I am looking with interest at the sketchup posts. I have a project brewing
that I will need to design. It is a metal and wood circular workstation.
The design is not that difficult. It will be in sections and will be bolted
together. A lot of components will be attached to it. But those are not a
part of the basic design of what needs to be designed/built.
My questions are as follows.
Can a 3D model be drawn that would show the circular design?
Particularly, can the compnent parts be shown in different perspctives
around that circle? In other words, can I take a common component and show
it at six different angles to simulate how they would look really look in
this circular configuration?
I need to draw a circular wood keyboard bench that will attach to the metal
frame. Could this be drawn easily? And can it be "attached" to the metal
frame drawing?
This whole component model of constructing a drawing will be a whole
different experiece for me. I will give a shot and see how I do.
The design is not that difficult. It is similar to other things I have
built. What I need is a good 3D representation to sell it to the folks who
will pay for it. Any thoughts, etc would be appreciated.
"Jim Weisgram" wrote
>
> Or, once you have created a piece that comprises a component, you can
> place 6 of them at various orientations within one drawing.
>
Thank you sir. That is an essential function that I needed and you stated
it clearly. Sketchup may very well become a tool of choice for me. Now I
just need to block out some time to learn it.
"Robatoy" fired this zinger
Jack Stein wrote:
>
> Took me months or starting, quitting, starting again, quitting and so
> on. It can be deceptively hard, or deceptively easy, depending on your
> point of view:-)
>
A reasonable amount of intelligence makes it easier. That's probably
why you find it so difficult.
=======================
Subtle...
On Oct 9, 9:25=A0am, Jack Stein <[email protected]> wrote:
> Robatoy wrote:
> > On Oct 8, 12:52 pm, Jack Stein <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >> Took me months or starting, quitting, starting again, quitting and so
> >> on. =A0It can be deceptively hard, or deceptively easy, depending on y=
our
> >> point of view:-)
>
> > A reasonable amount of intelligence makes it easier. That's probably
> > why you find it so difficult.
>
> ...and why you never did figure it out.
>
You are making shit up, Douche-nozzle. You have NO way of knowing
whether I figured SU out or not.
Try again. ( I will check back in a few days, knowing it usually takes
a long time for you to say something 'clever'.)
On Oct 8, 5:53=A0pm, Swingman <[email protected]> wrote:
> John wrote:
> > I was contemplating whether or not this was worth bringing up, but in
> > the end I thought why not, everyone can decide for themselves:
>
> > If you're looking for things that Sketchup can't do, chances are that
> > Carrara can. Carrara can be gotten for $30 off of the DAZ website (it
> > comes with the Figures Characters and Avitars book). =A0Carrara has som=
e
> > very powerful modelling tools, and can produce photo-realistic output,
> > including video, etc. (Interestingly, if you want to do non-photo-
> > realistic sketchup-type output, you have to pay for a plugin).
>
> > It looks like it has a much larger learning curve than Sketchup
> > (sketchup looks pretty easy on the training videos), but as you can
> > imagine, Carrara is vastly more powerful.
>
> > Anyways, just thought I would bring that up, and people can have a
> > decide if it's worth the extra money/learning curve (just a warning
> > though -- the DAZ website seems to be overly proud of thier models of
> > scantily clad women -- it can do other things... really!. =A0I've been
> > using it for years and have done many furniture designs with it) =A0The
> > sight is here:
>
> It's always worth bringing up. There are a ton of programs out there
> that can do the job and it's always nice to see the choices available.
>
> One man's poi is another man's poison.
>
> --www.e-woodshop.net
> Last update: 10/22/08
> KarlC@ (the obvious)
We have agreed to disagree on some of the issues, but let it be said
that the whole SketchUp concept has opened a lot of doors for many
that otherwise would have never experienced the pleasure and
functionality of aided drafting and design.
On Oct 9, 11:30=A0am, Steve Turner <[email protected]>
wrote:
> RicodJour wrote:
> > On Oct 9, 11:16 am, Robatoy <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> On Oct 9, 11:13 am, Steve Turner <[email protected]>
>
> >>> LOL! =A0The old Road Runner and Wile E. Coyote cartoons are coming to=
mind
> >>> for some reason. =A0:-)
> >> Beep Beep.....
>
> > Ummm, not for nothing, but I think it's far more likely, tool junkie
> > that you are, that there's a whole pile of Acme boxes out back of your
> > place. =A0:)~
>
> > R
>
> He collects them as souvenirs when Wile E. is done with them. =A0:-)
>
> --
> See Nad. =A0See Nad go. =A0Go Nad!
> To reply, eat the taco.http://www.flickr.com/photos/bbqboyee/
Indeed. The only empty boxes I have are those marked: "TUNNEL ENTRANCE
PAINT"
On Fri, 09 Oct 2009 08:02:21 -0500, Steve Turner
<[email protected]> wrote:
>An aside... I know you argued the point with one of your other buddies
>about a week ago, but there *must* be something wrong with your clock.
>I'm using the same news server you are, but your posts are showing up
>"in the future", whereas mine are not.
As I told him. But, considering we were in the throes of insulting
each other, his misplaced arrogance precluded any chance of him
admitting his computer clock wasn't set properly.
C'est la vie.
On Oct 9, 9:04=A0am, Steve Turner <[email protected]>
wrote:
> Swingman wrote:
> > Robatoy wrote:
> >> On Oct 9, 9:25 am, Jack Stein <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Why the hell don't you guys just plonk each other?
>
> Nah, it's too much fun for both of them. =A0:-)
>
> --
> See Nad. =A0See Nad go. =A0Go Nad!
> To reply, eat the taco.http://www.flickr.com/photos/bbqboyee/
It is pure benevolence on my part. Without me, Stein would have no
reason to exist.
On Oct 8, 11:05=A0pm, Doug Winterburn <[email protected]> wrote:
> Robatoy wrote:
> > On Oct 8, 7:12 pm, "Lee Michaels" <leemichaels*[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> >> "Robatoy" fired this zinger
>
> >> =A0Jack Stein =A0wrote:
>
> >>> Took me months or starting, quitting, starting again, quitting and so
> >>> on. It can be deceptively hard, or deceptively easy, depending on you=
r
> >>> point of view:-)
> >> A reasonable amount of intelligence makes it easier. That's probably
> >> why you find it so difficult.
> >> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>
> >> Subtle...
>
> > I'm known for my subtleness.... like the 'b' in subtle.
>
> or the silent "P" in swimming
>
> - Doug
Ha!
Robatoy wrote:
> On Oct 9, 9:25 am, Jack Stein <[email protected]> wrote:
Why the hell don't you guys just plonk each other?
--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 10/22/08
KarlC@ (the obvious)
On Oct 7, 10:05=A0am, Swingman <[email protected]> wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
> You got two buddies a couple of hours away who are converts, nay
> zealots! ... let us know if you have any questions. <G>
Awright!!
I'll remember that. Actual zealots bring a lot of "entusiasms" to the
table.
Thanks for the offer!
Robert
On Oct 8, 5:39=A0pm, John <[email protected]> wrote:
> I was contemplating whether or not this was worth bringing up, but in
> the end I thought why not, everyone can decide for themselves:
>
> If you're looking for things that Sketchup can't do, chances are that
> Carrara can. Carrara can be gotten for $30 off of the DAZ website (it
> comes with the Figures Characters and Avitars book). =A0Carrara has some
> very powerful modelling tools, and can produce photo-realistic output,
> including video, etc. (Interestingly, if you want to do non-photo-
> realistic sketchup-type output, you have to pay for a plugin).
>
> It looks like it has a much larger learning curve than Sketchup
> (sketchup looks pretty easy on the training videos), but as you can
> imagine, Carrara is vastly more powerful.
