Custom leader arrow - dot ?

[Anonymous]

Hi, yet more queies here.

I'm placing tags, but the standard leader arrows do not include a 'dot' that I tend to use as a standard.

I can edit the type - and access the drop-down list, and I've also looked for an annotation family for leader arrow, but cannot find any either.

Is there a way of using a dot - or of creating a custom leader arrow type as a family and making my own filled circle ?

Thanks

[Anonymous]

fix this stuff autodesk!

this is a graphic limitation (among many) of Revit, that should have never existed (why even force this?).  this is not a "wish list" item in my opinion; it's a demand.  you make it sound like "we did it this way because it was easier to write the code like that."  not a good or acceptable answer.  this is a similar instance as the text handling that was finally fixed in the last release (yeah, did you know, until 2017, Revit has been under-sizing ALL of the text in your project!?!?), or vertically continuous handrail loops, which is yet to be fixed.  these are software engineering failures (think of it like something that would invoke a recall in a physical product).  plain and simple, there are still a number of credible programming failures within the Revit framework, that your users have to work-around everyday.  work-arounds are not solutions; they are me (user) taking extra time to pick up the slack where you (autodesk) dropped the ball.  maybe hire a couple of engineers and architects to help you with your scope.

i've been an advanced user for over a decade now, and there are still gaping oversights (closed loop handrails!!!).  we should be calling these issues what they are, failures. thousands of dollars and days of frustration.  you all on the customer support end should consul the frustrated with confession.  we will be far more accommodating to admission, than to the "we'll think about" style of arrogance that seems to dominate these threads.

i'm with @Anonymous these aren't requests.  do your job, fix them now.  and stop wasting everyone's time.  

@grumpygrizzly no, just no.  that argument doesn't hold up.  in fact, it's quite likely that Revit would have a much stronger international presence if the graphic control was there from day one.  so, prioritize better autodesk.

i'm not normally this stern, but we Revit users are really getting tired of waiting to the software engineers to get this stuff fixed. period.

best///jacob

[caitlin]

With the amount of customization available for all other aspects of revit components and families, It seems to me that a custom arrowhead would be entirely possible if software writers would enable that options. Title blocks, for example, can be made to look like Autocad title blocks, and I imagine everyone is super happy about that. 

Can we agree that everything will not look the same in Revit, and also allow users to make their own arrowhead? Then users could choose if they wanted to use new Revit ones or spend time to re-create the ones they are used to?

[Anonymous]

Thank you for the Question and Answer...  

---

@Anonymouswrote:

It's always the way, spend 30 mins trying to figure it out, post a query, then stumble across the solution.

I've figured out how to do it - if anyone else searches this - here's how I did it:

From the Manage Tab, select Additional Settings, and click Arrowheads

That brings up the usual Edit Type dialogue box, select any of the standard arrows from the Type prompt - then duplicate it giving it a unique name - I called mine 'Dot - Filled'

From the Arrow Style - I selected Dot, ticked Filled, and set a Tick size at 1mm, clicked apply and OK.

Then back in the Tag Edit Type box - I again duplicated to create a new type - and selected the 'Dot - Filled' that now appears in the drop down list.

---

---

@Anonymouswrote:

It's always the way, spend 30 mins trying to figure it out, post a query, then stumble across the solution.

I've figured out how to do it - if anyone else searches this - here's how I did it:

From the Manage Tab, select Additional Settings, and click Arrowheads

That brings up the usual Edit Type dialogue box, select any of the standard arrows from the Type prompt - then duplicate it giving it a unique name - I called mine 'Dot - Filled'

From the Arrow Style - I selected Dot, ticked Filled, and set a Tick size at 1mm, clicked apply and OK.

Then back in the Tag Edit Type box - I again duplicated to create a new type - and selected the 'Dot - Filled' that now appears in the drop down list.

---

[Anonymous]

"A drawing is almost like a signature"?! What do you mean?

If you are professional, not amateur-decorator, you should follow standards. Drawing is NOT art for fun, it is project information that should be readable for EVERYONE and shouldn't be messed with "little things that make the drawings their own".

BIM is for informational communication.

[NigelParsons4560]

... and we should all wear the same coloured clothes, drive the same make of car, and live in 2-bedroom apartments of the same layout ...

[chrisplyler]

---

@NigelParsons4560 wrote:

... and we should all wear the same coloured clothes, drive the same make of car, and live in 2-bedroom apartments of the same layout ...

