AutoCAD 2004/2005/2006 DWG Format

[#1]

I have not been able to do this correctly since Rel. 13. I'm leary about upgrading from 2000 because this has gotten worse with each release. Could someone verify this is still a problem in 2004? By January I will loose the ability to upgrade.

2D polylines do not work very well in any CS other than the WCS. Example: If you start in the WCS and rotate it 90 deg. about the X axis. (But you can try this in any non-WCS you wish.) Then get into a plan view for that UCS. Start drawing a polyline. Several things can go wrong.
1.If you draw a few straight segments and then type "a" to draw an arc tangent from the last segment; create that arc, then type "u" to undo that arc. When the arc is undone, you are still in the polyline command to draw more segments, however from now on you see no ghosting of the segment you are about to create from then on. When you click as if making segments, they are created...you just don't see them.
2. And sometimes, when you end the polyline command after drawing some segments....the polyline line disappears. Actually, it is now in the WCS and tossed way out in na-na-land.
3. If you draw several polylines in a UCS and then extend and trim them so you have a series of separate polylines, but with coincident endpoints (because you just trimmed them to be so), some of the segments will not join. You may even be unable to trim or extend some of the polylines because it says thay are not in the same plane, even though you know they are and can verify it through listing the data for those polylines.

It's frustrating when I want to do something that I could do ten years ago in a few seconds and now I mess around for a half hour trying to make it work.

It would be helpful to know if this problem still exists. I've been trying to get Autodesk to answer to this for three years. I even tried to get Lynn Allen invloved, but with no sucess.

Thanks.

[#2]

3dpoly?

--
Dean Saadallah
Add-on products for LT
http://www.pendean.com/lt
--

[#3]

Seems to work OK here.  You can always get a free 15 day
trial version and check it out yourself.

Jim B.

style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">

"Buckward" <
href="mailto:buck@buckward.com">buck@buckward.com> wrote in message
href="news:f19434f.-1@WebX.maYIadrTaRb">news:f19434f.-1@WebX.maYIadrTaRb...

I
have not been able to do this correctly since Rel. 13. I'm leary about
upgrading from 2000 because this has gotten worse with each release. Could
someone verify this is still a problem in 2004? By January I will loose the
ability to upgrade.

2D polylines do not work very well in any CS other than the WCS. Example:
If you start in the WCS and rotate it 90 deg. about the X axis. (But you can
try this in any non-WCS you wish.) Then get into a plan view for that UCS.
Start drawing a polyline. Several things can go wrong.
1.If you draw a few
straight segments and then type "a" to draw an arc tangent from the last
segment; create that arc, then type "u" to undo that arc. When the arc is
undone, you are still in the polyline command to draw more segments, however
from now on you see no ghosting of the segment you are about to create from
then on. When you click as if making segments, they are created...you just
don't see them.
2. And sometimes, when you end the polyline command after
drawing some segments....the polyline line disappears. Actually, it is now in
the WCS and tossed way out in na-na-land.
3. If you draw several polylines
in a UCS and then extend and trim them so you have a series of separate
polylines, but with coincident endpoints (because you just trimmed them to be
so), some of the segments will not join. You may even be unable to trim or
extend some of the polylines because it says thay are not in the same plane,
even though you know they are and can verify it through listing the data for
those polylines.

It's frustrating when I want to do something that I could do ten years ago
in a few seconds and now I mess around for a half hour trying to make it work.

It would be helpful to know if this problem still exists. I've been trying
to get Autodesk to answer to this for three years. I even tried to get Lynn
Allen invloved, but with no sucess.

Thanks.

[#4]

No 2D.....arcs.....
It's prep for 3d.

[#5]

That's a good idea! Thanks.
Though I never got my problem through to anyone, perhaps it got fixed anyway.

[#6]

Prep for 3d? You still using ELEVATION to simulate 3D?

--
Dean Saadallah
Add-on products for LT
http://www.pendean.com/lt
--

[#7]

No. Most of my models are used for courtroom graphics. I've been doing this since 1990, long before MAX or even 3D Studio existed. Back then it was AT&T Crystal Graphics Software Labs's Topaz, which ran off the Targa+ board, which allowed a 386 8MHz PC to do true color graphics and realtime airbrushing on 5K images. (The Targa board also did realtime keying, posterization, strobe and wipes with composite and S-video out. It was ahead of it's time.) The DOS 386 Extended Mode that 3D Studio ran under also could utilize the Targa board and I still pine for the ability to have all my test renders scroll up on the video monitor for instant evaluation in that color space. Topaz's rendering engine produced lushes images...still better the MAX's scanline renderer.
AutoCAD's tools for moving around in 3D space and querying distances kicks ass whereas MAX's tools for this are totally lame. The demands for accuracy in courtroom graphics still demand I model most of my stuff in AutoCAD. I've spent three days in deposition with computer in hand having to prove to opposing attorneys the EXACT dimensions for just about everything in the model. Their goal was to discredit my skills and get the animation bsrred form court. (They did not succeed.)

Go to www.buckward.com and check out the gallery. EVERYTHING there was modeled in AutoCAD.

