Don't know what you're saying,Richard,but I'll see if I can do that too.

Very nice!

There shouldn't be any "hidden styles" in your model. You should be able to see any styles in the In Model styles library. But just to be sure, open some of the components individually and take a look. If you are getting components from other sources, it is best to check them out carefully before using them. This would be especially true with components from the 3D Warehouse.

All you have to do is make a layer above the one on which your viewports are placed and add your text and leaders on that layer. Unlike in SketchUp where layer order doesn't matter, in LayOut the order of the layer list is important. I have my templates set up so the SU viewports go on layers quite low in the list. Dimensions, hatches, labels and other text and dashed lines go on layers higher up in the list. As to changing the text, it depends upon the OS. On PC you can change the font in the Text Style inspector window. On Mac you can get to the Font window most easily by right clicking on the text.

You're getting the snapping to an apparent grid because that's what you have it set to do. Untick Grid Snap and it won't do that. [image: wAuU_2013-10-29_06-40-30.png] If you want to adjust the viewport size without adjusting the size of the model, tick the box for Preserve scale on resize. Leave it ticked for that viewport or it will resize when you untick it. [image: 70oA_2013-10-29_06-41-34.png]

Would you e-mail a LayOut file that shows the problem so I can see it?

There isn't any way for LayOut to give you heights directly as it does for dimensions. If I remember correctly, TIG did a plugin that would insert them in SketchUp as leader text. You could use those or you could put them in the SketchUp view and replace them in LO with properly formatted shapes and text. You could put the leader text on their own layer in SU. Turn off that layer after you've finished with them in LO.

I haven't had anyone test it yet... I'll see what I can do for the free files. You'd still need an account set up on the back side. But sure, you can just give it away. send me a pm here with your desired login info.

+1 to guides in LO +1 to layer not print +1 to offset fillet (and stretch besides of scale) What about having Vector and Hybrid modes that would render correctly and differently hidden, and soften lines? One would be as dashed lines the other as dotted lines, and both would export to CAD with line styles?

Is it possible that the active layer is below that on which the thing you are trying to dimension lays? I was working on something the other day and started to insert a dimension which wasn't showing up. It turned out I had made a layer lower in the stack active. the dimension was indeed being made but it was hidden behind the SU viewport on the layer above.

Thanks for your help! I did just as you suggested with success. My custom scrapbook remained too! Again thanks...

After crippling LO with large custom hatch pattern files I have spent some time reducing the file size with moderate success, they print well enough but the screen presentation when exported to PDF leaves a lot to be desired until you zoom right in to about 600% ! I may yet return to local vector hatch patching

@arcad-uk said: Careful what you wish for Rich, you might have to accommodate the fillets & chamfer programmers as well! Hmmm? You're right if all my wishes come true I'll be busy! I retract my last post!

@dave r said: I agree, it would be nice to be able to control line weights independently in the SU viewport although I'm not sure how it would be done without either setting some rules based on distances as you've suggested or something else. Most of the ways I can think of it going would take as much time or more than the ways I deal with it now. FWIW, you don't have to explode the viewport to be able to adjust line weights. You could do what I outlined above and leave the scenes un-exploded. It's still probably a work around but once you do it a time or two, the process will be quite straightforward and it is workable. You have to be able to think through and set things up in SketchUp so you have different scenes for different line weights. Maybe the ideal, pie-in-the-sky method would be to be able to select the vector lines in a viewport and modify their weight, style, color, etc. while maintaining the link to dynamic SketchUp. I imagine something that would use the relative distances but when I try to think of the "rules" such a code would use, it seems impossible that a logic would get what is wanted. I imagine a house treated as a solid sculptural object in a view. Then if a line lay way in front of the next surface it would be heavier etc. This would probably take as long a most renderers if it were possible. If there were a user applied modification. LO would have to "know" which lines are which for each update- and given that the problem is in changes to the design / model, that also seems unlikely to work.Might be some hope in layers, but for a complex model the layers or groups for objects are not necessarily translatable to 2d stacked LO layers for each view.

At this time the only text files that LayOut is officially intended to take are RTFs. I think you've hit on a couple of points but you'll probably get better results if you copy your table from Excel and paste it in a blank Word doc. Most projects I do in LayOut involve at least one table. The data is exported from SketchUp as a CSV file which I massage and rearrange in Excel before going to Word. I dislike the appearance of the straight tables so I convert tables to tab-separated text. Usually I do a few other things in Word including pasting in some boilerplate text before saving as an RTF file. This file imports into LayOut flawlessly and as long as I remember not to try editing it in LO directly, I can always open it for editing in Word. It seems like a convoluted path but for me it is workable. I've done so many of them now that the steps are sort of a process I can do quite rapidly.

rizkylp. Thanks for sharing best regards Pedro

Thanks so much for taking the time to explain that. Sometimes it's the simplest things that seem to be obstacles in the day.

Well seemed easy enough for me, but I can see your point now...

If you want to use more then one model - write script best way. I think you have only one model. Thzts why best way is make scenes manualy.

Hi Marc, I guess your first paragraph answers a key point that the images should be as small as possible, I was uncertain whether a large or small image was more efficient in L.O. and also under pressure to get the drawings published at the time. I will have a play based on your advice and see how much difference it makes. The memory usage was flat once loaded, it just seemed to be a very big hit and enough for me to need a memory upgrade to avoid bug splats. There's not much point in uploading the files if they are so inefficient and I have a few graphics options to crop the images and lower the bit depth which I will do and then post them as they may be of interest to others on this forum. One other aspect you may be able to answer... I have a plan with a number of connected straight walls; is it more memory efficient using several (un-stroked) rectangles or a continuous trace to create a single pattern fill?