Topic: Brain Dead Drawing only?

[craigr]

Then maybe you should realize the problem lies in using names like "Standard" for obviously customized fonts and styles

People who've evolved past the "monkey" stage know how styles work when there is a coincidence of names.

Our Company intials are 'CSI', so anything I modify / create I start the name with CSI - such as 'CSI_Security'. This is simple to do and takes no extra time. This way, when I or anyone else opens a dwg, they know which items we modified / created.

craigr

[Josh Nieman]

Then maybe you should realize the problem lies in using names like "Standard" for obviously customized fonts and styles

People who've evolved past the "monkey" stage know how styles work when there is a coincidence of names.

Our Company intials are 'CSI', so anything I modify / create I start the name with CSI - such as 'CSI_Security'. This is simple to do and takes no extra time. This way, when I or anyone else opens a dwg, they know which items we modified / created.

craigr

Exactly.  If you named your custom stuff "Standard" then anyone you copied your stuff into someone else's drawing, or any drawing without those same customizations... it'll simply take on the properties of the drawing you paste into.. not the source.

We do it a similar way.  We label all of ours after our company name as well, sometimes with clarification like you do, if there're multiples.  Text styles like CASE-RomanS, CASE-RomanD, etc...

[CADaver]

But some guys never gets past the CAD monkey stage.  Especially the monkeys who change the txt.shx of Standard font to Romans and stupid stuff like that...

??  and the problem with that is.... what?

If you copy from a drawing where the standard font have been changed and paste the copied part into a drawing where the standard have not been changed, the text ends up looking horrible. And it happens a lot when more then one company is working on something.

Then don't do that... or is that too easy??

It is better to create a unique name for your text styles.

Better?? ... for whom??

A monkey thinks he is saving time, but a cad user who has evolved from the monkey stage, know that the fastest way is not always the right way.

Those of us unrelated to monkeys know that the right way is always faster.

[craigr]

When wouldn't it be better to create unique Text Styles names?

Or anything non-standard.

craigr

[CADaver]

When wouldn't it be better to create unique Text Styles names?

Better for what??  We routinely re-font style Standard, and have done so without issue for a couple of decades.  If it's going to be there, why not use it? And our text looks "right" even if a contractor inadvertently used style Standard.

[Shinyhead]

Well, as an outsourcer I can tell you its horrible to work with for us, not with text style, but with other things, like ctb files. I have clients that have modified monochrome.ctb. So we either edit that ctb for him alone, and mess up any other client that uses that ctb, or we leave his unmodified, and never actually see his drawings as he will.
For drawing defined things, thats ok, but for things that are in the actual nuts and bolts cad setup, editing any defaults is bad in my book.

[craigr]

When wouldn't it be better to create unique Text Styles names?

Better for what??  We routinely re-font style Standard, and have done so without issue for a couple of decades.  If it's going to be there, why not use it? And our text looks "right" even if a contractor inadvertently used style Standard.

Better so that everything is clear to anyone that opens a dwg that may not be accustom to how your company does things.

I caught onto the unique naming thingy several years ago, while working on dwgs that another company had passed to me to use. It was very helpful to understand what they were doing & easier to figure out how to handle their non-standard ways.

I have even worked on a project that several companies worked on the same dwgs & it was mandated that any new layers, etc... must have the company initials at the front of their layer names. - Very nice.

Admittedly, I tend to be obsessive about things being neat & tidy and very easy to work with whenever possible.

I HATE what I would call 'sloppy' work. If everyone would do their drawings the way I want them, then my world would be MUCH easier.

craigr

[Shinyhead]

Another point, and this happens to us often enough.  We get a template from a client to work with, and they have reset standard to some oddball font.  Well our font alt looks ok as we work and have NO IDEA its wrong. So we send the drawings, next thing we have a client on the phone yelling about how the text is all wrong.  Never mind sending us the fonts you need us to use.

This happens with dimstyles and textstyles often enough that when setting up a new client I almost refuse to set up things unless they use e-transmit to send me the template and such.

[Josh Nieman]

When wouldn't it be better to create unique Text Styles names?

Better for what??  We routinely re-font style Standard, and have done so without issue for a couple of decades.  If it's going to be there, why not use it? And our text looks "right" even if a contractor inadvertently used style Standard.

