An alternative to designing?

[ddashk]

that level of detail requires hours of time in a rendering program. sketchup is not as good as other programs in terms of the model before rendering. if it was it wouldn't be free.
don't get me wrong i love sketchup. if you look at things i have posted you will see i use it all the time. but i am a student and can't afford other packages. firms wouldn't pay huge money for packages if they could get the same results from sketchup.

 

[SketchUp Guru]

The blanket chest and bed was done with freeware. The others with Podium which isn't expensive. I didn't do those but the blanket chest render was about 20 minutes. Not hours.

I don't think the average woodworker needs to bother with rendering to photographic level anyway.

 

[wizer]

Sketchup is cropping up in a lot of places where Autocad used to be the only viable option. It's also making CAD much more accessible to those not trained in the subject.

 

[ddashk]

i agree that sketchup is perfect for the "average woodworker" probably above average. i still think however that a professional package does deliver a better image. i realise that this level of detail won't apply to most people but there is a professional environment where a sketchup model looks below par. also packages like inventor can export tool paths which is a huge advantage for firms where cnc machines are used

 

[SketchUp Guru]

If your only criteria for a professional images is photo-realism, no, SketchUp won't do that out of the box. On the other hand, it never was intended for that. However, it does what it was designed to do and more. I think it is unfair to compare it to other applications to which it was never intended as a competitor. It was designed to be a sketching program.

It is pointless to belittle it in the context of the way most people around here tend to use it. It seems a bit like saying the Saw Stop is lousy for slicing cheese.

 

[ddashk]

in my comparison i said it was quicker and easier to use.i was not belittling it. i just commented that there are other programs which deliver a more photo-realistic image. i if read my original post i was making the point that it would be perfect for byronblack as its quick and easy nature seemed to suit his style.

 

[ByronBlack]

in my comparison i said it was quicker and easier to use.i was not belittling it. i just commented that there are other programs which deliver a more photo-realistic image. i if read my original post i was making the point that it would be perfect for byronblack as its quick and easy nature seemed to suit his style.

I don't know about that. I've spent hours trying to work wth sketchup, and I just don't 'get' it. It seems to take me ages to do something that would take me minutes on paper. I just don't find it intuitive, for me it's cumbersome and fiddly.

 

[Chems]

Despite being computer literate and a trained designer, I cannot get on with sketchup, working with it feels wrong and I can never make it do what I want it to.

I find it x100 times faster to sketch with pencil and paper, working out relationships on a smaller scale. I use my imagination to 'see' how it will look in real scale, and work out dimensions against known sizes depending on how/where it's going to be used.

Once I have a sketch and the main dimensions, I'll tweak and add/remove aspects as I along - very much like Krenov, I try to see how the wood looks and make ammendments according to my eye as I go along. I'm too lazy to make rods or full-scale plans. I would only do that if I were making multiples of items; which so far I've not had to do.

I'm exactly the same, I can make hugly complex 3D Models in the top programs. But when it comes to woodwork I get out the pencil and go to town.

What I do find cad excellent for is if I want to work out the proportions of a piece of furniture in relation to a room, I can mock up the room and other items of furniture in box format then size my piece from that.