General discussion related to SketchUp Pro and Make
I do a little research and It would be great if Sketchup was also 64 so we can solve many problems that the render engines have because the limitations of sketchup. Does any have any Idea if they have plans for build a version for 64 bit?.
THE ONLY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN FICTION AND REALITY IS WHEN FICTION HAS TO BE CREDIBLE
This has been repeatedly discussed in the Sketchucation Forum for some time now and very recently. You could probably riffle back through Active Topics and find some direct comments from JBacus himself regarding the benefits/perils of such a concept. Or do a direct search on 64bit in the forum. If I gave you links they might run off the page.
I take the slow, deliberate approach in my aimless wandering.
Simple as is Sketchup is a 32 bit aplication instead 64, that just tell you something, double of speed, process, big models support, and in renders just refer VRAY how limited is, or for example try to do Grass in Sketchup that looks real...
When you use render plugins you will see. I will keep search for post no matter what I want fresh NEWS, thanks for all the comments.
THE ONLY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN FICTION AND REALITY IS WHEN FICTION HAS TO BE CREDIBLE
TwiLight recently made use of LAA to squeeze more performance out of SU when rendering. Plus, there's also Thea, which is a 64bit render studio, that's in Public Beta and is impressive.
But this has been discussed so much here that it's old news unfortunately.
You got larger model size right, but 64 bit SU would be slower then 32 bit, has nothing to do with process, or Vray. 64 bit SU rendered grass would look the same as it does now.
64bit does not mean faster application. It means more likely slower - because 64bit vs 32bit means all the data the application processes is double the size and that means it takes more time to process.
64bit is no magic bullet that makes everything run faster and smoother. There are many other software engineering techniques that makes applications faster, but it's very independent to each application.
The advantage 64bit has is that it allows the application to address larger blocks of memory. That's it. Now, that is something that you need while rendering, but there's nothing more to it. It won't make you grass any more real.
In what way would 64bit support be really helpful? For your reference and others, here is one of the better discussions we've had the topic so far.
This stuff is difficult to understand. I don't think we're beating a dead horse if there are still misconceptions floating around the community about the real benefits of 64bit computing.
Are you Buddah or something? Two sessions of SU at the same time mean 2 sets of arms!
FWIW, the Mac allows for multiple windows open at the same time. I could only get Windows XP to do this if I had multiple instances of SU opened at the same time (ie it's doable- but messy).
My book "Let's SketchUp!" Download from here
I'm more concerned with SketchUp's lack of stability for large polycount scenes than the speed.
I use layers for everything and can hide what is not needed when working so speed isn't my primary issue.
Most other 3d software I've used (Lightwave, Maya, 3dsMax and others...) have no or little problem importing dense geometry like for example a couple of trees.
Doing that in SU will almost certainly make it crash for me.
From my understanding 64 bit software can hold more in memory so my guess is that SU would get more stable with 64 bit?
But these applications doesn't display the geometry in the viewport in the same manner as SU. SU is real-time rendering the model - in it's sketchy style. Lightwave, Maya and max display models with many visual artifacts - because they are intended to be rendered by a third party render engine.
Have you checked SU's memory usage when you import?
Strangely enough I have come to terms the whole 64 bit and multi-core debate and accept Google's reasoning.
I also understand the whole poly limitation as briefly explained by Thomas.
I have figured that I may not get my wishes or hopes but I can change the way I work with Sketchup. 9 out of 10 times my models are pretty heavy but work fine with SU, and the 1 out of 10 I use a 3rd party app to compile my scene when SU is overloaded. I render with a studio based app so there are no restrictions on cores or bits, nor poly's for that matter.
What I'm saying in essence is find a way around SU 'limitations' (personally I believe that some of these limitations are SU's strengths as if they were to be overcome it would probably be at the cost of what makes SU such a great app)
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.
That is true.
For us as users it's more important that we make it clear what we wish to be addressed - instead of how. The How can the engineers take care of - they have the Knowledge.
