful in that minor subset of human knowledge that interests them. (Anime, SF, and computers.) But get outside of that, and it breaks down pretty quickly. (The geek fanboi doesn't realize how badly because his ability to accurately judge the value of a source isn't a good as he think it is.)

[1] And I did try editing - for over a year, but each and every one of my articles was re-edited into nonsense.

The one that galled me the worst was when an article was reverted because my edits couldn't be confirmed via a google search. Never mind they shelves of expensive reference books on the obscure topic in question that I own... To two editors and three admins - if it wasn't on Google, it didn't exist. That was the straw that broke the camels back.

Re:Slight ?

[PGC]

Sorry, the model of your house could not be found on the google 3d-world map ... you are homeless. No ... No.... I don't care if you have a building contract... it is not on google.

Re:Slight ?

[Catskul]

I imagine from a certain fanboy point of view, yes - it could be considered a compliment. But from a realistic point of view, Wikipedia's coverage (outside of episode guides for The Simpsons and Star Trek) is spotty to say the least.

I think from this statment you must not have spent much time on wikipedia. While I have no idea of the coverage and quality of wikipedia's articles on Simpsons and Star Trek are, I do know that I have widened and deepened my knoledge of history, science and technology despite the holes and flaws present on wikipedia. While Wikipedia is not a primary source it does a pretty damn good job with many topics. Considering that it isnt a primary source, its pretty poor to complain about it not being a good primary source.

If you really care to complain about knowledge sources existing in subsets, open a printed encycolpedia you will find lots to complain about. If you want to complain about editing wars, well, yeah, I empathasize.

Wheat and chaff, but still wheat.

Re:Slight ?

[Cyvros]

Good points. Wikipedia is a very good resource (I contribute to it myself), although there are many grammatical and factual errors, just compare that to the sheer size of the place and how many articles and entries are available there. I wouldn't ever consider using it as a referenced resource for an article or an essay, but it's still a good place for background knowledge.

But I'm going off-topic here. SketchUp sounds great. I've been looking for something like this (free 3D designer) for some time and I hope it's as easy to use as it comes across as being.

Can the models have textures?

[antdude]

Like with photograph textures like you seen in games? I don't like those cartoon looking models, especially when using aerial views.

Re:Can the models have textures?

[TWooster]

Yes, you can have textures, and the positioning system is fairly decent. It does have its issues.

It is primarily a mass-modeler, though, and you'd be foolish to use it for anything else (organic, truly twisted, etc included). It does not have a "renderer" per se, so you couldn't even do lighting anyway.

Re:Is Google Earth a play for the future virt worl

[Anonymous Coward]

They're building Teh Matrix!!!1!!!

Googlebots, agents, think about it...

Juvenile

[the grace of R'hllor]

I'd imagine all of New York City's major buildings would require Age Verification System within about 15 seconds of launch of this feature. You just can't trust people not to mess with the world...

Depending on the age of the software

[everphilski]

For software written a several years ago, yes, you are very right porting is a pain in the arse when you are dealing with 3D graphics and even using the native windowing environment (the knife slices both ways, going from unix to windows isn't much fun either).

If you are starting out fresh... Qt or FOX or WxWidgets are all good cross-platform windowing toolkits. Only caveat with Qt is that it is GPL (unless you get a commercial license) whereas FOX and WxWidgets are LGPL.

For 3D graphics check out OpenSceneGraph. Very portable and built directly on GL. I am able to build projects (currenly using Qt+OSG, also working on FOX+OSG due to licensing issues) on both Linux and Windows with minimal effort in porting.

Re:Depending on the age of the software

[gstoddart]

If you are starting out fresh... Qt or FOX or WxWidgets are all good cross-platform windowing toolkits. Only caveat with Qt is that it is GPL (unless you get a commercial license) whereas FOX and WxWidgets are LGPL.

My original point stands -- unless you architect from the beginning to be cross-platform (which Google Earth/SketchUp may not be) it's probably hard to make it cross-platform after the fact.

It may simply not be cost-effective/possible to retroactively offer Linux versions of these pieces of software.

But, I'm glad to hear that it's now much more possible to do so.

Cheers

Re:Depending on the age of the software

[everphilski]

I wasn't arguing, I completely agree. I was making suggestions for anyone wanting to start out in this area.

Wind Turbine?

[g.a.g]

It would be really nice to have wind turbines available in Google Earth - it would make wind farm visualisations (like for instance, the infamous Cape Cod wind farm) directly accessible. Anyone having a WT model, please upload it.

Thanks a lot!

wow!

[BluedemonX]

I'm surprised there's no jokes from the tinfoil hat crowd about the authorities "planting" nuke factories in Iran, WMD in Iraq, etc. via models on Google Earth....

Vs. SketchUp Pro-3DS

[Anonymous Coward]

"Blender can handle 3DS, OBJ, and a number of other model formts fine without loss of the type of information that sketchup exports"

I have some .3DS files from the IMSI collection that Blender can't handle. Neither can Wings3D for that matter.

hiiii

[Anonymous Coward]

ggg

Earth

[GMHobbit]

Are Google building 'Earth' : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_globe#History

Cars, Trees, Textures and more at formfonts.com

[casparro]

Be sure to check out Form Fonts for some really nice components(cars, trees, textures, scripts, ect). http://www.formfonts.com/ Its a subscription site, but darn cheap for the professional content they offer.

Pah, to really cut down on pizza delivery times...

[patio11]

...just have the mob buy out all pizza chains everywhere, offer $1 million to anyone who gets a late pizza, and ruthlessly annihilate any driver who misses his delivery target by a single second. Plus you get computer hacking ninjas as drivers in the bargain!