Community
DWF
cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

We should of used PDF's insted of DWF's

11 REPLIES 11
Reply
Message 1 of 12
Anonymous
275 Views, 11 Replies

We should of used PDF's insted of DWF's

Dwf's are completely unacceptable. They take anywhere from 3 sec to 30
min to create. We've tried all 3 .pc3's that came with autocad 2002 with
every possible setting change on them, but nothing. Auditing, purging,
xcliping on, xcliping off on the dwg's before we create them, but nothing.
With the sheer number of dwg's we have, creating dwf's is a weekend process.



Line weights don't merge. Even when you set it up in the .pc3. Which is
horrible for us since we use that religiously in our office (since it cuts
down huge amounts of cadd hours). The only way around it is to go into every
dwg and make sure your display order is correct. So xrefing 1 xref into 200
dwgs and creating dwf's via a script just got thrown out the window. Yes,
when they print they merge, but that's still unacceptable since we do all of
our markups on the buzzsaw system.



There's no current way to batch plot already created dwf files. You can do
it from explorer but you don't get the options of "scale to fit" and "paper
size", even when you set up your defaults on your PC to the right tray. So
11x17 batch plotting is out of the questions.



Line weights change sizes when zooming in and out and panning. Yes, this
does happen. We even bought Volo View 2.01 thinking it was the viewer but
still the same problem.



To make it worse, it's been like this since we got into dwf's (aprox. 4
months ago). Autodesk has made no effort to fix any of these bugs/glitches
with their software or release any updates/patches for them. And we as
consumers are paying for it.




--
Jorge Zamora
CADD Support/Lisp Programer
http://www.cadgodtools.com
11 REPLIES 11
Message 2 of 12
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

I'm sorry you are having problems using DWF. DWF has its share of issues
and is by no means perfect. Fortunately DWF has been getting a lot more
attention and resources at Autodesk and we are seeing rapid improvements.
In just the past few months we've released AEV 3, AEV 3.1, Volo View 3,
DWFwriter, DWF Creator, and the DWF 6 Toolkit. AEV 4 is in Beta now and
there's lots more on the way. Some of the issues you are having are already
fixed in the shipping free products. I also feel that DWF is better suited
for CAD than PDF today and that this will become increasingly important with
DWF's CAD-centric features increasing into the future.

In my testing of the new Acrobat Pro 6.0 I've found that you'd have many of
the same issues, possibly even worse, with PDF. For example, with the
drawings I have tested I've found Acrobat Pro 6.0 to be about 2 to 3 times
slower than DWF in plot creation speed, and file sizes that are about 3 to 7
times larger.

As for merge control, PDF doesn't support it at all (neither on-screen or at
print time). With DWF 6 merge control is supported at print-time, though
the current viewers don't display it on-screen. At least DWF 6 stores the
merge control intent so that when the viewers have this feature for
on-screen display you'll be ready to go.

As for batch publishing a large number of DWG's to DWF you have the free
PUBLISH command that comes with the AutoCAD DWF Creator found at
http://www.autodesk.com/dwfcreator which does three things not available
with Acrobat:
1) It allows you to drag-and-drop entire directories of DWG files into a
batch plot project (which can be saved for later re-use) and allows you to
select the plot order and plot style for each page in the batch. This is a
huge time saver.
2) Once you've defined your plot project, it automatically plots all these
pages into a single multipage DWF 6 file in one step (unlike Acrobat Pro 6
which requires you to manually assemble lots of individual PDF files as a
second step). You don't even need to open your DWG's to use this feature.
With AutoCAD 2004 you can even plot to multiple single-page DWF's or to a
real plotter or printer using the same "plot project" definition file.
3) It adds DWF 6 support to AutoCAD 2002, the latest version with multi-page
support, encryption, thumbnails, etc.

Note that "DWF Creator" is for people with AutoCAD 2002. AutoCAD 2004 has
the DWF 6 and PUBLISH functionality built in.

