WYSIWYG plotting instead of archaic color .ctb or named .stb plot styles

[jefferyjensen]

Hello AutoCAD Printing and Plotting Users,

It appears I can perform What You See Is What You Get (WYSIWYG) plotting by using layer lineweights and layer transparency. Thus avoid using the archaic (.ctb) or (.stb) plot styles. Has anyone else done this?

Any issues matching object linetypes with plot style linetypes? I didn't compare LTSCALE between object lineweights and plot style (To Scale Linetypes in Layout Viewports)

Do you know the mapping values between layer transparency and plot style screening? Could find much help on transparency setting.

This is my guess on comparing Transparency with Screening

Transparency, Screening

0, 100 (opaque, black or full intensity)

10, 90

20, 80

30, 70

40, 60

50, 50

60, 40

70, 30

80, 20

90, 10

100, 0 (unable to assign 100% transparency to layer objects, 0 invisible)

This is my WYSIWYG plotting process

1. Customization check on LineWeight and Transparency

2. Layer settings - assign lineweights and transparency (0 is opaque and 90 is translucent/almost invisible)

3. Plot Options, check on plot object lineweights and plot transparency, check off plot with plot styles

Everything looks fine, just wanted to see how others are doing this.

References:

AutoCAD 2017 Help - Layer Transparency Dialog Box and To Use Screening

Cadalyst - Plotting With Transparency

Forums - Transparency vs Screening

Thanks for your help,

Jeff Jensen

[hencoop]

I've never experienced AutoCAD actually displaying exactly what will be plotted.  The display has always seemed to be an approximation for me, screen resolution being what it is.  It does seem to plot exact pen widths and colors from the arcane .ctb though.  I have experimented with shading and transparency and as far as I can tell it is pretty much trial and error to get the results I am after. Also, different plot devices also give me different results (slightly).

I use the colors 250-255 as grays with literal "white" and "black" at each end. I invert the output so it is as near to WYSIWYG gray as possible since I draw on a black background.  (I.e. white is black and black is white on my plots. The lighter the gray on my black background the darker it is on my plot.)

I've resorted to plotting DWGtoPDF almost exclusively.  It drops the number of plotters and plot variables to the minimum possible and I can print the PDFs to any device and get the nearest to identical results as seems possible.

I think if I switched to your method that would require lots of relearning of drafting methods/habits that I've developed over the years.

[john.vellek]

Hi @jefferyjensen,

There are many folks that plot without plot styles and are very satisfied with the outcome. The problem comes when you want to share the files and you have to explain your process to others.

I encourage you to explore this further and post your impressions for the benefit of the Community. Linetypes and overrides should be respected in the manner you are suggesting.

Please select the Accept as Solution button if my post solves your issue or answers your question.

[dgorsman]

We've always used "By object type" for linetypes.  No point messing around TOO much between settings, especially taking into consideration viewport scaling/annotation scales, printing reduced-size for checking, and so on.

All of our prints are black-and-white linework so WYSIWYG won't work that well here.  It's also convenient to look at a drawing and say "That's not going to print right" simply by the color, without actually checking object line weight, layer lineweight, and/or toggling "Display lineweight" settings.

Cue CTB vs. STB plot style war. 

[RobDraw]

I like the method but have never had the opportunity to use it in AutoCAD. It is by far the most versatile of the three options. IMHO, it is not an exact display on screen. It can be extremely close but there are too many variables to suggest it is actually WYG. It is a very good representation, though. The same could be said for PDFs.

As I model, I definitely prefer to work in color and do not like line weights displayed. So, if I were to use this methodology, I would need to use viewport overrides and that might bring up a minor issue when needing to work through a viewport for annotative scaling reasons.

With that being said, setting it up is not for the faint of heart and requires a good understanding of plotting, even more so, a solid standard, and your users will also need to understand it. Some may have trouble grasping it, especially if they are used to other methods.

[Alfred.NESWADBA]

Hi,

just my 2c:

>> avoid using the archaic (.ctb) or (.stb) plot styles. Has anyone else done this?

I'm working now for years without CTB or STB, and also company standard I was involved to create are all happy to have not the CTB/STB-hell.

Sending DWG-files to other companies is now the easiest way, the select the layout and plot, ready, not search for a valid CTB/STB, copy them (in older versions of AutoCAD) to the own plot-styles folder (which has then hundreds or thousands of CTB/STB files) ....

The only thing necessary for wysiwyg is that you need to work on white background (as you are plotting on white paper). For guys working for a long time with CAD and so started with the old tube-monitors ... therefor with black background that might be the biggest challenge to get used to white background. 😉

- alfred -

[hencoop]

Indeed!

I cannot stand a white background.  It is too hard on my eyes.  I set every background I can to black or dark grey.  Initially it was also to reduce the electrons shooting at me from the CRT.

Etransmit takes care of the ctb when sending to others but 99.9% of my work does not go out to anyone except as a print or PDF.