>
> Anyways, just thought I would bring that up, and people can have a
> decide if it's worth the extra money/learning curve (just a warning
> though -- the DAZ website seems to be overly proud of thier models of
> scantily clad women -- it can do other things... really!. =A0I've been
> using it for years and have done many furniture designs with it) =A0The
> sight is here:
>
> http://www.daz3d.com/i/software/carrara?_m=3Dd
>
> John
Will ya look at that... runs on a Mac...(as well as a PC)
On Oct 9, 11:36=A0am, Steve Turner <[email protected]>
wrote:
> Jack Stein wrote:
> > Steve Turner wrote:
> >> Jack Stein wrote:
> >>> Robatoy wrote:
> >>>> On Oct 8, 12:52 pm, Jack Stein <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >>>>> Took me months or starting, quitting, starting again, quitting and =
so
> >>>>> on. =A0It can be deceptively hard, or deceptively easy, depending o=
n
> >>>>> your
> >>>>> point of view:-)
>
> >>>> A reasonable amount of intelligence makes it easier. That's probably
> >>>> why you find it so difficult.
>
> >>> ...and why you never did figure it out.
>
> >> An aside... =A0I know you argued the point with one of your other
> >> buddies about a week ago, but there *must* be something wrong with
> >> your clock.
>
> > I didn't argue the point, I stated my clock was correct.
>
> >> I'm using the same news server you are, but your posts are showing up
> >> "in the future", whereas mine are not. =A0I originally took this probl=
em
> >> to be the fault of the news server, but I just verified that setting
> >> my clock into the future and replying to a post (see the Rockwell
> >> planer thread) DID cause the timestamp of the reply to show up in the
> >> future. I've since resynchronized my clock back with time.windows.com
> >> prior to submitting this reply.
>
> > My computer clock is set correctly, with the correct date and time, and
> > the correct time zone. =A0My messages come back to me with the correct
> > time. =A0It is 12:11 PM on my computer, on my watch, on my cell phone, =
on
> > my TV. =A0What would you like me to change?
>
> Interesting; you and I both have two posts only seconds apart to the
> same server (eternal-september.org), and the NNTP-Posting-Date in the
> headers reflect this:
>
> =A0 =A0mine: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 16:17:53 +0000 (UTC)
> =A0 yours: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 16:17:04 +0000 (UTC)
> Yet the dates displayed by my newsreader (Thunderbird) are:
>
> =A0 =A0mine: 11:17am
> =A0 yours: 12:16pm
On Google: Jack's: 12:16PM
Yours" 11:36AM !!!
>
> Which are basically the times that we posted within our own local time
> zones. =A0However, I don't see anything else in the message headers that
> would indicate what our time zones *are*, so I'm not sure how this is
> happening. =A0I guess the eternal-september.org newserver must be
> misconfigured somehow...? =A0Is this how people on other servers are
> seeing things?
40 minute time zones? ;-)
> Maybe you are not seeing it Jack (any others?), but the side effect is
> that your posts are appearing out of order with respect to when you
> posted. =A0Your posts are showing up after the follow-on replies.
That sounds like your newsreader is set up improperly. Threading
should overrule time stamps.
[email protected] wrote:
> On Sun, 11 Oct 2009 09:50:21 -0500, Jack Stein <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> Really? You think my Windows OS is the only one that doesn't know when
>> to adjust for daylight savings time?
>
> The problem isn't that your Windows doesn't know when to adjust to
> DST, it's that you don't know when to turn Windows DST on.
Hardly!
> And if your
> Windows OS doesn't work properly in the first place, then you were the
> one that screwed it up.
Wrong, camel breath.
>>> You do understand that the time setting is not for your benefit, it is
>>> for the benefit of others, right?
>> No, I didn't know that.
> Understandable. There's many, many things you don't know and refuse to
> even acknowledge for some strange reason.
Right, my time settings don't mean beans to me, why would I care what
the time stamps on my files are as long as you can see what time I
posted a message. You really are clueless!
>>> Windows adjust the time for you. Then switch back if you believe
>>> there is a benefit.
>
>> I've re-applied the patch, but if you actually thought I was going to
>> set my clock to the wrong time to make a few people here happy, you are
>> wrong.
> That's where your problem lies. You weren't being asked to set the
> wrong time, you were being told that your time setting wasn't working
> properly.
No, I was told my clock was wrong, it wasn't. My time setting also works
fine here, it is only the windows automatic setting that doesn't work
right. Windows may be junk, but there is no way they could know the
government was going to change when DST should start and stop. They put
a manual setting so it could be used if needed. I needed it, I used it,
my system was working fine, time was correct.
As usual though, your arrogance got in the way. The time
> thing was for everybody's use (everyone on newsgroups anyway) and not
> just the few people you happened to be arguing with at the time. But,
> you're too self centered to understand that.
I really don't care what time stamps my messages have when they get on
your system. I've added a patch solely to correct others systems that
were incorrectly adjusting my clock for DST, which did not need adjusted.
> God, it's so much fun razzing you.
Glad to entertain you.
> You're such an easy target. Guess
> that shows what kind of insignificant life I have, eagerly waiting to
> respond to your self deceiving posts every morning. :)
> You have a good day now, Jack.
--
Jack
Using FREE News Server: http://www.eternal-september.org/
http://jbstein.com
On Sun, 11 Oct 2009 09:50:21 -0500, Jack Stein <[email protected]>
wrote:
>Really? You think my Windows OS is the only one that doesn't know when
>to adjust for daylight savings time?
The problem isn't that your Windows doesn't know when to adjust to
DST, it's that you don't know when to turn Windows DST on. And if your
Windows OS doesn't work properly in the first place, then you were the
one that screwed it up.
>> You do understand that the time setting is not for your benefit, it is
>> for the benefit of others, right?
>
>No, I didn't know that.
Understandable. There's many, many things you don't know and refuse to
even acknowledge for some strange reason.
>> Windows adjust the time for you. Then switch back if you believe
>> there is a benefit.
>I've re-applied the patch, but if you actually thought I was going to
>set my clock to the wrong time to make a few people here happy, you are
>wrong.
That's where your problem lies. You weren't being asked to set the
wrong time, you were being told that your time setting wasn't working
properly. As usual though, your arrogance got in the way. The time
thing was for everybody's use (everyone on newsgroups anyway) and not
just the few people you happened to be arguing with at the time. But,
you're too self centered to understand that.
God, it's so much fun razzing you. You're such an easy target. Guess
that shows what kind of insignificant life I have, eagerly waiting to
respond to your self deceiving posts every morning. :)
You have a good day now, Jack.
Will it dimension?
Will it import component sizes and materials types into an optimization
program such as Cutlist Plus?
"John" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>I was contemplating whether or not this was worth bringing up, but in
> the end I thought why not, everyone can decide for themselves:
>
> If you're looking for things that Sketchup can't do, chances are that
> Carrara can. Carrara can be gotten for $30 off of the DAZ website (it
> comes with the Figures Characters and Avitars book). Carrara has some
> very powerful modelling tools, and can produce photo-realistic output,
> including video, etc. (Interestingly, if you want to do non-photo-
> realistic sketchup-type output, you have to pay for a plugin).
>
> It looks like it has a much larger learning curve than Sketchup
> (sketchup looks pretty easy on the training videos), but as you can
> imagine, Carrara is vastly more powerful.
>
> Anyways, just thought I would bring that up, and people can have a
> decide if it's worth the extra money/learning curve (just a warning
> though -- the DAZ website seems to be overly proud of thier models of
> scantily clad women -- it can do other things... really!. I've been
> using it for years and have done many furniture designs with it) The
> sight is here:
>
> http://www.daz3d.com/i/software/carrara?_m=d
>
> John
I was contemplating whether or not this was worth bringing up, but in
the end I thought why not, everyone can decide for themselves:
If you're looking for things that Sketchup can't do, chances are that
Carrara can. Carrara can be gotten for $30 off of the DAZ website (it
comes with the Figures Characters and Avitars book). Carrara has some
very powerful modelling tools, and can produce photo-realistic output,
including video, etc. (Interestingly, if you want to do non-photo-
realistic sketchup-type output, you have to pay for a plugin).
It looks like it has a much larger learning curve than Sketchup
(sketchup looks pretty easy on the training videos), but as you can
imagine, Carrara is vastly more powerful.
Anyways, just thought I would bring that up, and people can have a
decide if it's worth the extra money/learning curve (just a warning
though -- the DAZ website seems to be overly proud of thier models of
scantily clad women -- it can do other things... really!. I've been
using it for years and have done many furniture designs with it) The
sight is here:
http://www.daz3d.com/i/software/carrara?_m=d
John
Leon wrote:
>>> but as you can
>>> imagine, Carrara is vastly more powerful.
