The Appendix

Modeling Optimization

On Wrapping Moldings around Core Elements

There are many ways to model elements in 3D, especially in SketchUp. In relation to classical architecture and the orders the big question is how to divide the elements up while modeling, as that can have a large effect on how simple it is to model, how easy to adapt for use, and how much geometry is used, especially in the case of unnecessary geometry.

The Case of the Tuscan Pedestal

This is formed of a base molding, topped by a die, and terminated with a cap molding. As a result, you can think of it as one element (the pedestal), as three (the base, die, cap), or as many as nine (the individual classical elements) or eleven (the individual elements as modeled in SketchUp). And, how you think of these elements, determines how you model them.

The Tuscan pedestal is a good example, as the die is not a totally separate, distinct, element, since it connects to the base by a congé, which presents challenges in modeling.

So how you divide the pedestal t

Below are several methods that I have found. This will give you an idea of ??

1. The first way would be to create the entire pedestal at the same time.
2. The first way would be to create it as it actually appears in the book, of the correct height, with the congé attached at bottom on the right outer edge, and the left inner edge aligned along the Centerline, thus showing a half sectional view of the pedestal die.
3. To turn this profile into a solid, you would use the Push/Pull, Rotate/Copy, and Intersect with Selection tools, along with a final cleanup.
4. The second way would be to create a pair of profiles, with the body of the die as a simple rectangle and the congé as a separate molding profile at it's bottom.
5. To turn this into a solid, you would use Push/Pull on the rectangle profile, then wrap the die molding aound the solid with the Follow-Me tool, again with a final cleanup.
6. The third way would be to create a single rectangular profile for the die, but extending the whole height of the pedestal. The congé would then be attached to the base molding and that, along with the cap molding, would wrap around the core die element.
7. To use this, you would do the same as in the above method, but the congé would be attached to the base molding, which you would wrap around the die along with the cap molding.
8. The fourth way would be to create a single pedestal profile, of the full height, including both die and base and cap moldings.
9. The final way would be to create a rectangular profile for the die, of the correct width but extending only down to the top of the congé connecting it to the base molding. This would then be used with the base and cap moldings, which would wrap around the die element.

On Using Wedges instead of Full Cylinders

(I prefer using wedges in forming these elements, instead of full cylinders, as I think it makes it easier if you later want to flute the column or embed it in a wall, as well as making>

Cylindrical elements (like the column shaft and parts of the base & capital) will be created using a two step process. The first, Create the Wedges for a Cylindrical Component, will involve turning the profiles into pie-shaped wedges (whose number and size are determined by the order). This helps reduce the geometry in the model, as well as facilitating the creation of both plain and fluted columns. The second step, Form a Cylinder from Wedge Components, involves Rotating/Copying the wedges around their center to form a full cylinder.

The alternative to the above would be to use the profiles to construct the full cylinders, however this can add significantly to the geometry in a model, especially if the column is fluted. If you are tempted to do this, I would suggest creating a column with both methods first, and compare the differences before committing yourself to not using wedges.

As an example of this, creating an external component for the cylindrical torii of the classic Attic base, takes 71KB in Microsoft Windows when made of 20 wedges of 18 degrees each, with the sides Hidden. Creating the same, but with the added Geometry of the unnecessary sides erased, gives a file size of 59KB (smaller, but not so much that I think it is worth the extra effort of erasing the side faces, then Hiding the side edges). However, creating a component made as a complete cylinder (of the same diameter and height), takes 507KB when saved to disk. So, generally, creating the wedges is the better option. But, still keep the profiles, to use if the following applies to your situation.

The one area where using wedges can run into problems is applying textures other than solid colors. For that you may need to create full cylinders for those elements (for example, if you wanted a variegated marble for a column shaft). This may or may not be an issue, depending upon your output, and what rendering method you use, but it is something to be aware of.

Form a Cylinder from Wedge Components

I could erase the side faces and centerline, but the edges would still need to be hidden, so I don’t think the decrease in geometry is worth the extra effort.

On the Curved Pilaster Profiles used with Follow-Me

Insert something here about cleaning up the arched surfaces inside the base & capital