True. If someone is modelling AND rendering in SU (with its kind of "sketchy" style), why would s/he insert xFrog trees for instance when there are nice, low poly "symbolic" trees as well.
Then nothing stops anyone from modelling all necessary parts in SU and exporting them into 3rd party apps to compile them into different scenes. If the developers of these apps fully understand what SU users want, they will sooner or later find the way to apply export with proxies and such and swap them in the studio apps later. Or whatever way of instancing and similar things they can come up with.
SketchUp don't need to go 64bit for that - they only have to update the thumbnailer. (Which I really hope they do.)
hahaha great post khai
But when we stop to think about it, a question pops "why would I need sk 64 bits?" Really why? it's not like SK has the tools to push it much further without help from others, and if it works with others it's because the OTHERS try to work with it, not the other way. And it's not flawless (vrayfur on a imported skp file anyone?)
If you ask me 6-7 years ago what I though sk would be capable of doing I would have answer something like Lumion does now (it's the perfect philosophy of WYSIWYG that sk had), and more clever and unique modelling/texturing/animation tools (64 bits and multicore wouldn't cross my mind back then). And now remind me what's the big differences in this departments with sk without 3rd party stuff, in 6 years? A little shocking when you think about it, isn't it...
So be it 32 or 64, I think sk has reach the "mature" point (unfortunately), it's has good as it ever is going to be (just some "optimizations" here and there with newer versions). Just accept it and use it as long as it works for you (it will give us all much less headaches and "beating-dead-horses"-debates).I have.
So, honestly I think the questions in sk development goes much deeper than plain and simple 64 bits...
As long as there are Sketchup Ruby Plugin developers Sketchup will be fine as a modelling tool... The top priority as I see it is for the Sketchup dev team to really take the time to polish up the functionality and documentation of the APIs (Ruby & C++) and add an API for Layout, then some sort of high quality plugin management scheme will probably make most users very happy.
I do wonder if some very real performance gains could be made by overhauling the internal render engine, because that seems to be the thing that slows down performance the most.
I create video tutorial series about several 2D & 3D graphics programs.
We implemented an entirely new rendering engine in SU7.1, which did increase performance significantly. Historically, every new SketchUp release is faster than its predecessor.
To be honest I've found SU8 alot more responsive than 7.1 was on my ATI card. And i've also noticed that SU8 is alot quicker when selecting hi-poly(sub-divided) meshes.
So for me 64bit isn't something I crave, as out of the box SU is still my weapon of choice
I think that's actually a pretty interesting point. Looking at it another way, why NOT start pushing for an 16-bit or even 8-bit version of SU? If 64-bit is slower, because of the extra info being pushed through, then it stands to reason that an 8-bit SU would be faster, would it not?
But is it more stable for "polygon heavy" models?
I'd rather have a slow but stable SU than a fast and unstable.
Do you mean that a 64bit SU wouldn't be more stable for heavy models?
The only way it'd be more stable would be if SU ran out of memory while such a model where loaded. Personally I have not seen that, even with 1-2 million faces models. (Faces, not triangles, so the triangle count ( which most apps report in ) will be much higher.)
The only times I's crashed SU due to running out of memory has been when I rendered with a render-engine.
New releases of SketchUp tend towards increased stability. I say that they "tend towards" increased stability because new major versions may be less stable than the preceding maintenance release for the last major version– actually, that's the whole reason for doing maintenance releases. We track "stability" metrics by watching submitted crash reports– so be sure that you're sending those reports in if you're having problems.
Unfortunately, as SketchUp's performance and stability increase you are at liberty to make larger and more complex models. Which put new and more taxing requirements on the system as a whole.
But, no– 64bit computing won't inherently improve the stability of SketchUp for large models.
Evrybody says that new sketchup not be 64bit but i got this answer from Trimble
Thanks for the note. We don't have an exact date we can share with you to when the next version of SketchUp Pro will be released. We are working on the next version and plan to have it out sometime this year. The plan is to include 64bit functionality.
If you need anything else, please let me know.