Some other advantages of DWF over PDF:
a.. Acrobat doesn't support Snap when measuring or when redlining, meaning
you can't get the required accuracy you need.
b.. Acrobat measure requires the user to manually provide a scale, and isn
't viewport aware (each viewport might have a different scale, which DWF
properly encodes)
c.. Hyperlinks are not preserved from AutoCAD when using Acrobat to PDF
but are with DWF
d.. No multi-layout and multi-DWG publishing of all your pages into a
single PDF in one step from AutoCAD (as there is with DWF)
e.. Acrobat doesn't support layers with AutoCAD 2004
f.. Acrobat doesn't support for Named Views, DWF does
g.. Acrobat hasPlot time performance problems (takes about 2-3x the time
or worse in default mode)
h.. Acrobat PDF has file size problems (between 3x and 7x worse than DWF
in default mode)
i.. Acrobat PDF has some rendering artifacts (triangle edges show up in
24-bit color wheel demo for example)
j.. Acrobat Dynamic Pan/Zoom are poor and aren't truly dynamic as they are
in DWF viewers
k.. Acrobat PDF doesn't support for merge control
l.. PDF redlines can't be imported back into AutoCAD (DWF/RML can be
imported into Acad)
m.. Acrobat PDF doesn't handle AutoCAD gradients properly: they can crash
the machine, or take a huge amount of time to plot and generate huge PDF
files (hundreds of megabytes with some drawings when printing to large size
paper)
n.. Acrobat has a higher cost compared to DWF products (DWF products are
free, except for Volo View 3 at the current $49 promotional price).
o.. Acrobat's viewer download size is many times larger than DWF's
p.. Acrobat's viewer doesn't embedded as an ActiveX control into Office
documents (such as PowerPoint presentations or custom applications) the way
the DWF AEV does.
Of course I'm biased, I'm on the DWF team! I recognize that each product
has its strengths and applicability. At the end of the day if PDF is works
better for your AutoCAD output then that is what you should use.

--
-Brian Mathews
Autodesk, Inc.
brian.mathews@autodesk.com
Message 3 of 12
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

Thanks for the review, it's a very helpful review of a basically 'new'
implementation from Autodesk that has yet to mature fully like Acrobat has
over the last ten years. It would be nice if you could do this as
improvements are issued as well, but more details about your type of files
would help.

AND, without the attitude that went with your post 😞

--
Dean Saadallah
Add-on products for LT
http://www.pendean.com/lt
--
Message 4 of 12
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

Sorry about the attitude, I've just been so frustrated with this format. But
I am glad to see that Autodesk it working on these issues, so its only a
matter of time till i get my weekends back.


--
Jorge Zamora
CADD Support/Lisp Programer
http://www.cadgodtools.com

"Dean Saadallah" wrote in message
news:15F66BB2C7DE407B0B71AAA3B15A2158@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> Thanks for the review, it's a very helpful review of a basically 'new'
> implementation from Autodesk that has yet to mature fully like Acrobat has
> over the last ten years. It would be nice if you could do this as
> improvements are issued as well, but more details about your type of files
> would help.
>
> AND, without the attitude that went with your post 😞
>
> --
> Dean Saadallah
> Add-on products for LT
> http://www.pendean.com/lt
> --
>
>
Message 5 of 12
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

Excellent response, re the scaling awareness will this be more accurate in
future dwfs?

From what I can see its to within 0.00x % now but we draw buildings (perhaps
300m long) in 1 unit=1 mm so the slight error is noticeable (unless you
change units). i.e. 300,000 mm true displays as perhaps ~300,005 mm. This
takes a bit of explaining to people who expect a digital "print" to be
perfect 🙂

For critical setout we will send a bound dwg (to on site users who have VV3)
which is 100% true.

Other than that we have stopped using PDF except for those unwilling or
unable to install AEV.

3.8mb as PDF vs. 400k DWF is my current best comparison for a file that had
a lot of hatch pattern in it.

