Topic: AutoCAD 2017

[mjfarrell]

How does it compare to Corel? Similar shade of lipstick? 

whatever the guy used was better than what you posted
in the dwgs he sent there was text, however it was in clumps...some words, some groups of words, and or half words were text objects...but they were just globs of
pieces of text...

however some, very little, of yours was a little better than his converted dwgs, however on whole it was worse.

[lamarn]

Will you be using dwg link now you are have the ability to convert pdf? Wonder if the animal called Rev'it is able handle this kind of conversion.. Would be fun to explore these creature behavior, wouldn't it?

[Krushert]

Here you go. Looks like the text did not make the trip.

Yeah, that's pretty craptastic...where did I put that lipstick?

Yup!
That my friends is a prime example of garbage in garbage out.

**Sorry Folks I grabbed the wrong quote**

[Rob...]

Yup!
That my friends is a prime example of garbage in garbage out.

I always wonder why people base their opinions on what you're not supposed to do.

[ChrisCarlson]

Yea, this is about AutoCAD 2017, not the merits or ethics in going from PDF to DWG. Its a neat feature, apparently one that needs some work but a neat, somewhat useful feature.

Wonder how many people will move to the new cursor type, "CURSORTYPE" 1

[ChrisCarlson]

Auto-complete within the insert block dialog should have been added in eons ago.

[mjfarrell]

Yup!
That my friends is a prime example of garbage in garbage out.

I always wonder why people base their opinions on what you're not supposed to do.

Since we having a do over; let me try again...

Curious what is actually meant by this?
If one is NOT supposed to use PDF to DWG what is it there for?

Or is this comment related to something else?  Because I did not see anyone suggesting or trying something that should not be done.
One might read this as 'there is a tool in the program, however one should never use it'.  Then why is it there?

[Krushert]

My garbage comment was in reference to your comment below and your expectations that was going to somehow come out better than the cad file that you were given.   I see that as someone who wants gold from lead.   Just not going to happen.

Yeah, that's pretty craptastic...where did I put that lipstick?

[mjfarrell]

My garbage comment was in reference to your comment below and your expectations that was going to somehow come out better than the cad file that you were given.   I see that as someone who wants gold from lead.   Just not going to happen.

Yeah, that's pretty craptastic...where did I put that lipstick?

Actually I was not given a CAD file, I was given a vector drawing program generated PDF, the quality of which was pretty high.
However the output was terrible, both from the originator (no idea what PDF to DWG process they used), and ACAD 2017.
I didn't want or expect gold from chicken feathers, I would however had been wildly surprised if it had gotten close to 90% of usable output.
And that simply didn't happen from either PDF to DWG process.
Neither output would be acceptable enough to not require re-creating the detail to be usable in a set of plans.

[rkmcswain]

Actually I was not given a CAD file, I was given a vector drawing program generated PDF, the quality of which was pretty high.
However the output was terrible, both from the originator (no idea what PDF to DWG process they used), and ACAD 2017.

Do you know of any process that will give you what you want?
I've seen several online PDF→DWG converters that do a pretty good job, as well as a standalone version (from Dotsoft).
I have not compared any of those to 2017 yet however.

[mjfarrell]

Actually I was not given a CAD file, I was given a vector drawing program generated PDF, the quality of which was pretty high.
However the output was terrible, both from the originator (no idea what PDF to DWG process they used), and ACAD 2017.

Do you know of any process that will give you what you want?
I've seen several online PDF→DWG converters that do a pretty good job, as well as a standalone version (from Dotsoft).
I have not compared any of those to 2017 yet however.

Pretty much NONE of the PDF to DWG conversions I have encountered get above 75%, and that is being generous.
One might have thought that all the programming power at Autodesk would have been able to push that bar a little closer to 90% or better.