> ... I'll add that it took me 3 down loads, 3 installs, and 2
> uninstalls before verions 6 & 7 came out. I did not like it, it was a bit
> to cartoonish and I hated the line weights. But then I made program
> settings changes and actually learned the program and now I probably have 5
> versions of AutoCAD LT that are collection dust.
Choosing 3D design software for your woodworking endeavors could be
considered the equivalent of choosing the right type of joint for a
woodworking project.
And, "vastly more powerful" is not always necessary, or even desirable.
Take face frames as an example. There are a number of joints available
to the face frame maker, some "vastly more powerful" than others, but
damn few, like lowly pocket hole joinery, that exhibit "just the right
amount" of power/strength to get the job done well, are easy to use and
quick to employ, are cost effective, and are conveniently accessible to
even the most neophyte of wooddorkers.
Add that the power of pocket hole joinery is not necessarily evident in
its initial instance, but becomes increasingly so in its application to
the casework (project).
IOW, it is not inconceivable that the lowly SU is to 3D design software
for the wooddorker, as the lowly pocket hole joinery is to the face
frame maker. <g>
I'm now going to bow out of any fruitless discussions regarding what
software will do this or that, or won't do what ... and leave it at
"choice" is good, and what works for one, will not necessarily do so for
the other.
...LOL!
--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 10/22/08
KarlC@ (the obvious)
On Oct 9, 2:15=A0pm, Steve Turner <[email protected]>
wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
> > On Oct 9, 11:36 am, Steve Turner <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> >> Interesting; you and I both have two posts only seconds apart to the
> >> same server (eternal-september.org), and the NNTP-Posting-Date in the
> >> headers reflect this:
>
> >> =A0 =A0mine: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 16:17:53 +0000 (UTC)
> >> =A0 yours: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 16:17:04 +0000 (UTC)
>
> >> Yet the dates displayed by my newsreader (Thunderbird) are:
>
> >> =A0 =A0mine: 11:17am
> >> =A0 yours: 12:16pm
>
> > On Google: =A0 =A0Jack's: =A012:16PM
> > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 Yours" =A0 11:36AM !!!
>
> You're looking at the wrong post. =A0The one in which I made these
> comments is stamped 11:36; the one (of mine) to which I was referring is
> stamped 11:17. =A0I couldn't really know how mine was going to be stamped
> before I sent, could I? =A0:-)
You're right, of course. Going back that far in Google is too painful
now.
> > That sounds like your newsreader is set up improperly. =A0Threading
> > should overrule time stamps.
>
> No. =A0There is no setting in Thunderbird for this kind of stuff, and the
> information we're talking about is right there in the message headers.
So is the threading info.
> And threading will only overrule time stamps if I'm looking at the
> threaded view. =A0If I sort by timestamp then threading plays no part in
> the sort order, and that's where the problem shows up. =A0Recall that I'm
> not the only one seeing this problem.
Then don't do that. ;-)
On Oct 8, 12:52=A0pm, Jack Stein <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Took me months or starting, quitting, starting again, quitting and so
> on. =A0It can be deceptively hard, or deceptively easy, depending on your
> point of view:-)
>
A reasonable amount of intelligence makes it easier. That's probably
why you find it so difficult.
On Oct 9, 11:16=A0am, Robatoy <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Oct 9, 11:13=A0am, Steve Turner <[email protected]>
>
> > LOL! =A0The old Road Runner and Wile E. Coyote cartoons are coming to m=
ind
> > for some reason. =A0:-)
>
> Beep Beep.....
Ummm, not for nothing, but I think it's far more likely, tool junkie
that you are, that there's a whole pile of Acme boxes out back of your
place. :)~
R
"Robatoy" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
On Oct 8, 5:53 pm, Swingman <[email protected]> wrote:
> John wrote:
> > I was contemplating whether or not this was worth bringing up, but in
> > the end I thought why not, everyone can decide for themselves:
>
> > If you're looking for things that Sketchup can't do, chances are that
> > Carrara can. Carrara can be gotten for $30 off of the DAZ website (it
> > comes with the Figures Characters and Avitars book). Carrara has some
> > very powerful modelling tools, and can produce photo-realistic output,
> > including video, etc. (Interestingly, if you want to do non-photo-
> > realistic sketchup-type output, you have to pay for a plugin).
>
> > It looks like it has a much larger learning curve than Sketchup
> > (sketchup looks pretty easy on the training videos), but as you can
> > imagine, Carrara is vastly more powerful.
>
> > Anyways, just thought I would bring that up, and people can have a
> > decide if it's worth the extra money/learning curve (just a warning
> > though -- the DAZ website seems to be overly proud of thier models of
> > scantily clad women -- it can do other things... really!. I've been
> > using it for years and have done many furniture designs with it) The
> > sight is here:
>
> It's always worth bringing up. There are a ton of programs out there
> that can do the job and it's always nice to see the choices available.
>
> One man's poi is another man's poison.
>
> --www.e-woodshop.net
> Last update: 10/22/08
> KarlC@ (the obvious)
We have agreed to disagree on some of the issues, but let it be said
that the whole SketchUp concept has opened a lot of doors for many
that otherwise would have never experienced the pleasure and
functionality of aided drafting and design.
Agree with that and I'll add that it took me 3 down loads, 3 installs, and 2
uninstalls before verions 6 & 7 came out. I did not like it, it was a bit
to cartoonish and I hated the line weights. But then I made program
settings changes and actually learned the program and now I probably have 5
versions of AutoCAD LT that are collection dust.
Jack Stein wrote:
> I think you nailed it. I have mine turned off, because I don't want
> windows adjusting my clock. I turned it off because it was fussing with
> the time changes on the wrong dates. When they changed the dates, I
> found a fix and installed the patch. Then one fine day I had to
> reinstall windows and lost the fix. I never bothered to find the patch,
> and re fix it, instead, I just turned off the auto time change crap. My
> clocks are all correct though, and the time stamps on my messages I send
> show correctly here, and the times showing on your messages are showing
> correctly here. I guess because I don't have windows automagically
> screwing with the times:-)
Jack,
Been a while, but IIRC, the time stamp is made by(function)a system call
to the OS and no amount of futzing above that level in Windows is going
to solve the underlying DST problem. BTDT. If you reapply the patch that
should fix the problem. Try the below:
http://www.intelliadmin.com/DaylightSavingFix.exe
--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 10/22/08
KarlC@ (the obvious)
[email protected] wrote:
> On Oct 7, 10:30 am, "Lee Michaels" <leemichaels*[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> What I need is a good 3D representation to sell it to the folks who
>> will pay for it. Any thoughts, etc would be appreciated.
>
> You can use this page to search the group:
>
> http://groups.google.com/advanced_search?hl=en&q=&hl=en&
>
> I remember Swingman, Morris Dovey, and Robatoy had a lot of insightful
> commentary on using Sketchup, and if I remember, Morris posted
> something on using it for 3D modeling.
LOL ... check out the "Artist or Engineer" thread as we speak. :)
> I hope you post your ideas and how long it takes you to do what you
> are going to do with it. I have been thinking that I want to sketch
> up some simple designs with it, but will need to set aside some
> learning time.
You got two buddies a couple of hours away who are converts, nay
zealots! ... let us know if you have any questions. <G>
--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 10/22/08
KarlC@ (the obvious)
Lee Michaels wrote:
> What I need is a good 3D representation to sell it to the folks who
> will pay for it. Any thoughts, etc would be appreciated.
Yes to all of the above. It's the sole reason I use the program and
decided to become proficient with it, which was not that steep of a hill
to climb.
Although there are undoubtedly differing opinions, it works for me,
particular since it is freely available/downloadable to both me and my
client(s) to use to view the 3d aspect of the model(s) from all
perspectives, something not usually available with CAD software, even
with standalone "viewers".
If you want to see what you can with woodworking project, etc:
http://www.finewoodworking.com/item/19804/create-a-carved-pierced-table-apron
Check out the entire Fine Woodworking "Design, Click, Build" series.
Better yet, grab the RSS feed.