--
Regards,
Robin Capper
Email; robin.capper@thewarehouse.co.nz




"Brian Mathews" wrote in message
news:2880D90C6E0123AF6E48E131CBE06235@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> I'm sorry you are having problems using DWF. DWF has its share of issues
> and is by no means perfect. Fortunately DWF has been getting a lot more
> attention and resources at Autodesk and we are seeing rapid improvements.
> In just the past few months we've released AEV 3, AEV 3.1, Volo View 3,
> DWFwriter, DWF Creator, and the DWF 6 Toolkit. AEV 4 is in Beta now and
> there's lots more on the way. Some of the issues you are having are
already
> fixed in the shipping free products. I also feel that DWF is better
suited
> for CAD than PDF today and that this will become increasingly important
with
> DWF's CAD-centric features increasing into the future.
>
> In my testing of the new Acrobat Pro 6.0 I've found that you'd have many
of
> the same issues, possibly even worse, with PDF. For example, with the
> drawings I have tested I've found Acrobat Pro 6.0 to be about 2 to 3 times
> slower than DWF in plot creation speed, and file sizes that are about 3 to
7
> times larger.
>
> As for merge control, PDF doesn't support it at all (neither on-screen or
at
> print time). With DWF 6 merge control is supported at print-time, though
> the current viewers don't display it on-screen. At least DWF 6 stores the
> merge control intent so that when the viewers have this feature for
> on-screen display you'll be ready to go.
>
> As for batch publishing a large number of DWG's to DWF you have the free
> PUBLISH command that comes with the AutoCAD DWF Creator found at
> http://www.autodesk.com/dwfcreator which does three things not available
> with Acrobat:
> 1) It allows you to drag-and-drop entire directories of DWG files into a
> batch plot project (which can be saved for later re-use) and allows you to
> select the plot order and plot style for each page in the batch. This is
a
> huge time saver.
> 2) Once you've defined your plot project, it automatically plots all these
> pages into a single multipage DWF 6 file in one step (unlike Acrobat Pro 6
> which requires you to manually assemble lots of individual PDF files as a
> second step). You don't even need to open your DWG's to use this feature.
> With AutoCAD 2004 you can even plot to multiple single-page DWF's or to a
> real plotter or printer using the same "plot project" definition file.
> 3) It adds DWF 6 support to AutoCAD 2002, the latest version with
multi-page
> support, encryption, thumbnails, etc.
>
> Note that "DWF Creator" is for people with AutoCAD 2002. AutoCAD 2004 has
> the DWF 6 and PUBLISH functionality built in.
>
> Some other advantages of DWF over PDF:
> a.. Acrobat doesn't support Snap when measuring or when redlining,
meaning
> you can't get the required accuracy you need.
> b.. Acrobat measure requires the user to manually provide a scale, and
isn
> 't viewport aware (each viewport might have a different scale, which DWF
> properly encodes)
> c.. Hyperlinks are not preserved from AutoCAD when using Acrobat to PDF
> but are with DWF
> d.. No multi-layout and multi-DWG publishing of all your pages into a
> single PDF in one step from AutoCAD (as there is with DWF)
> e.. Acrobat doesn't support layers with AutoCAD 2004
> f.. Acrobat doesn't support for Named Views, DWF does
> g.. Acrobat hasPlot time performance problems (takes about 2-3x the time
> or worse in default mode)
> h.. Acrobat PDF has file size problems (between 3x and 7x worse than DWF
> in default mode)
> i.. Acrobat PDF has some rendering artifacts (triangle edges show up in
> 24-bit color wheel demo for example)
> j.. Acrobat Dynamic Pan/Zoom are poor and aren't truly dynamic as they
are
> in DWF viewers
> k.. Acrobat PDF doesn't support for merge control
> l.. PDF redlines can't be imported back into AutoCAD (DWF/RML can be
> imported into Acad)
> m.. Acrobat PDF doesn't handle AutoCAD gradients properly: they can
crash
> the machine, or take a huge amount of time to plot and generate huge PDF
> files (hundreds of megabytes with some drawings when printing to large
size
> paper)
> n.. Acrobat has a higher cost compared to DWF products (DWF products are
> free, except for Volo View 3 at the current $49 promotional price).
> o.. Acrobat's viewer download size is many times larger than DWF's
> p.. Acrobat's viewer doesn't embedded as an ActiveX control into Office
> documents (such as PowerPoint presentations or custom applications) the
way
> the DWF AEV does.
> Of course I'm biased, I'm on the DWF team! I recognize that each product
> has its strengths and applicability. At the end of the day if PDF is
works
> better for your AutoCAD output then that is what you should use.
>
> --
> -Brian Mathews
> Autodesk, Inc.
> brian.mathews@autodesk.com
>
>
Message 6 of 12
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

I have a DWF that is 788KB. I tried to make a PDF of it. During the process
the the PC was totally locked for 10-20 minutes or more. Then the size of
the PDF was 34 477 KB when finished.

The PDF was almost 44 times larger and impossible to view in Acrobat Reader.

The drawings used a lot of gradient hatches. It was also a 20 pages DWF and
a 20 pages PDF.

In AEV the file works perfect and with very good performance.