I've never used the Elevation command. I do a combination of polygonal surfacing modeling and solids, depending on my needs. I have dozens of AutoLisp routines still in use, most of which I wrote 12 years ago....like the ability to run a 3D polyline through space representing the centerline for piping running through a petrochemical plant. I start the Piper routine, pick the centerline, answer a few questions and the pipe appears before my eyes with proper piping OD's and radiuses for the bends.

We all use AutoCAD in a variety of ways. AutoDesk should not let basic functions, like polyline construction in any plane get and stay corrupted in subsequent releases. They could have easily verified my claims four years ago, but ignored my attempts to enlighten them.

[#8]

Buckward,

In 3dsMax the extended precision like AutoCAD is not as precise and there
really is a good reason. Most animation and visualization does not require
the extra processing or time required for the precision in the modelling
kernel as that would only decrease performance in large animations and
processing. It would be like trying to model a concert hallp and modelling
each individual light on the ceiling or making detailed elements far out of
focus like modelling a phone down to the buttons when seen from 200 feet
away in the room. I can understand your need for precision in your line of
work and many do accomplish this in 3dsMax today using a variety of methods.
As far as your comments on AutoCAD and a polyline problem, would you be
intersted in providing direct feedback and examples to the AutoCAD
development team? If you are interested, please email me at
shaan@autodesk.com.

Sincerely,
Shaan Hurley
Autodesk, Inc.

"Buckward" wrote in message
news:f19434f.5@WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
No. Most of my models are used for courtroom graphics. I've been doing this
since 1990, long before MAX or even 3D Studio existed. Back then it was AT&T
Crystal Graphics Software Labs's Topaz, which ran off the Targa+ board,
which allowed a 386 8MHz PC to do true color graphics and realtime
airbrushing on 5K images. (The Targa board also did realtime keying,
posterization, strobe and wipes with composite and S-video out. It was ahead
of it's time.) The DOS 386 Extended Mode that 3D Studio ran under also could
utilize the Targa board and I still pine for the ability to have all my test
renders scroll up on the video monitor for instant evaluation in that color
space. Topaz's rendering engine produced lushes images...still better the
MAX's scanline renderer.
AutoCAD's tools for moving around in 3D space and querying distances kicks
ass whereas MAX's tools for this are totally lame. The demands for accuracy
in courtroom graphics still demand I model most of my stuff in AutoCAD. I've
spent three days in deposition with computer in hand having to prove to
opposing attorneys the EXACT dimensions for just about everything in the
model. Their goal was to discredit my skills and get the animation bsrred
form court. (They did not succeed.)
Go to www.buckward.com and check out the gallery. EVERYTHING there was
modeled in AutoCAD.
I've never used the Elevation command. I do a combination of polygonal
surfacing modeling and solids, depending on my needs. I have dozens of
AutoLisp routines still in use, most of which I wrote 12 years ago....like
the ability to run a 3D polyline through space representing the centerline
for piping running through a petrochemical plant. I start the Piper routine,
pick the centerline, answer a few questions and the pipe appears before my
eyes with proper piping OD's and radiuses for the bends.
We all use AutoCAD in a variety of ways. AutoDesk should not let basic
functions, like polyline construction in any plane get and stay corrupted in
subsequent releases. They could have easily verified my claims four years
ago, but ignored my attempts to enlighten them.

[#9]

Shaan,
You've made my day!
I've been hoping to get someone from Autodesk to lend an ear over this issue and your response pleases me intensely. I really do love Autodesk and Discreet, though you only hear from me when I have a complaint.

I will get with you shortly. Someone suggested that I download an eval version of 2004 and try it out. Perhaps the problem got fixed in the last couple of years via a tangential improvement, which just happened to solve this as well. If so, I'm keen for an upgrade....which I understand I had better do soon.

Thanks again!

[#10]

Buckward,

We love to hear if you are having good or bad
results and that goes for any customer with constructive feedback and details.
In fact there is a feedback link on the
href="http://www.autodesk.com/autocad">www.autodesk.com/autocad in which the
email form goes to the development team directly and many are directly replied
to every day. I would still like you to email me if interested in direct
feedback channels as I run all Autodesk beta programs and beta testing is a
prime opportunity to discuss issues and feedback directly with the teams. It is
sometimes difficult to feel like you can get an ear at Autodesk but you would be
shocked at the efforts we go to in order to meet our customers but there are
just so many of them and only so many travel days and phone calls you can make
in a year.

Sincerely,

Shaan Hurley ( also a customer and recovering
mech.designer)

Autodesk, Inc.

href="mailto:shaan@autodesk.com">shaan@autodesk.com

style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">

"Buckward" <
href="mailto:buck@buckward.com">buck@buckward.com> wrote in message
href="news:f19434f.7@WebX.maYIadrTaRb">news:f19434f.7@WebX.maYIadrTaRb...

Shaan,

You've made my day!
I've been hoping to get someone from Autodesk to
lend an ear over this issue and your response pleases me intensely. I really
do love Autodesk and Discreet, though you only hear from me when I have a
complaint.

I will get with you shortly. Someone suggested that I download an eval
version of 2004 and try it out. Perhaps the problem got fixed in the last
couple of years via a tangential improvement, which just happened to solve
this as well. If so, I'm keen for an upgrade....which I understand I had
better do soon.

Thanks again!