Topic: PDF Software

[CaddmannQ]

Go try & zip a zip file & you'll figure it out. 

<Edit: Because the danged "A" key is sticking on my keyboard.>

[Josh Nieman]

hehe... zip a zip... now that's just FUN to SAY.


...it's been a long day.

[daron]

Out of curiosity, what are all these PDF's you're making made from?

The only time I do a PDF is from AutoCAD, & then I just "plot to PDF".

Not sure who you're asking, but with CutePDF I can print word documents, excel, notepad, most anything software related. It's set up as a printer object. So, mine's made from CutePDF.

[M-dub]

We use PrimoPDF, CutePDF and Adobe Acrobat 7.0 Pro depending on who's machine you're on.  Don't really have too many problems with any of them.  We need (and pay for) Acrobat because we need to modify PDF's from time to time.  If I had to chose one, it would have to be Acrobat...

[CaddmannQ]

Not sure who you're asking...

Anybody with an answer 

I've never been big on PDF's, and I guess I'm just looking for more rationale to like/use them.

[MP]

We use PDF 995 at work but I use Acrobat Pro at home and prefer it.

[Keith™]

Not sure who you're asking...

Anybody with an answer 

I've never been big on PDF's, and I guess I'm just looking for more rationale to like/use them.

Th reason we use them is because frequently we have to provide a set of plans for review to owners, builders, contractors etc. More often than not, in fact in the many years I have been doing this it has happened only once, these people do not have AutoCAD and it is problematic for many to ask that they go to autodesk and download a viewer that will need to be updated whenever the drawing format changes. However, almost everyone has the free adobe reader installed on their system. Most computers come with it pre-installed. For that reason alone, it makes more sense to provide a PDF. Also, whenever we provide a plot set to any printer, they can easily plot the files without having to install any special software. The files look exactly like they are supposed to every time.

[daron]

Like and Use are two different things. It's a matter of giving in to the machine. Everybody has adobe reader. Everyone wants it in PDF format. That's why I use it. There are some reasons to like it. Sending a document from windows to unix and back helps to keep the format better than OO does for one. I'm sure there are more, I just don't have them. Really though, it's like asking why we use Autocad? Well, it's the standard. Everyone knows about it. You can't get away from it.

[CaddmannQ]

Point taken, and I understand the need for platform independence, but my best tool is a hammer so I tend to see every job as a nail. 

I guess I'm just a bit PO'd that the SE's at the state architect are now demanding PDF's for checking, while record sets must still be in DWG format. PDF is not what I consider an engineer's tool, but rather a literary/publisher's tool. Anyhow, it's just extra work for us with no compensation. I guess I was just reaching for any idea that would imply an advantage/compensation for us, as the designers.

[Keith™]

I see it as being no different than plotting a set. If I plot a set to PDF that is essentially the same as me plotting a set to paper .. 'ceptin it is less work to do a PDF

[Dinosaur]

Expanding on Keith's comment about recipients not having AutoCAD, now having AutoCAD is not necessarily enough.  If a drawing is created with a vertical application such as ADT or Civil 3D, unless the correct object enabler is installed AutoCAD can not display many key parts of the drawing.

[Antisthenes]

PDF creator  because it's opensource

http://www.pdfforge.org/products/pdfcreator/
http://pdfcreator.sf.net

[Josh Nieman]

PDF creator  because it's opensource

http://www.pdfforge.org/products/pdfcreator/
http://pdfcreator.sf.net

and flawed.

That's the first PDF Creator my company went with... we quickly ditched it after so much money being lost having to get reprints done using a NON sucky pdf maker.

[Chuck Gabriel]

PDF creator  because it's opensource

http://www.pdfforge.org/products/pdfcreator/
http://pdfcreator.sf.net

and flawed.

That's the first PDF Creator my company went with... we quickly ditched it after so much money being lost having to get reprints done using a NON sucky pdf maker.

I've been using it for several years now without any problems, although it did take some trial and error to get it configured just right.  What issues did you have with it?

[Josh Nieman]

PDF creator  because it's opensource

http://www.pdfforge.org/products/pdfcreator/
http://pdfcreator.sf.net

and flawed.

That's the first PDF Creator my company went with... we quickly ditched it after so much money being lost having to get reprints done using a NON sucky pdf maker.

I've been using it for several years now without any problems, although it did take some trial and error to get it configured just right.  What issues did you have with it?

Inconsistent lineweight printing, plotting shades/hatches/wipeouts as solid black polygons at times, and it didn't like our shaded lines too much, because it always made them like 50% lighter than they shoulda been.  This could have been due to the pdfs made by this driver not having a good relationship with whatever conversion our outside printers' use, but either way, it wasn't working out.

The boss had it from the old company he worked at, and I think there was a guy there who set it up right, and it wasn't working well over here... I had no clue what it was really until I read about it recently.  It was the bosses' baby and when he couldn't get it to work right, I provided a reliable, efficient, cost effective solution that anyone could use.