--
Best Regards, Jimmy B
CAD and Database Developer Manager at www.pharmadule-emtunga.com
Take a look at the trial version of SmartPurger (now for AutoCAD 2004) or
download some freeware at www.jtbworld.com
More on AutoCAD 2004;
www.jtbworld.com/autocad2004.htm
www.jtbworld.com/autocad2004tips.htm


"Robin Capper" wrote in message
news:6BFBE779F86D60519D1B472C931949EA@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> Excellent response, re the scaling awareness will this be more accurate in
> future dwfs?
>
> From what I can see its to within 0.00x % now but we draw buildings
(perhaps
> 300m long) in 1 unit=1 mm so the slight error is noticeable (unless you
> change units). i.e. 300,000 mm true displays as perhaps ~300,005 mm. This
> takes a bit of explaining to people who expect a digital "print" to be
> perfect 🙂
>
> For critical setout we will send a bound dwg (to on site users who have
VV3)
> which is 100% true.
>
> Other than that we have stopped using PDF except for those unwilling or
> unable to install AEV.
>
> 3.8mb as PDF vs. 400k DWF is my current best comparison for a file that
had
> a lot of hatch pattern in it.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Robin Capper
> Email; robin.capper@thewarehouse.co.nz
>
>
>
>
> "Brian Mathews" wrote in message
> news:2880D90C6E0123AF6E48E131CBE06235@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> > I'm sorry you are having problems using DWF. DWF has its share of
issues
> > and is by no means perfect. Fortunately DWF has been getting a lot more
> > attention and resources at Autodesk and we are seeing rapid
improvements.
> > In just the past few months we've released AEV 3, AEV 3.1, Volo View 3,
> > DWFwriter, DWF Creator, and the DWF 6 Toolkit. AEV 4 is in Beta now and
> > there's lots more on the way. Some of the issues you are having are
> already
> > fixed in the shipping free products. I also feel that DWF is better
> suited
> > for CAD than PDF today and that this will become increasingly important
> with
> > DWF's CAD-centric features increasing into the future.
> >
> > In my testing of the new Acrobat Pro 6.0 I've found that you'd have many
> of
> > the same issues, possibly even worse, with PDF. For example, with the
> > drawings I have tested I've found Acrobat Pro 6.0 to be about 2 to 3
times
> > slower than DWF in plot creation speed, and file sizes that are about 3
to
> 7
> > times larger.
> >
> > As for merge control, PDF doesn't support it at all (neither on-screen
or
> at
> > print time). With DWF 6 merge control is supported at print-time,
though
> > the current viewers don't display it on-screen. At least DWF 6 stores
the
> > merge control intent so that when the viewers have this feature for
> > on-screen display you'll be ready to go.
> >
> > As for batch publishing a large number of DWG's to DWF you have the free
> > PUBLISH command that comes with the AutoCAD DWF Creator found at
> > http://www.autodesk.com/dwfcreator which does three things not available
> > with Acrobat:
> > 1) It allows you to drag-and-drop entire directories of DWG files into a
> > batch plot project (which can be saved for later re-use) and allows you
to
> > select the plot order and plot style for each page in the batch. This
is
> a
> > huge time saver.
> > 2) Once you've defined your plot project, it automatically plots all
these
> > pages into a single multipage DWF 6 file in one step (unlike Acrobat Pro
6
> > which requires you to manually assemble lots of individual PDF files as
a
> > second step). You don't even need to open your DWG's to use this
feature.
> > With AutoCAD 2004 you can even plot to multiple single-page DWF's or to
a
> > real plotter or printer using the same "plot project" definition file.
> > 3) It adds DWF 6 support to AutoCAD 2002, the latest version with
> multi-page
> > support, encryption, thumbnails, etc.
> >
> > Note that "DWF Creator" is for people with AutoCAD 2002. AutoCAD 2004
has
> > the DWF 6 and PUBLISH functionality built in.
> >
> > Some other advantages of DWF over PDF:
> > a.. Acrobat doesn't support Snap when measuring or when redlining,
> meaning
> > you can't get the required accuracy you need.
> > b.. Acrobat measure requires the user to manually provide a scale, and
> isn
> > 't viewport aware (each viewport might have a different scale, which DWF
> > properly encodes)
> > c.. Hyperlinks are not preserved from AutoCAD when using Acrobat to
PDF
> > but are with DWF
> > d.. No multi-layout and multi-DWG publishing of all your pages into a
> > single PDF in one step from AutoCAD (as there is with DWF)
> > e.. Acrobat doesn't support layers with AutoCAD 2004
> > f.. Acrobat doesn't support for Named Views, DWF does
> > g.. Acrobat hasPlot time performance problems (takes about 2-3x the
time
> > or worse in default mode)
> > h.. Acrobat PDF has file size problems (between 3x and 7x worse than
DWF
> > in default mode)
> > i.. Acrobat PDF has some rendering artifacts (triangle edges show up
in
> > 24-bit color wheel demo for example)
> > j.. Acrobat Dynamic Pan/Zoom are poor and aren't truly dynamic as they
> are
> > in DWF viewers
> > k.. Acrobat PDF doesn't support for merge control
> > l.. PDF redlines can't be imported back into AutoCAD (DWF/RML can be
> > imported into Acad)
> > m.. Acrobat PDF doesn't handle AutoCAD gradients properly: they can
> crash
> > the machine, or take a huge amount of time to plot and generate huge PDF
> > files (hundreds of megabytes with some drawings when printing to large
> size
> > paper)
> > n.. Acrobat has a higher cost compared to DWF products (DWF products
are
> > free, except for Volo View 3 at the current $49 promotional price).
> > o.. Acrobat's viewer download size is many times larger than DWF's
> > p.. Acrobat's viewer doesn't embedded as an ActiveX control into
Office
> > documents (such as PowerPoint presentations or custom applications) the
> way
> > the DWF AEV does.
> > Of course I'm biased, I'm on the DWF team! I recognize that each
product
> > has its strengths and applicability. At the end of the day if PDF is
> works
> > better for your AutoCAD output then that is what you should use.
> >
> > --
> > -Brian Mathews
> > Autodesk, Inc.
> > brian.mathews@autodesk.com
> >
> >
>
>
Message 7 of 12
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