--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 10/22/08
KarlC@ (the obvious)
"Lee Michaels" <leemichaels*nadaspam*@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>I am looking with interest at the sketchup posts. I have a project brewing
>that I will need to design. It is a metal and wood circular workstation.
>The design is not that difficult. It will be in sections and will be bolted
>together. A lot of components will be attached to it. But those are not a
>part of the basic design of what needs to be designed/built.
>
> My questions are as follows.
>
> Can a 3D model be drawn that would show the circular design?
Absolutely
>
> Particularly, can the compnent parts be shown in different perspctives
> around that circle? In other words, can I take a common component and show
> it at six different angles to simulate how they would look really look in
> this circular configuration?
They can be shown and or walked around by orbiting around the
component/object, much like you would walk around in your shop looking at
different angles. Basically there is no view angle that is not available.
Something to remember you don't simply pick a single angle to view or draw,
you can see it from any angle after drawing, even inside out.
>
> I need to draw a circular wood keyboard bench that will attach to the
> metal frame. Could this be drawn easily? And can it be "attached" to the
> metal frame drawing?
Yes Yes
>
> This whole component model of constructing a drawing will be a whole
> different experiece for me. I will give a shot and see how I do.
Just remember how you build in the shop. Build each part and assemble on
the drawing. There are hundreds of tutorials that can teach you short cuts
and one of the best is copying mirror images of a component or object.
>
> The design is not that difficult. It is similar to other things I have
> built. What I need is a good 3D representation to sell it to the folks
> who will pay for it. Any thoughts, etc would be appreciated.
Sketchup is hard to beat for presentation especially if the customer is
looking at Sketchup and looking over your sholder. Print outs obviousely
will limit you to the view that you have when you print however you can
print out multiple views.
Drawings views done with Sketchup that a few of us have posted are simply a
drop in the bucket compared to the possible views that you can see on the
screen.
Remember this, there is a trick to printing to scale so that you can print
full scale drawings. This is handy if you want to glue a print out of a
complicated curve directly to your wood for a cutting guide. This may not
be important to you now but perhaps you will remember that it can be done
when the time comes.
John wrote:
> I was contemplating whether or not this was worth bringing up, but in
> the end I thought why not, everyone can decide for themselves:
>
> If you're looking for things that Sketchup can't do, chances are that
> Carrara can. Carrara can be gotten for $30 off of the DAZ website (it
> comes with the Figures Characters and Avitars book). Carrara has some
> very powerful modelling tools, and can produce photo-realistic output,
> including video, etc. (Interestingly, if you want to do non-photo-
> realistic sketchup-type output, you have to pay for a plugin).
>
> It looks like it has a much larger learning curve than Sketchup
> (sketchup looks pretty easy on the training videos), but as you can
> imagine, Carrara is vastly more powerful.
>
> Anyways, just thought I would bring that up, and people can have a
> decide if it's worth the extra money/learning curve (just a warning
> though -- the DAZ website seems to be overly proud of thier models of
> scantily clad women -- it can do other things... really!. I've been
> using it for years and have done many furniture designs with it) The
> sight is here:
It's always worth bringing up. There are a ton of programs out there
that can do the job and it's always nice to see the choices available.
One man's poi is another man's poison.
--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 10/22/08
KarlC@ (the obvious)
On Oct 9, 11:13=A0am, Steve Turner <[email protected]>
wrote:
> Robatoy wrote:
> > On Oct 9, 9:04 am, Steve Turner <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> >> Swingman wrote:
> >>> Robatoy wrote:
> >>>> On Oct 9, 9:25 am, Jack Stein <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>> Why the hell don't you guys just plonk each other?
> >> Nah, it's too much fun for both of them. =A0:-)
>
> > It is pure benevolence on my part. Without me, Stein would have no
> > reason to exist.
>
> LOL! =A0The old Road Runner and Wile E. Coyote cartoons are coming to min=
d
> for some reason. =A0:-)
>
Beep Beep.....
Having just used SketchUp Pro on a new residential construction project
myself(presentation capabilities are greatly enhanced with the Pro
version using the standalone "Layout", while the drawings capabilities
are no different from the free version),it was interesting to see this
company's remarks regarding their use of SketchUp on high rise construction.
http://sketchupdate.blogspot.com/2009/10/sketchup-pro-in-construction-video-case.html
Having "BTDT" so to speak, albeit on a much smaller scale, my experience
was identical as to the benefits of the program for quickly
supplementing, and some cases supplanting, traditional 2d construction
plans with 3d for problem solving, and generally greasing the wheels of
the "detail" part of the construction project.
These benefits obviously apply to smaller projects as well.
--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 10/22/08
KarlC@ (the obvious)
On Oct 8, 7:12=A0pm, "Lee Michaels" <leemichaels*[email protected]>
wrote:
> "Robatoy" fired this zinger
>
> =A0Jack Stein =A0wrote:
>
>
>
> > Took me months or starting, quitting, starting again, quitting and so
> > on. It can be deceptively hard, or deceptively easy, depending on your
> > point of view:-)
>
> A reasonable amount of intelligence makes it easier. That's probably
> why you find it so difficult.
> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>
> Subtle...
I'm known for my subtleness.... like the 'b' in subtle.
On Oct 7, 10:30=A0am, "Lee Michaels" <leemichaels*[email protected]>
wrote:
>=A0What I need is a good 3D representation to sell it to the folks who
> will pay for it. =A0Any thoughts, etc would be appreciated.
You can use this page to search the group:
http://groups.google.com/advanced_search?hl=3Den&q=3D&hl=3Den&
I remember Swingman, Morris Dovey, and Robatoy had a lot of insightful
commentary on using Sketchup, and if I remember, Morris posted
something on using it for 3D modeling.
Then there's this, of which I have heard on other sites the tutorials
are pretty good:
http://sketchup.google.com/intl/en/training/
Then of course, you can YouTube it with user videos:
http://tinyurl.com/yegonp9
I hope you post your ideas and how long it takes you to do what you
are going to do with it. I have been thinking that I want to sketch
up some simple designs with it, but will need to set aside some
learning time.
Robert
Jim Weisgram wrote:
> You will have to do your homework and practice. For me, it took a few
> hours to get the hang of really making it work for me. I do have a
> some experience with 3D software.
Took me months or starting, quitting, starting again, quitting and so
on. It can be deceptively hard, or deceptively easy, depending on your
point of view:-)
>> And can it be "attached" to the metal frame drawing?
> I expect the wood part can easily be attached to the metal part in the
> 3D model. It is easy to have 2 components and connect them up.
One of the gotcha's is its harder NOT to connect up 2 parts. Mainly, if
you don't make a "part" a "component" or group, and connect two or more
parts, they automatically become one part. Once you connect two parts
into one, you can't separate them into "components". I suggest you go
here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kae7uZxyOzQ&NR=1 and watch the
video to get a feel of how easy it is to make a table, then look at the
many tutorials around to learn the basics.
http://sketchup.google.com/training/videos.html
http://www.aidanchopra.com/
and a million others.
>> This whole component model of constructing a drawing will be a whole
>> different experiece for me. I will give a shot and see how I do.
>> The design is not that difficult. It is similar to other things I have
>> built. What I need is a good 3D representation to sell it to the folks who
>> will pay for it. Any thoughts, etc would be appreciated.
What helped me the most was Swingmans insistence that it was a great
tool. It is easy to get lost in a maze of things you don't quite know
how to do and give up. My suggestion is take your time, skipping steps
never helps the learning curve. Erase any preconceived notions Robocop
may give you and remember millions are using it, including the likes of
Swingman, so it probably will do just what you want or it wouldn't be so
popular.
--
Jack
Using FREE News Server: http://www.eternal-september.org/
http://jbstein.com
On Sat, 10 Oct 2009 13:07:01 -0500, Jack Stein <[email protected]>
wrote:
>my clock is wrong, and my clock is right, I ignore it. When Steve says
>my time zones are showing up wrong and asks if I have windows
>automatically adjusting for time zones, I pay attention.
Then you're still an idiot of massive proportions, because your time
as posted on the newsgroup is still an hour in the future. Obviously,
you didn't pay attention and have decided that what you choose to do
has to be right if you stamp your feet hard enough. Perhaps in the
shadow of your one man clown show, no one will notice that it's
actually wrong.