Don't you guys do everything in house?

[Josh Nieman]

This happens with dimstyles and textstyles often enough that when setting up a new client I almost refuse to set up things unless they use e-transmit to send me the template and such.

I'm that way any time I get drawings from most architects.  I usually wait until I open a drawing, and take a look to see if any fonts or shape files were substituted for.  If there is ANYTHING with substitutions or any fonts that are not standard with Windows or Autocad, I generally call and ask if they know of etransmit and if they'd send me the file with all attachments, like you said.  One client chewed me out for wasting time.  I sent him our drawings hoping everything was right and fine, and the architect calls me back complaining because now we're at the deadline and we're going to have to waste time reprinting because we didn't use the right font, which was something special one of his guys made, named after their company.  Man, if only someone would have had the foresight to ask for that font up front   

Anyways... I digress.

[CADaver]

Well, as an outsourcer I can tell you its horrible to work with for us, not with text style, but with other things, like ctb files.

Why is that a problem?  We frequently build to client standards, what's the problem?

I have clients that have modified monochrome.ctb. So we either edit that ctb for him alone, and mess up any other client that uses that ctb,

Ya know, directories and profiles are wonderful things, check 'em out.

For drawing defined things, thats ok, but for things that are in the actual nuts and bolts cad setup, editing any defaults is bad in my book.

What is a "nuts and bolts cad setup"??  I've worked with AutoCAD for a long time and I've never seen one of those.  In fact the beauty of AutoCAD is NOTHING is a "nuts and bolts cad setup", everything can be custom fit to a user.

[Shinyhead]

Heh,  had something even more silly once.  A cad manager instructed me to explode, and I kid you not, all dimensions and hatch (after making sure they were on the zero layer).  This went into the standard (I double checked three times on the phone and got email verification twice!)

They went along this way for about 4 years before the cad manager called up saying we didn't need to do it that way anymore.  Apparently the guys that took the drawings and had to clean them up for CNC had been running overbudget for the entire time (imagine that!) but he couldn't quite swallow his pride enough to change the standard.   

[Maverick®]

............

 

[CADaver]

When wouldn't it be better to create unique Text Styles names?

Better for what??  We routinely re-font style Standard, and have done so without issue for a couple of decades.  If it's going to be there, why not use it? And our text looks "right" even if a contractor inadvertently used style Standard.

Better so that everything is clear to anyone that opens a dwg that may not be accustom to how your company does things.

Anyone working on our files for the duration of the contract are keenly aware of how we do things.  After we turn 'em over to the client, it's his file.  Re-fonting style Standard in that file should not be an issue.

I caught onto the unique naming thingy several years ago, while working on dwgs that another company had passed to me to use. It was very helpful to understand what they were doing & easier to figure out how to handle their non-standard ways.

Unique is okay until it bloats the file with numerous styles that are the same except the name.  Seems counter productive, doesn't it?

I have even worked on a project that several companies worked on the same dwgs & it was mandated that any new layers, etc... must have the company initials at the front of their layer names. - Very nice.

So you needed a road map to isolate the steel on the project??

I HATE what I would call 'sloppy' work. If everyone would do their drawings the way I want them, then my world would be MUCH easier.

And what is sloppy about changing the font of style Standard to Romans??

[Shinyhead]

Well, as an outsourcer I can tell you its horrible to work with for us, not with text style, but with other things, like ctb files.

Why is that a problem?  We frequently build to client standards, what's the problem?

I have clients that have modified monochrome.ctb. So we either edit that ctb for him alone, and mess up any other client that uses that ctb,

Ya know, directories and profiles are wonderful things, check 'em out.

For drawing defined things, thats ok, but for things that are in the actual nuts and bolts cad setup, editing any defaults is bad in my book.

What is a "nuts and bolts cad setup"??  I've worked with AutoCAD for a long time and I've never seen one of those.  In fact the beauty of AutoCAD is NOTHING is a "nuts and bolts cad setup", everything can be custom fit to a user.

You ideas are valid with one teensy problem.  We use LT, and that makes it a wee bit tougher.  We *could* go to all full, but that is a very pricey option to upgrade 15 seats to full.  We only maintain one seat of full on subscription.  LT is very nuts and bolts that way, it can be customized to a very large extent, but on the fly changes to that are a BIT more tricky.