PDF's without the right customization is kind of bad to. But at least you
can configure it to work. With DWF's your at the mercy of the patches, if
any, with the problems I posted.

Your problem with the size being so big could of been due to the
resolution set to the PDF writer. You can customize it from your "printers"
in the OS to make that change. Make sure you close acad and restart it
before you attempt to print again.

I also noticed that my first post got removed. Not really sure why as
those are known problems with DWF's that havent been resolved.

Jorge


"Jimmy B" wrote in message
news:771F9F61537161B4A0D8E58E01A15B94@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> I have a DWF that is 788KB. I tried to make a PDF of it. During the
process
> the the PC was totally locked for 10-20 minutes or more. Then the size of
> the PDF was 34 477 KB when finished.
>
> The PDF was almost 44 times larger and impossible to view in Acrobat
Reader.
>
> The drawings used a lot of gradient hatches. It was also a 20 pages DWF
and
> a 20 pages PDF.
>
> In AEV the file works perfect and with very good performance.
>
> --
> Best Regards, Jimmy B
> CAD and Database Developer Manager at www.pharmadule-emtunga.com
> Take a look at the trial version of SmartPurger (now for AutoCAD 2004) or
> download some freeware at www.jtbworld.com
> More on AutoCAD 2004;
> www.jtbworld.com/autocad2004.htm
> www.jtbworld.com/autocad2004tips.htm
>
>
> "Robin Capper" wrote in message
> news:6BFBE779F86D60519D1B472C931949EA@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> > Excellent response, re the scaling awareness will this be more accurate
in
> > future dwfs?
> >
> > From what I can see its to within 0.00x % now but we draw buildings
> (perhaps
> > 300m long) in 1 unit=1 mm so the slight error is noticeable (unless you
> > change units). i.e. 300,000 mm true displays as perhaps ~300,005 mm.
This
> > takes a bit of explaining to people who expect a digital "print" to be
> > perfect 🙂
> >
> > For critical setout we will send a bound dwg (to on site users who have
> VV3)
> > which is 100% true.
> >
> > Other than that we have stopped using PDF except for those unwilling or
> > unable to install AEV.
> >
> > 3.8mb as PDF vs. 400k DWF is my current best comparison for a file that
> had
> > a lot of hatch pattern in it.
> >
> > --
> > Regards,
> > Robin Capper
> > Email; robin.capper@thewarehouse.co.nz
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > "Brian Mathews" wrote in message
> > news:2880D90C6E0123AF6E48E131CBE06235@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> > > I'm sorry you are having problems using DWF. DWF has its share of
> issues
> > > and is by no means perfect. Fortunately DWF has been getting a lot
more
> > > attention and resources at Autodesk and we are seeing rapid
> improvements.
> > > In just the past few months we've released AEV 3, AEV 3.1, Volo View
3,
> > > DWFwriter, DWF Creator, and the DWF 6 Toolkit. AEV 4 is in Beta now
and
> > > there's lots more on the way. Some of the issues you are having are
> > already
> > > fixed in the shipping free products. I also feel that DWF is better
> > suited
> > > for CAD than PDF today and that this will become increasingly
important
> > with
> > > DWF's CAD-centric features increasing into the future.
> > >
> > > In my testing of the new Acrobat Pro 6.0 I've found that you'd have
many
> > of
> > > the same issues, possibly even worse, with PDF. For example, with the
> > > drawings I have tested I've found Acrobat Pro 6.0 to be about 2 to 3
> times
> > > slower than DWF in plot creation speed, and file sizes that are about
3
> to
> > 7
> > > times larger.
> > >
> > > As for merge control, PDF doesn't support it at all (neither on-screen
> or
> > at
> > > print time). With DWF 6 merge control is supported at print-time,
> though
> > > the current viewers don't display it on-screen. At least DWF 6 stores