You're so arrogant, it's laughable. Keep playing an ignorant newsgroup
twit. It fits you perfectly.
On Oct 10, 12:50=A0pm, Jack Stein <[email protected]> wrote:
> dpb wrote:
> > [email protected] wrote:
> >> On Fri, 09 Oct 2009 15:39:55 -0500, Steve Turner
> >> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>> spend much more energy on it. =A0:-) =A0I am curious though about whe=
ther
> >>> Jack has his daylight saving time flag turned on; for me it's been
> >>> the bug that keeps on biting.
> >> There's a good chance it is. I had the same problem several months
> >> back. Turned the time flag on and the problem went away. Can't
> >> remember exactly why I turned it off in the first place, but I do
> >> remember turning it off on purpose for some reason.
>
> > The hour offset when his local time seems ok is probably indicative the
> > mail client is picking up some setting and adjusting or not when it
> > shouldn't/should.
>
> > W/ the switch in dates, perhaps he's got an old OS that doesn't know th=
e
> > right day _to_ switch, maybe???
>
> Right, that is the source of the problem. =A0My fix is to set the clock
> manually, 2x a year. =A0It is 11:50 am as I send this message. =A0That is
> the correct time from where I am sitting:-). =A0It will also be the
> correct time showing up on my message when it comes back to me. =A0It wil=
l
> be wrong when the time changes back to EST, whenever that might happen,
> then, I will have to fix it again.
I know of the hearing-impaired, the sight-impaired, impaired
driving...never, ran across a chronologically impaired person until
you showed up.
You do understand that the time setting is not for your benefit, it is
for the benefit of others, right? Whatever it is that you and/or your
machine is doing, is wrong. Why don't you change the setting and let
Windows adjust the time for you. Then switch back if you believe
there is a benefit. That might correct the situation...at least until
you human-error adjust it back to the way it was.
R
On Oct 11, 10:50=A0am, Jack Stein <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> I've re-applied the patch, but if you actually thought I was going to
> set my clock to the wrong time to make a few people here happy, you are
> wrong. =A0It's 10:50 am, so the patch should make your day. =A0If not, to=
ugh
> beans.
Note the times above - they coincide! It worked. Was that so
difficult?
Instead of arguing that there's nothing wrong with your settings/
system, when _everybody_ is telling you there is, learn from this
experience. People aren't kicking your cage for no reason. Most are
just pointing something out and helping you.
Now Paypal Swingman some beer money and say thank you.
R
[email protected] wrote:
> On Fri, 09 Oct 2009 15:39:55 -0500, Steve Turner
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> spend much more energy on it. :-) I am curious though about whether
>> Jack has his daylight saving time flag turned on; for me it's been the
>> bug that keeps on biting.
>
> There's a good chance it is. I had the same problem several months
> back. Turned the time flag on and the problem went away. Can't
> remember exactly why I turned it off in the first place, but I do
> remember turning it off on purpose for some reason.
The hour offset when his local time seems ok is probably indicative the
mail client is picking up some setting and adjusting or not when it
shouldn't/should.
W/ the switch in dates, perhaps he's got an old OS that doesn't know the
right day _to_ switch, maybe???
--
dpb wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
>> On Fri, 09 Oct 2009 15:39:55 -0500, Steve Turner
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> spend much more energy on it. :-) I am curious though about whether
>>> Jack has his daylight saving time flag turned on; for me it's been
>>> the bug that keeps on biting.
>> There's a good chance it is. I had the same problem several months
>> back. Turned the time flag on and the problem went away. Can't
>> remember exactly why I turned it off in the first place, but I do
>> remember turning it off on purpose for some reason.
>
> The hour offset when his local time seems ok is probably indicative the
> mail client is picking up some setting and adjusting or not when it
> shouldn't/should.
>
> W/ the switch in dates, perhaps he's got an old OS that doesn't know the
> right day _to_ switch, maybe???
Right, that is the source of the problem. My fix is to set the clock
manually, 2x a year. It is 11:50 am as I send this message. That is
the correct time from where I am sitting:-). It will also be the
correct time showing up on my message when it comes back to me. It will
be wrong when the time changes back to EST, whenever that might happen,
then, I will have to fix it again.
--
Jack
Using FREE News Server: http://www.eternal-september.org/
http://jbstein.com
RicodJour wrote:
> I know of the hearing-impaired, the sight-impaired, impaired
> driving...never, ran across a chronologically impaired person until
> you showed up.
Really? You think my Windows OS is the only one that doesn't know when
to adjust for daylight savings time?
> You do understand that the time setting is not for your benefit, it is
> for the benefit of others, right?
No, I didn't know that.
Whatever it is that you and/or your
> machine is doing, is wrong.
What would you like me to do? My clock is correct, my time zone is
correct, my dates are correct.
> Why don't you change the setting and let
> Windows adjust the time for you. Then switch back if you believe
> there is a benefit.
I explained why. Auto change doesn't work on my system so I manually
set the clock to the CORRECT TIME. I didn't know it was screwing up
everyone else's day, I knew my computer showed the correct time, and my
mail, and everyone else's mail was showing the correct time when it
comes here.
> That might correct the situation...at least until
> you human-error adjust it back to the way it was.
I've re-applied the patch, but if you actually thought I was going to
set my clock to the wrong time to make a few people here happy, you are
wrong. It's 10:50 am, so the patch should make your day. If not, tough
beans.
--
Jack
Using FREE News Server: http://www.eternal-september.org/
http://jbstein.com
RicodJour wrote:
> On Oct 11, 10:50 am, Jack Stein <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I've re-applied the patch, but if you actually thought I was going to
>> set my clock to the wrong time to make a few people here happy, you are
>> wrong. It's 10:50 am, so the patch should make your day. If not, tough
>> beans.
>
> Note the times above - they coincide! It worked. Was that so
> difficult?
Yeah, cool for you. The difficulty was finding out what the problem
was. My clock was correct here. Steve was aware enough that if my date
and time were correct, something else was wrong. Fortunately he had run
into this bugaboo in the past, and identified the problem is with
manually setting the clock. I had applied the patch to fix windows
automatic time stamp long ago, and when I had to reinstall my system, I
didn't bother, I just do it manually. I had no way of knowing everyone
else's was seeing an adjusted time.
> Instead of arguing that there's nothing wrong with your settings/
> system, when _everybody_ is telling you there is, learn from this
> experience. People aren't kicking your cage for no reason.
Steve Turner was the only one not kicking my cage. You for example
actually think the time setting on my system is for everyone but me. I
don't think so, my time settings are primarily for me. Upscale thought
my clock was set wrong, it wasn't.
Most are just pointing something out and helping you.
Steve helped identify why your clocks were stamping my messages with the
wrong time. That helps me how?
> Now Paypal Swingman some beer money and say thank you.
Swingman made it easy for me to apply the patch. The patch means I
don't have to spend 3 seconds twice a year manually adjusting my clock.
I took the time to apply the patch to help those who are sorting mail
based on the NNTP-Posting Date. If you look in my headers you will see
that the time stamp on my messages were correct. Now, personally, I
can't stand replies that include the date and time the original message
was posted, so for all those that use that format, you can thank Steve
and Swingman because personally, or frankly my dear, I don't give a damn.
--
Jack
Using FREE News Server: http://www.eternal-september.org/
http://jbstein.com
On Fri, 09 Oct 2009 15:39:55 -0500, Steve Turner
<[email protected]> wrote:
>spend much more energy on it. :-) I am curious though about whether
>Jack has his daylight saving time flag turned on; for me it's been the
>bug that keeps on biting.
There's a good chance it is. I had the same problem several months
back. Turned the time flag on and the problem went away. Can't
remember exactly why I turned it off in the first place, but I do
remember turning it off on purpose for some reason.
Robatoy wrote:
> On Oct 8, 12:52 pm, Jack Stein <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Took me months or starting, quitting, starting again, quitting and so
>> on. It can be deceptively hard, or deceptively easy, depending on your
>> point of view:-)
>>
> A reasonable amount of intelligence makes it easier. That's probably
> why you find it so difficult.
...and why you never did figure it out.
