Posts by Simon Weinberger

    Hi jason,


    did you try a clean installation, as suggested?

    1. Close all SketchUp windows
    2. Delete the file enscape.rb and folder enscape inside "%APPDATA%\SketchUp\SketchUp 2017\SketchUp\Plugins" (or 2016)
    3. Install again

    We didn't change anything fundamental in the SketchUp installation procedure or system requirements lately. Did you have a previous version, that was working? If the problem persists, please write an email to our support and attach the few newest files in the folder "%TEMP%\Enscape\Logs\EnscapeSketchupPlugin"

    Looks like only the field of view is different. Are you sure you have enabled view synchronization, which synchronizes the field of view automatically?




    You can also try to adjust the field of view manually in the settings.



    Hi @all


    I did some more testing & research myself. Here is what I found about shortcomings in the camera synchronization. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

    1. When navigating in SketchUp without Two-Point Perspective, Enscape displays the same region, with correct eye, direction and horizontal field of view. The aspect ratio of the viewport is not synchronized, therefore Enscape often has too much or too less image in the top and bottom regions.
    2. When enabling Two-Point Perspective in SketchUp, Enscape behaves very similar to point 1). No complaints except the unsynchronized height.
    3. When panning & zooming in Two-Point Perspective in SketchUp, Enscape does not pick up the changes. Therefore the perspective is correct, but the borders of the image might be completely wrong. If you think you have this problem you can check in the Ruby Console. "Sketchup.active_model.active_view.camera.center_2d" has a non-zero value and/or "Sketchup.active_model.active_view.camera.scale_2d" has a non-one value.
    4. When setting an explicit aspect ratio (possible through various other extensions), the behaviour is likely not what one expects. If you have black bars left/right, Enscape nonetheless displays the width of the whole viewport (including the black bars). If you have black bars top/bottom, Enscape displays an incorrect field of view.
    5. When rotating in SketchUp until the up-vector points down, the camera in Enscape does not follow this movement, the up-vector points up.

    Now to the interesting part. How important is it for you to have these shortcomings fixed? What are your use cases?

    1. Do you need any of these things fixed for things other than manual post-processing & combining with other imagery? What are you aiming for with the post-processing?
    2. When synchronizing the aspect ratio, do you need it to a) always be in sync, b) be in sync if some checkbox is enabled or c) sync explicitly when pressing a button?
    3. When synchronizing the aspect ratio, do you need it to have the aspect ratio of the viewport (including black borders) or the camera (without the black borders) or do you need it to be selectable?
    4. When synchronizing the aspect ratio, do you want it to automatically apply to screenshots & videos as well?
    5. How important is it for you to pan & scale in SketchUp Two-Point Perspective and have Enscape show the same image?
    6. How important is it for you to look at your model upside-down?

    Sorry for this rather long post, but I want to be sure, I understand your wishes and problems.

    vertigo1 Can you tell me how to turn section planes on/off by layer in SketchUp (no Enscape involved). I can't reproduce this - only able to show/hide the plane, but the part that is cut by the section plane is always hidden in SketchUp. Also you can't mean the toggle in the menu "View->Section Cuts", because then using the Enscape play button would not help. If you can provide me with a test project, that would be great. Thanks.

    EarthMover I totally understand your arguments, and we will weight them appropriately. But it's not as simple as it might seem on first sight.


    We could support referencing some external .skp files, but there are obstacles:

    1. Referencing these skp files on more than one machine is difficult. Should one use absolute or relative paths? Search in subdirectories? Explicitly specify additional search directories? Revit users face some of these difficulties when referencing textures at the moment.
    2. For live updates to work we have to use the SketchUp Ruby API. For reading .skp files we would have to use the SketchUp C API. This means we would have to do the data export almost from scratch.

    Alternatively we could provide a proprietary file format with export & import functions. But this does not come without drawbacks:

    1. Maintaining a proper file format is a lot of work, especially if you want to be compatible between multiple versions.
    2. Enscape tries to deliver value to a lot of customers on a regular basis. We wouldn't be able to do so, if new features also required a change in the file format.

    Let me summarize this topic again: Providing proxy objects is not as simple as it might seem and we have to balance this feature request against others. But we've heard your call.