> the
> > > merge control intent so that when the viewers have this feature for
> > > on-screen display you'll be ready to go.
> > >
> > > As for batch publishing a large number of DWG's to DWF you have the
free
> > > PUBLISH command that comes with the AutoCAD DWF Creator found at
> > > http://www.autodesk.com/dwfcreator which does three things not
available
> > > with Acrobat:
> > > 1) It allows you to drag-and-drop entire directories of DWG files into
a
> > > batch plot project (which can be saved for later re-use) and allows
you
> to
> > > select the plot order and plot style for each page in the batch. This
> is
> > a
> > > huge time saver.
> > > 2) Once you've defined your plot project, it automatically plots all
> these
> > > pages into a single multipage DWF 6 file in one step (unlike Acrobat
Pro
> 6
> > > which requires you to manually assemble lots of individual PDF files
as
> a
> > > second step). You don't even need to open your DWG's to use this
> feature.
> > > With AutoCAD 2004 you can even plot to multiple single-page DWF's or
to
> a
> > > real plotter or printer using the same "plot project" definition file.
> > > 3) It adds DWF 6 support to AutoCAD 2002, the latest version with
> > multi-page
> > > support, encryption, thumbnails, etc.
> > >
> > > Note that "DWF Creator" is for people with AutoCAD 2002. AutoCAD 2004
> has
> > > the DWF 6 and PUBLISH functionality built in.
> > >
> > > Some other advantages of DWF over PDF:
> > > a.. Acrobat doesn't support Snap when measuring or when redlining,
> > meaning
> > > you can't get the required accuracy you need.
> > > b.. Acrobat measure requires the user to manually provide a scale,
and
> > isn
> > > 't viewport aware (each viewport might have a different scale, which
DWF
> > > properly encodes)
> > > c.. Hyperlinks are not preserved from AutoCAD when using Acrobat to
> PDF
> > > but are with DWF
> > > d.. No multi-layout and multi-DWG publishing of all your pages into
a
> > > single PDF in one step from AutoCAD (as there is with DWF)
> > > e.. Acrobat doesn't support layers with AutoCAD 2004
> > > f.. Acrobat doesn't support for Named Views, DWF does
> > > g.. Acrobat hasPlot time performance problems (takes about 2-3x the
> time
> > > or worse in default mode)
> > > h.. Acrobat PDF has file size problems (between 3x and 7x worse than
> DWF
> > > in default mode)
> > > i.. Acrobat PDF has some rendering artifacts (triangle edges show up
> in
> > > 24-bit color wheel demo for example)
> > > j.. Acrobat Dynamic Pan/Zoom are poor and aren't truly dynamic as
they
> > are
> > > in DWF viewers
> > > k.. Acrobat PDF doesn't support for merge control
> > > l.. PDF redlines can't be imported back into AutoCAD (DWF/RML can be
> > > imported into Acad)
> > > m.. Acrobat PDF doesn't handle AutoCAD gradients properly: they can
> > crash
> > > the machine, or take a huge amount of time to plot and generate huge
PDF
> > > files (hundreds of megabytes with some drawings when printing to large
> > size
> > > paper)
> > > n.. Acrobat has a higher cost compared to DWF products (DWF products
> are
> > > free, except for Volo View 3 at the current $49 promotional price).
> > > o.. Acrobat's viewer download size is many times larger than DWF's
> > > p.. Acrobat's viewer doesn't embedded as an ActiveX control into
> Office
> > > documents (such as PowerPoint presentations or custom applications)
the
> > way
> > > the DWF AEV does.
> > > Of course I'm biased, I'm on the DWF team! I recognize that each
> product
> > > has its strengths and applicability. At the end of the day if PDF is
> > works
> > > better for your AutoCAD output then that is what you should use.
> > >
> > > --
> > > -Brian Mathews
> > > Autodesk, Inc.
> > > brian.mathews@autodesk.com
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
Message 8 of 12
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