--
Jack
Got Change: 57 states, not counting Alaska and Hawaii!
http://jbstein.com
Jack Stein wrote:
> Robatoy wrote:
>> On Oct 8, 12:52 pm, Jack Stein <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Took me months or starting, quitting, starting again, quitting and so
>>> on. It can be deceptively hard, or deceptively easy, depending on your
>>> point of view:-)
>>>
>> A reasonable amount of intelligence makes it easier. That's probably
>> why you find it so difficult.
>
> ...and why you never did figure it out.
An aside... I know you argued the point with one of your other buddies
about a week ago, but there *must* be something wrong with your clock.
I'm using the same news server you are, but your posts are showing up
"in the future", whereas mine are not. I originally took this problem
to be the fault of the news server, but I just verified that setting my
clock into the future and replying to a post (see the Rockwell planer
thread) DID cause the timestamp of the reply to show up in the future.
I've since resynchronized my clock back with time.windows.com prior to
submitting this reply.
--
See Nad. See Nad go. Go Nad!
To reply, eat the taco.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bbqboyee/
Swingman wrote:
> Robatoy wrote:
>> On Oct 9, 9:25 am, Jack Stein <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Why the hell don't you guys just plonk each other?
Nah, it's too much fun for both of them. :-)
--
See Nad. See Nad go. Go Nad!
To reply, eat the taco.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bbqboyee/
Robatoy wrote:
> On Oct 9, 9:04 am, Steve Turner <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>> Swingman wrote:
>>> Robatoy wrote:
>>>> On Oct 9, 9:25 am, Jack Stein <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Why the hell don't you guys just plonk each other?
>> Nah, it's too much fun for both of them. :-)
>
> It is pure benevolence on my part. Without me, Stein would have no
> reason to exist.
LOL! The old Road Runner and Wile E. Coyote cartoons are coming to mind
for some reason. :-)
--
See Nad. See Nad go. Go Nad!
To reply, eat the taco.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bbqboyee/
RicodJour wrote:
> On Oct 9, 11:16 am, Robatoy <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Oct 9, 11:13 am, Steve Turner <[email protected]>
>>
>>> LOL! The old Road Runner and Wile E. Coyote cartoons are coming to mind
>>> for some reason. :-)
>> Beep Beep.....
>
> Ummm, not for nothing, but I think it's far more likely, tool junkie
> that you are, that there's a whole pile of Acme boxes out back of your
> place. :)~
>
> R
He collects them as souvenirs when Wile E. is done with them. :-)
--
See Nad. See Nad go. Go Nad!
To reply, eat the taco.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bbqboyee/
Steve Turner wrote:
> Jack Stein wrote:
>> Robatoy wrote:
>>> On Oct 8, 12:52 pm, Jack Stein <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Took me months or starting, quitting, starting again, quitting and so
>>>> on. It can be deceptively hard, or deceptively easy, depending on your
>>>> point of view:-)
>>>>
>>> A reasonable amount of intelligence makes it easier. That's probably
>>> why you find it so difficult.
>>
>> ...and why you never did figure it out.
>
> An aside... I know you argued the point with one of your other buddies
> about a week ago, but there *must* be something wrong with your clock.
I didn't argue the point, I stated my clock was correct.
> I'm using the same news server you are, but your posts are showing up
> "in the future", whereas mine are not. I originally took this problem
> to be the fault of the news server, but I just verified that setting my
> clock into the future and replying to a post (see the Rockwell planer
> thread) DID cause the timestamp of the reply to show up in the future.
> I've since resynchronized my clock back with time.windows.com prior to
> submitting this reply.
My computer clock is set correctly, with the correct date and time, and
the correct time zone. My messages come back to me with the correct
time. It is 12:11 PM on my computer, on my watch, on my cell phone, on
my TV. What would you like me to change?
--
Jack
Using FREE News Server: http://www.eternal-september.org/
http://jbstein.com
Jack Stein wrote:
> Steve Turner wrote:
>> Jack Stein wrote:
>>> Robatoy wrote:
>>>> On Oct 8, 12:52 pm, Jack Stein <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Took me months or starting, quitting, starting again, quitting and so
>>>>> on. It can be deceptively hard, or deceptively easy, depending on
>>>>> your
>>>>> point of view:-)
>>>>>
>>>> A reasonable amount of intelligence makes it easier. That's probably
>>>> why you find it so difficult.
>>>
>>> ...and why you never did figure it out.
>>
>> An aside... I know you argued the point with one of your other
>> buddies about a week ago, but there *must* be something wrong with
>> your clock.
>
> I didn't argue the point, I stated my clock was correct.
>
>> I'm using the same news server you are, but your posts are showing up
>> "in the future", whereas mine are not. I originally took this problem
>> to be the fault of the news server, but I just verified that setting
>> my clock into the future and replying to a post (see the Rockwell
>> planer thread) DID cause the timestamp of the reply to show up in the
>> future. I've since resynchronized my clock back with time.windows.com
>> prior to submitting this reply.
>
> My computer clock is set correctly, with the correct date and time, and
> the correct time zone. My messages come back to me with the correct
> time. It is 12:11 PM on my computer, on my watch, on my cell phone, on
> my TV. What would you like me to change?
Interesting; you and I both have two posts only seconds apart to the
same server (eternal-september.org), and the NNTP-Posting-Date in the
headers reflect this:
mine: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 16:17:53 +0000 (UTC)
yours: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 16:17:04 +0000 (UTC)
Yet the dates displayed by my newsreader (Thunderbird) are:
mine: 11:17am
yours: 12:16pm
Which are basically the times that we posted within our own local time
zones. However, I don't see anything else in the message headers that
would indicate what our time zones *are*, so I'm not sure how this is
happening. I guess the eternal-september.org newserver must be
misconfigured somehow...? Is this how people on other servers are
seeing things?
Maybe you are not seeing it Jack (any others?), but the side effect is
that your posts are appearing out of order with respect to when you
posted. Your posts are showing up after the follow-on replies.
--
See Nad. See Nad go. Go Nad!
To reply, eat the taco.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bbqboyee/
Steve Turner wrote:
> Jack Stein wrote:
>> My computer clock is set correctly, with the correct date and time,
>> and the correct time zone. My messages come back to me with the
>> correct time. It is 12:11 PM on my computer, on my watch, on my cell
>> phone, on my TV. What would you like me to change?
>
> Interesting; you and I both have two posts only seconds apart to the
> same server (eternal-september.org), and the NNTP-Posting-Date in the
> headers reflect this:
>
> mine: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 16:17:53 +0000 (UTC)
> yours: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 16:17:04 +0000 (UTC)
>
> Yet the dates displayed by my newsreader (Thunderbird) are:
>
> mine: 11:17am
> yours: 12:16pm
>
> Which are basically the times that we posted within our own local time
> zones.
It is the exact time I sent my message, and it is the exact time that
shows up on my message in Tbird, and your time is showing 11:36 in your
message.
However, I don't see anything else in the message headers that
> would indicate what our time zones *are*, so I'm not sure how this is
> happening. I guess the eternal-september.org newserver must be
> misconfigured somehow...?
I dunno. Before I posted my last message, I went to eternal-september to
see if perhaps I configured something wrong there like the wrong time
zone and didn't find anything. I don't think they do anything with the
time stamp, or my messages wouldn't be coming back to me with the
correct time stamp.
> Is this how people on other servers are
> seeing things?
> Maybe you are not seeing it Jack (any others?), but the side effect is
> that your posts are appearing out of order with respect to when you
> posted. Your posts are showing up after the follow-on replies.
Hey, you got me. My end *seems* correct to me. I took a cursory look
at things and everything appears correct on my end, so it's probably
me:-) It's 1:04 right as I'm posting...
--
Jack
Using FREE News Server: http://www.eternal-september.org/
http://jbstein.com
Jack Stein wrote:
> Steve Turner wrote:
>> Jack Stein wrote:
>
>>> My computer clock is set correctly, with the correct date and time,
>>> and the correct time zone. My messages come back to me with the
>>> correct time. It is 12:11 PM on my computer, on my watch, on my cell
>>> phone, on my TV. What would you like me to change?