---

Those things communicate style, not data. We SHOULD all wear the same dog tags or medical bracelets, have the same or at  least very similar format of driver's licenses, the same labeling of our electrical breaker panels, the same nutritional info on our cereal boxes, etc., so that people can learn how to read them once and then read all of them.

[Anonymous]

In your opinion arrow stile change architecture?

It will not materialize at the construction site. Only informational content will.

Project involves more than one person. We can't flatter ourselves that something of this process is our own, or is for our self-satisfaction . Project needs professional knowledge only. 

Standardization developed for effective information exchanging.

Disarrangement, discrepancies, not informative additions lead to destructive complications.

Good specialist = educated.

[Anonymous]

Then you have no clue about the history of drafting. Everyone does things
different ways. And I wasn't speaking about "personal" standards or
preferences. Firm/ company level. Things that have always been done a
certain way because of preferences. It has nothing to do with decorating
and everything to do with being part of a company's identity.
Personally, I have had clients leave their original firm and come to us
because our drawings were more concise, and LOOKED better. Because at the
end of the day; it's NOT just about conveying information. It's also about
letting those that don't understand the entire process, see what's going to
happen. Your portfolio sells you.

[ToanDN]

---

@Anonymous wrote:
Personally, I have had clients leave their original firm and come to us
because our drawings were more concise, and LOOKED better.

---

The relationship between clients and their design firms is equal to that between design firms and their software companies. 

Some design firms may choose to go with not-so-nice drafting standards in order to get the jobs done more quickly, targeting the mass and let go the niche market to the firms like yours.  So may Autodesk.

If your clients weren't forced to stay with the other design firms so neither are you.  You can

[Anonymous]

Not entirely true.  As of right now, AutoDesk has been buying up competition (like how they originally acquired Revit).  The only actual option out there right now is Bentley.  And that's a problem whether using Microstation or Bentley BIM.  The .dwg file format and interface is ubiquitous.  It is the standard.  The same has become of Revit.  Utilizing other software is not a realistic option.

[Anonymous]

Unfortunately I received my architectural education in those old days when it was impossible to use a computer. And I spent in university 6 years focusing on freehand drafting and rendering styles. But later I had to make photo-realistic renderings and animations to be competitive.
Graphical design is for Graphical Designer portfolio. Using BIM for that has no sense
BIM is for working with information.
Portfolio of architectural company should show architecture, not drafting styles (if you don't sell calligraphy pens of course).

Everything should be used appropriately

[NigelParsons4560]

I agree with you Mukfee.  I also get unsolicited compliments from builders and contractors on the quality of our documentation.  My gripes with Revit are all about the limitations with leaders, dimensions, grids, etc. and all reflect on the presentation quality of the drawing.  I was complaining about this stuff to Autodesk for 10 years.  Every couple of years there is a new method of lodging wishlist requests.  I've tried them all.  In the end, I went and purchased a couple of ArchiCads.  Most of our work is done on that platform now.

[Anonymous]

Unfortunately for REVIT there are drafting standards that are above the software.

It is the job of any drafting software package to accommodate and comply with actual standards. When it comes to this Autocad has done a much better job than Revit. Its sad to see the knowledge of a 100 year old tradebeing eroded by a poorly designed software package which will fade into nonexistence in the next 10 years as the next bigger and better software comes along. 

Im sure your Boss boss knows what hes trying to do and is probably correct in his annotation.

[RobDraw]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

It is the job of any drafting software package to accommodate and comply with actual standards. When it comes to this Autocad has done a much better job than Revit. Its sad to see the knowledge of a 100 year old tradebeing eroded by a poorly designed software package which will fade into nonexistence in the next 10 years as the next bigger and better software comes along. 

---

Oh, the woes of the inflexible...

[Anonymous]

Autocad and Revit are incomparable. You can compare abacus and algebraic
calculator but not comprehensivly smart BIM with nonfunctional linework.
Except that revit by default corresponds international codes and standards,
which helps to avoid conflicts and confusions that custom standards bring.

[Anonymous]

*delete*

[Chad.millard]

Yes, the inflexible Revit.

[RobDraw]

We all know Revit has its limitations. Some people have trouble accepting that and insist that it should be easy to program beyond them. 

[Chad.millard]

There are many limitations inside Revit that are only there on purpose.  Items 1/32" or smaller?  Not a legitimate restraint.  Not being able to show a symbol for a wall mounted light fixture because they purposely removed the "Maintain Annotation Orientation" option from lighting families is another.  Lack of customization for the smallest things that make a difference to people, like arrowheads. 

[francfiles]

Imperial. Let me guess, USA?