Your message wasn't deleted. Go to tools/options/maintenance if you use OE
and notice that messages (in your news reader) are deleted after a time
period you specify.

-------------------------------------------------
"Jorge Z" wrote:.
> I also noticed that my first post got removed. Not really sure why as
> those are known problems with DWF's that havent been resolved.
Message 9 of 12
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

Jorge: I don't think Dean was commenting on your bad attitude, I think Dean
was commenting on my bad attitude in my response to you.

I didn't intend any bad attitude, and I'm sorry if it came out that way.

--
-Brian Mathews
Autodesk, Inc.
brian.mathews@autodesk.com



"Jorge Z" wrote in message
news:5E8406F7517147C09FF7E6BBF9A2C2F6@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> Sorry about the attitude, I've just been so frustrated with this format.
But
> I am glad to see that Autodesk it working on these issues, so its only a
> matter of time till i get my weekends back.
>
>
> --
> Jorge Zamora
> CADD Support/Lisp Programer
> http://www.cadgodtools.com
>
> "Dean Saadallah" wrote in message
> news:15F66BB2C7DE407B0B71AAA3B15A2158@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> > Thanks for the review, it's a very helpful review of a basically 'new'
> > implementation from Autodesk that has yet to mature fully like Acrobat
has
> > over the last ten years. It would be nice if you could do this as
> > improvements are issued as well, but more details about your type of
files
> > would help.
> >
> > AND, without the attitude that went with your post 😞
> >
> > --
> > Dean Saadallah
> > Add-on products for LT
> > http://www.pendean.com/lt
> > --
> >
> >
>
>
Message 10 of 12
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous




> Excellent response, re
the scaling awareness will this be more accurate in
> future
dwfs?

One of the advantages (to some customers at least,
maybe not you) is the security offered by DWF because it has the same
restrictions as physical paper.  Many users don't want people stealing
their model data.  Let me explain:

 

When you take a measurement in AutoCAD from a DWG
file you have a 64-bit double-precision floating point value that gives you
extreme levels of precision and accuracy.  You also have lots of model
intelligence.  For example an ADT door knows it is a door and the wall
knows that it needs to have a hole to contain the door and that the framing
inside the wall needs to adjust based on the position of the door.  The
door and walls aren't just pictures made of lines, they are intelligent objects
with cross-linked relationships.

 

With physical paper and a physical ruler we all
know there are limitations to the precision and accuracy, and we all know that
all you have are a bunch of dumb pixels (the model intelligence is
gone).

 

The DWF files you have today are essentially
electronic plots, generated from AutoCAD's (or another application's) plot
engine.  As such many of the same limitations apply to DWF as to
paper.  This is where the security comes in: since the DWF doesn't have the
same precision and accuracy, and since the DWF geometry is tessellated (blocks
and objects get exploded into their individual graphic strokes) it isn't easy to
turn a DWF back into a DWG (just like it isn't easy to turn paper into a
DWG).  Even if you did the work to change the paper or DWF back into a DWG
you'd be missing lots of model intelligence.  Many customers feel that
paper is sufficiently secure and they want that same level of security with
DWF.

 

So why are your measurements not 100%
accurate/precise with DWF?