>>
>> Interesting; you and I both have two posts only seconds apart to the
>> same server (eternal-september.org), and the NNTP-Posting-Date in the
>> headers reflect this:
>>
>> mine: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 16:17:53 +0000 (UTC)
>> yours: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 16:17:04 +0000 (UTC)
>>
>> Yet the dates displayed by my newsreader (Thunderbird) are:
>>
>> mine: 11:17am
>> yours: 12:16pm
>>
>> Which are basically the times that we posted within our own local time
>> zones.
>
> It is the exact time I sent my message, and it is the exact time that
> shows up on my message in Tbird, and your time is showing 11:36 in your
> message.
>
> However, I don't see anything else in the message headers that
>> would indicate what our time zones *are*, so I'm not sure how this is
>> happening. I guess the eternal-september.org newserver must be
>> misconfigured somehow...?
>
> I dunno. Before I posted my last message, I went to eternal-september to
> see if perhaps I configured something wrong there like the wrong time
> zone and didn't find anything. I don't think they do anything with the
> time stamp, or my messages wouldn't be coming back to me with the
> correct time stamp.
>
>> Is this how people on other servers are seeing things?
>
>> Maybe you are not seeing it Jack (any others?), but the side effect is
>> that your posts are appearing out of order with respect to when you
>> posted. Your posts are showing up after the follow-on replies.
>
> Hey, you got me. My end *seems* correct to me. I took a cursory look
> at things and everything appears correct on my end, so it's probably
> me:-) It's 1:04 right as I'm posting...
I just looked at a BUNCH of different headers from a bunch of different
groups and posters (some whom I know to be in your time zone), posting
to a variety of news servers (including eternal-september) and they all
show time stamps with a 5-hour delta from the NNTP-Posting-Date entry,
except for yours; yours is 6 hours.
In the "Time Zone" tab of your "Date and Time Properties" (assuming
you're running Windows, of course) do you have the "Automatically adjust
clock for daylight saving changes" checked? (I do) I'm a programmer by
trade, and I've done a lot of messing around with time values in code,
and it's my considered opinion that this feature of Windows is *broken*.
If you have that turned off you might try turning it on to see what
the effect is. If it's already turned on, then I'm lost again. :-)
--
"Even if your wife is happy but you're unhappy, you're still happier
than you'd be if you were happy and your wife was unhappy." - Red Green
To reply, eat the taco.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bbqboyee/
Jack Stein wrote:
> Steve Turner wrote:
>> Jack Stein wrote:
>
>>> My computer clock is set correctly, with the correct date and time,
>>> and the correct time zone. My messages come back to me with the
>>> correct time. It is 12:11 PM on my computer, on my watch, on my cell
>>> phone, on my TV. What would you like me to change?
>>
>> Interesting; you and I both have two posts only seconds apart to the
>> same server (eternal-september.org), and the NNTP-Posting-Date in the
>> headers reflect this:
>>
>> mine: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 16:17:53 +0000 (UTC)
>> yours: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 16:17:04 +0000 (UTC)
>>
>> Yet the dates displayed by my newsreader (Thunderbird) are:
>>
>> mine: 11:17am
>> yours: 12:16pm
>>
>> Which are basically the times that we posted within our own local time
>> zones.
>
> It is the exact time I sent my message, and it is the exact time that
> shows up on my message in Tbird, and your time is showing 11:36 in your
> message.
>
> However, I don't see anything else in the message headers that
>> would indicate what our time zones *are*, so I'm not sure how this is
>> happening. I guess the eternal-september.org newserver must be
>> misconfigured somehow...?
>
> I dunno. Before I posted my last message, I went to eternal-september to
> see if perhaps I configured something wrong there like the wrong time
> zone and didn't find anything. I don't think they do anything with the
> time stamp, or my messages wouldn't be coming back to me with the
> correct time stamp.
>
>> Is this how people on other servers are seeing things?
>
>> Maybe you are not seeing it Jack (any others?), but the side effect is
>> that your posts are appearing out of order with respect to when you
>> posted. Your posts are showing up after the follow-on replies.
>
> Hey, you got me. My end *seems* correct to me. I took a cursory look
> at things and everything appears correct on my end, so it's probably
> me:-) It's 1:04 right as I'm posting...
I just looked at a BUNCH of different headers from a bunch of different
groups and posters (some whom I know to be in your time zone), posting
to a variety of news servers (including eternal-september) and they all
show time stamps with a 5-hour delta from the NNTP-Posting-Date entry,
except for yours; yours is 6 hours.
In the "Time Zone" tab of your "Date and Time Properties" (assuming
you're running Windows, of course) do you have the "Automatically adjust
clock for daylight saving changes" checked? (I do) I'm a programmer by
trade, and I've done a lot of messing around with time values in code,
and it's my considered opinion that this feature of Windows is *broken*.
If you have that turned off you might try turning it on to see what
the effect is. If it's already turned on, then I'm lost again. :-)
--
"Even if your wife is happy but you're unhappy, you're still happier
than you'd be if you were happy and your wife was unhappy." - Red Green
To reply, eat the taco.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bbqboyee/
[email protected] wrote:
> On Oct 9, 11:36 am, Steve Turner <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>> Interesting; you and I both have two posts only seconds apart to the
>> same server (eternal-september.org), and the NNTP-Posting-Date in the
>> headers reflect this:
>>
>> mine: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 16:17:53 +0000 (UTC)
>> yours: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 16:17:04 +0000 (UTC)
>
>> Yet the dates displayed by my newsreader (Thunderbird) are:
>>
>> mine: 11:17am
>> yours: 12:16pm
>
>
> On Google: Jack's: 12:16PM
> Yours" 11:36AM !!!
You're looking at the wrong post. The one in which I made these
comments is stamped 11:36; the one (of mine) to which I was referring is
stamped 11:17. I couldn't really know how mine was going to be stamped
before I sent, could I? :-)
> That sounds like your newsreader is set up improperly. Threading
> should overrule time stamps.
No. There is no setting in Thunderbird for this kind of stuff, and the
information we're talking about is right there in the message headers.
And threading will only overrule time stamps if I'm looking at the
threaded view. If I sort by timestamp then threading plays no part in
the sort order, and that's where the problem shows up. Recall that I'm
not the only one seeing this problem.
--
"Our beer goes through thousands of quality Czechs every day."
(From a Shiner Bock billboard I saw in Austin some years ago)
To reply, eat the taco.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bbqboyee/
On Sun, 11 Oct 2009 08:22:56 -0700 (PDT), RicodJour
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Instead of arguing that there's nothing wrong with your settings/
>system, when _everybody_ is telling you there is, learn from this
>experience. People aren't kicking your cage for no reason. Most are
>just pointing something out and helping you.
It was mostly my fault, you have to give Jack some leeway here. He was
so caught up in our 'discussion' that it was impossible for him see
past the invectives to comprehend the comments about time posting.
Of course, having the troll-like nature that I do, I took advantage of
his anger and pushed his buttons some more, additionally clouding the
issue.
On Oct 11, 11:30=A0am, [email protected] wrote:
> On Sun, 11 Oct 2009 08:22:56 -0700 (PDT), RicodJour
>
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >Instead of arguing that there's nothing wrong with your settings/
> >system, when _everybody_ is telling you there is, learn from this
> >experience. =A0People aren't kicking your cage for no reason. =A0Most ar=
e
> >just pointing something out and helping you.
>
> It was mostly my fault, you have to give Jack some leeway here. He was
> so caught up in our 'discussion' that it was impossible for him see
> past the invectives to comprehend the comments about time posting.
>
> Of course, having the troll-like nature that I do, I took advantage of
> his anger and pushed his buttons some more, additionally clouding the
> issue.
As a friends of mine likes to say: "it only takes minutes of my time
to piss off somebody's whole day..."
UseNet is not for thin-skinned, humourless douche-nozzles...oops..
.
.
.
*smirk*
[email protected] wrote:
> On Sun, 11 Oct 2009 08:22:56 -0700 (PDT), RicodJour
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Instead of arguing that there's nothing wrong with your settings/
>> system, when _everybody_ is telling you there is, learn from this
>> experience. People aren't kicking your cage for no reason. Most are
>> just pointing something out and helping you.
>
> It was mostly my fault, you have to give Jack some leeway here. He was
> so caught up in our 'discussion' that it was impossible for him see
> past the invectives to comprehend the comments about time posting.
