Model Rejected for incomplete texturing and "terrain to build up"...

[AcesHigh]

Well, its NOT my fault that GoogleEarth´s images for my city are
incredibly low-res and blurry, and that terrain is all wrong.

The building in question is 34 stories tall... and is located on the
slope in a hill. It has two entrances. From one entrance, on the
higher street, you access the residential area. From that street, the
building is 28 stories tall. Behind the building, there is an area
with a pool, leisure areas and such. THAT same area is on the top
floor of the office area of the building, which is 6 stories tall and
is accessed from the lower street.

Problem is... the GoogleEarth terrain slope is not nearly as tall as
the real terrain.

Thus... I had 3 choices:

1) sunk the offices area below ground, and you wouldnt even be able to
see its entrance
2) corretly position the offices area, but leave the other side
entrance hanging some 10 meters in the air.
3) do the right thing: correctly position the offices area and create
TERRAIN around the residential area entrance, so it would correctly
connect to the avenue and not hang in the air!!

I did the 3rd choice with a very low amount of polygons, so I have no
idea why Google Rejected the model!


As for incomplete texturing?? WHERE????? Maybe you mean the leisure
area, where instead of using some sat image I used an architectural
render of the area I found on the building site. Well, it was MY ONLY
CHOICE, considering that the image on GoogleEarth is 4 years old and
the building is still under construction on the image... and even if
it was ready, I wouldnt use because GE´s imagery for my city is super
low-res and blurry!!

here is the link of the model
http://sketchup.google.com/3dwarehouse/details?mid=7d7f0d03490449158d11fd6bae00eea1

[SketchUp Guide Allison]

Hi AcesHigh,

Use the "Tell us why we're wrong" link on the model details page to
appeal the review.

-- Allison

> here is the link of the modelhttp://sketchup.google.com/3dwarehouse/details?mid=7d7f0d03490449158d...

[Dan Cooley]

Google, don't tell me this one isn't good enough and that the one that
stands in place in the 3D layer is.
It is necessary for this model to be as detailed as it is; otherwise
it wouldn't look like the acual tower. It can't be completely photo-
texured; that would require hundreds of pictures from different
angles. I tried to argue my point at the "tell us why we're wrong"
link, but it wouldn't let me submit it (it said error on page after
clicking submit then I started over typing everything again and tried
again; same thing, so now I'm furious). It can't be completely photo
textured because the railing is made of a sheet metal with tiny holes
in it. I tried to photo texture the railing but it looked far worse
than it does now. This is as good as it gets; I've spent four days on
this model. I didn't do that so that Google could tell me that the
model that is where mine should be, which probably took an hour to
make, is better than mine. The guy who made the one which currently
stands on the 3D layer didn't put in any effort at all. The stairs
face the wrong direction, and there's no elevator or railing in his,
and his is not photo-textured at all. I'm wondering if he's even seen
this tower or if he's just guessing at what it looks like. My model
looks like a picture of the actual tower; but aparently, mine isn't
good enough.

Here's a link to a picture that essentially explains it all.
http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k22/scriglada/Towers.jpg

[SketchUp Guide Allison]

Hi Dan,

If you're having issues with the "Tell us why we're wrong" link, it
may be your browser/OS combination (we've had some reports of people
having issues with later versions of IE). Try using Firefox or
Chrome. If it still doesn't work, drop me an email containing the
3DWH link to the model (and preferably also your OS and browser
version, so we can track down what's going on with the appeals link)
and I'll cart it over to somebody who can do something with it.

-- Allison