 

By default AutoCAD 2004 generates DWF files at 400
dots-per-inch on whatever virtual paper size you are plotting to.  If you
plot to 8.5x11 inch paper, that means in the horizontal dimension there are only
about 4,000 dots or coordinates that the DWF lines can terminate at.  This
effectively limits the precision of any measurement.  If your drawing
represents a 300 foot long building, and if that floor plan after you account
for margins is filling about 66% of the width of the page, that means there are
only 4,000 * .66 = 2,640 dots at which the lines can end at.  This means
that our precision is the 300 feet / 2,640 dots = 0.1136 feet (or 1.36
inches).  Wow!  So if I use the default 400 DPI on small 8.5x11 paper
I can only take measurements that are accurate to within about 1 inch! 
This is much less precision than AutoCAD (which can measure features smaller
than an atom!).  Also note that the DWF in this example is actually HIGHER
precision than what you would be able to do with a ruler and physical
paper.

 

So how do I improve the
precision?

 

The analogy is the same for DWF as it is for
paper.  With paper if the author wants consumers to be able to make better
measurements what do you do?  You print to larger paper (or you buy an
electron microscope)!  If I make my 300 foot building and print to E-sized
paper rather than Letter-sized, the result is better precision both with
physical paper and for DWF (since the DWF will be using the same 400 DPI times a
lot more inches of virtual paper which means there are a lot more
dots).

 

But what do I do if I want to allow higher
precision without changing the paper size (since my printer only prints to a
specific paper size, that is the size I have to use)?

 

With physical paper you don't have many options
here.  You could get a higher resolution printer (1000 DPI rather than 300
DPI for example), but it is still hard to get additional precision when using a
ruler and the human eye.  For the most part you have to go to a bigger
paper size to get higher precision measurements with physical
paper.

 

With DWF you can leave the paper size alone (at
8.5x11) and change the DPI setting (in the plot options custom-properties
dialog).  You can set this DPI up to a much higher number (the DPI times
the paper width must be less than 2^31 which is 2,147,483,648).  If you
used the maximum precision of DWF (which is still a lot less than for a DWG
which uses 2^48) you can get great precision in your measurements.  For
example: for 8.5x11 paper we could set the DPI in AutoCAD 2004 to be 195,225,786
DPI (try that with your laser printer!).  In our example above if you crank
the math out you'll find that you can measure your 300 foot building down to
0.000028 inches!!  When was the last time you needed a measurement accurate
to one-10,000th of an inch??

 

I increased my DPI value very high but my
measurements still aren't perfect.  Why?

 

The paper size and the DPI setting are only part of
the story.  That determines the absolute maximum possible precision that is
available.  However, other factors influence the precision of your
measurements.  For example, when you measure between two line endpoints,
where exactly are you measuring between?  Remember that lines have width
and they have end-caps.  As such they have volume.  Since some types
of geometry become tessellated in the DWF file and many types have volume, the
auto-snap technology sometimes can't tell exactly what piece of tessellated
geometry or which part of the volume you are wanting to measure
from.  For the line case, are you measuring from the line endpoint or from
the edge of the line-cap semi-circle that extends past the endpoint?  Also,
the auto-snap technology in certain cases may depend on the resolution of your
screen (the mouse can only point at a particular screen pixel) and there are
very few pixels on a screen.  Furthermore, the DWF coordinates have to pass
through multiple coordinate transforms.  Each transform introduces
round-off errors and precision errors which accumulate.


face=Arial size=2>
 

Summary:

 

To get better measurement precision:


  •  The author must intentionally enable you to
    receive the extra precision as part of the security concept.

  • The author can increase the size of the virtual
    DWF paper.

  • The author can increase the DPI setting of the DWF
    driver to use more pixels and precision.  Increasing DPI will
    increase the DWF file size, so you don't want to use a crazy DPI.

  • Plotting without line weights or other
    settings that lead to tessellation *may* improve the precision (but
    this depends on a complex set of variables and may not change the precision at
    all).

--
-Brian Mathews
 Autodesk,
Inc.
 

face=Arial size=2>brian.mathews@autodesk.com


 
Message 11 of 12
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

Group hug!

--
Dean Saadallah
Add-on products for LT
http://www.pendean.com/lt
--
Message 12 of 12
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

Thanks,

Very useful info.

Robin

 



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



> Excellent response, re
the scaling awareness will this be more accurate in
> future
dwfs?

One of the advantages (to some customers at
least, maybe not you) is the security offered by
DWF...

Can't find what you're looking for? Ask the community or share your knowledge.

Post to forums  

”Boost

 

”Tips

 

”Services