>
> Of course, having the troll-like nature that I do, I took advantage of
> his anger and pushed his buttons some more, additionally clouding the
> issue.
You really are stupid.
--
Jack
Using FREE News Server: http://www.eternal-september.org/
http://jbstein.com
[email protected] wrote:
> On Fri, 09 Oct 2009 14:15:15 -0500, Steve Turner
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> the sort order, and that's where the problem shows up. Recall that I'm
>> not the only one seeing this problem.
>
> Give it up Steve. Jack is much too arrogant to even consider that the
> problem is at his end. Even though he can see the hour difference
> between a message posted from his own computer is different than the
> time posted on the newsgroup, it's far beyond his capability to even
> acknowledge there might be a clock problem, much less that he's
> responsible for it.
>
> You cordially told him how to fix it and all he wants to do is argue.
Well now I have a different guy arguing with me, but I'm not going to
spend much more energy on it. :-) I am curious though about whether
Jack has his daylight saving time flag turned on; for me it's been the
bug that keeps on biting.
--
See Nad. See Nad go. Go Nad!
To reply, eat the taco.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bbqboyee/
Steve Turner wrote:
> Jack Stein wrote:
>> Hey, you got me. My end *seems* correct to me. I took a cursory look
>> at things and everything appears correct on my end, so it's probably
>> me:-) It's 1:04 right as I'm posting...
>
> I just looked at a BUNCH of different headers from a bunch of different
> groups and posters (some whom I know to be in your time zone), posting
> to a variety of news servers (including eternal-september) and they all
> show time stamps with a 5-hour delta from the NNTP-Posting-Date entry,
> except for yours; yours is 6 hours.
Yet my time zone is set correctly, at 5 hours, not 6 hours...
> In the "Time Zone" tab of your "Date and Time Properties" (assuming
> you're running Windows, of course) do you have the "Automatically adjust
> clock for daylight saving changes" checked? (I do) I'm a programmer by
> trade, and I've done a lot of messing around with time values in code,
> and it's my considered opinion that this feature of Windows is *broken*.
> If you have that turned off you might try turning it on to see what the
> effect is. If it's already turned on, then I'm lost again. :-)
I think you nailed it. I have mine turned off, because I don't want
windows adjusting my clock. I turned it off because it was fussing with
the time changes on the wrong dates. When they changed the dates, I
found a fix and installed the patch. Then one fine day I had to
reinstall windows and lost the fix. I never bothered to find the patch,
and re fix it, instead, I just turned off the auto time change crap. My
clocks are all correct though, and the time stamps on my messages I send
show correctly here, and the times showing on your messages are showing
correctly here. I guess because I don't have windows automagically
screwing with the times:-)
--
Jack
Using FREE News Server: http://www.eternal-september.org/
http://jbstein.com
[email protected] wrote:
> On Fri, 09 Oct 2009 14:15:15 -0500, Steve Turner
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> the sort order, and that's where the problem shows up. Recall that I'm
>> not the only one seeing this problem.
>
> Give it up Steve. Jack is much too arrogant to even consider that the
> problem is at his end. Even though he can see the hour difference
> between a message posted from his own computer is different than the
> time posted on the newsgroup, it's far beyond his capability to even
> acknowledge there might be a clock problem, much less that he's
> responsible for it.
Really? The time posted that I sent the message is exactly correct on
my newsreader, it goes out with the correct time, and it comes in with
the correct time. Steve's messages come in showing the correct time.
> You cordially told him how to fix it and all he wants to do is argue.
Yes, Steve is not an idiot, like you are... I guess I should have known
when I thought Sweetnothing or whatever fake name of the day you were
using was not a troll, but just, simple you... When an idiot tells me
my clock is wrong, and my clock is right, I ignore it. When Steve says
my time zones are showing up wrong and asks if I have windows
automatically adjusting for time zones, I pay attention.
Anyway, the correct time where I'm sitting is 1:07 pm, and the correct
time zone where I'm sitting is Eastern. Obviously something between me
and you is incorrectly adjusting my [correct] time into daylight savings
time, and it does not need adjusted, because it is already manually
correctly adjusted for that.
--
Jack
Using FREE News Server: http://www.eternal-september.org/
http://jbstein.com
Swingman wrote:
> Been a while, but IIRC, the time stamp is made by(function)a system call
> to the OS and no amount of futzing above that level in Windows is going
> to solve the underlying DST problem. BTDT. If you reapply the patch that
> should fix the problem. Try the below:
>
> http://www.intelliadmin.com/DaylightSavingFix.exe
Thanks Swingman, patch re-applied, so all should be well in usenet land.
--
Jack
Using FREE News Server: http://www.eternal-september.org/
http://jbstein.com
On Fri, 09 Oct 2009 14:15:15 -0500, Steve Turner
<[email protected]> wrote:
>the sort order, and that's where the problem shows up. Recall that I'm
>not the only one seeing this problem.
Give it up Steve. Jack is much too arrogant to even consider that the
problem is at his end. Even though he can see the hour difference
between a message posted from his own computer is different than the
time posted on the newsgroup, it's far beyond his capability to even
acknowledge there might be a clock problem, much less that he's
responsible for it.
You cordially told him how to fix it and all he wants to do is argue.
On Wed, 7 Oct 2009 11:30:56 -0400, "Lee Michaels"
<leemichaels*nadaspam*@comcast.net> wrote:
[...snip...]
>Particularly, can the compnent parts be shown in different perspctives
>around that circle? In other words, can I take a common component and show
>it at six different angles to simulate how they would look really look in
>this circular configuration?
>
Generally, you are going to draw a single 3 dimensional model of the
thing you want to represent.
Once you build the 3D model, you can orient the view from any "angle",
and you can print from that point of view. You can also select the
view to be some of the standards, such as isometric, top, front, side,
etc.
Or, once you have created a piece that comprises a component, you can
place 6 of them at various orientations within one drawing.
>I need to draw a circular wood keyboard bench that will attach to the metal
>frame. Could this be drawn easily?
Umm, not sure what you mean, it is hard to say if it can be easily
done. If you mean you have a circular bench that people sit at to use
a keyboard, then I'd guess it can be done pretty easily.
Expect a bit of a learning curve before you can draw anything more
than boxes and cylinders. There's lots of online tutorials and such
available from Google and from 3rd parties.
You will have to do your homework and practice. For me, it took a few
hours to get the hang of really making it work for me. I do have a
some experience with 3D software.
>And can it be "attached" to the metal frame drawing?
I expect the wood part can easily be attached to the metal part in the
3D model. It is easy to have 2 components and connect them up.
>
>This whole component model of constructing a drawing will be a whole
>different experiece for me. I will give a shot and see how I do.
>
>The design is not that difficult. It is similar to other things I have
>built. What I need is a good 3D representation to sell it to the folks who
>will pay for it. Any thoughts, etc would be appreciated.
>
"Leon" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Will it dimension?
> Will it import component sizes and materials types into an optimization
> program such as Cutlist Plus?
>
And for a bit more as to why I ask, I peronally would like to know if that
can be done. While I have no problem spending a few dollars on CAD
software, I have purchase several brands and several versions of AutoCAD LT
over the last 23 years. Sketchup actually replaced AutoCAD LT for me.
IIRC AutoCAD LT is about $800 for the latest version and quite frankly that
is now out of my confort zone especially since Sketchup is free. Shetchup
however was not always free and in the future may not continue to be free
and I like to keep my options open as to what might be my next CAD type
software. So far Sketchup is a locked in program for me as long as the
publisher does not become too proud of it in the future.
thanks I did not want my questions to be received as hostile. ;~)
Leon
Robatoy wrote:
> On Oct 8, 7:12 pm, "Lee Michaels" <leemichaels*[email protected]>
> wrote:
>> "Robatoy" fired this zinger
>>
>> Jack Stein wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> Took me months or starting, quitting, starting again, quitting and so
>>> on. It can be deceptively hard, or deceptively easy, depending on your
>>> point of view:-)
>> A reasonable amount of intelligence makes it easier. That's probably
>> why you find it so difficult.
>> =======================
>>
>> Subtle...
>
> I'm known for my subtleness.... like the 'b' in subtle.
or the silent "P" in swimming
- Doug