Huge LayOut pdf output

pbacot

Sorry to hijack your thread, but I haven't used layout that much and a client has complained when printing the pdfs I sent him they come out dark. Is this a known issue or something wrong with his printer setup?

Nothing that I've seen (any consistent problem with dark prints from LO).

pbacot

@unknownuser said:

It is the raster image that increases the file size. That said, the quality of the pdf is far better than the pdf printers I have tried. This becomes very apparent when you print a full size sheet. I just deal with the larger file size. A typical set of CD's for a house is around 120mb. I just use dropbox to send. I typically use dropbox anyway as it is a simple link to the email addressee, opposed to clogging your email server. No issues so far.

Thanks Sonder ( I figured you had come across this issue in some way). Dropbox is good and I think I would introduce where I can. Many different clients though, and most not very computer savvy. Trying to get all the different people that might want to see the plans in line with DropBox is not always efficient--so many are not part of a real "project team". So you get constant requests "please send the elevations to so and so". I AM needing to keep my email server cleared out more and more these days.

When you say the quality of the pdf -- are you talking about the "Export" command? Yes, they are pretty good. It's the same using the Apple built-in pdf as far as I can tell.

Still hope Trindle can do something with this, for I do get some very nice pdf files including all sorts of raster images from other applications with much smaller file size.

Krisidious

I use a combination of vector, raster and the hybrid... from layout my pdfs are normally from 150-300 megs. I typically have about 20 sheets. with the pdf emulator, I use either Adobe or PDF995, I get around 70-100 megs. I also use 24"x36"... I use my own web server to send the files.

Calstock

I always use Dropbox and just email the link for the PDF to the client. Works brilliantly, and it's free, (within certain usage constraints I believe).

JQL

Are you using High quality settings output? Have you tried Medium?

I've noticed they're much smaller but still have a good output quality when printing or even visualizing directly on pdf.

pbacot

JQL You are right as always! Yes, I think for construction drawings I'll try the medium setting. It's possible it only affects the raster portion, and for most construction drawings I am not using fancy textures. In fact I prefer to keep it simple.

I wondered if some statement was made by Trimble regarding how these settings relate to portions of the drawing. Looking into these settings--this is from the Trimble LayOut "Help Center:"

@unknownuser said:

LayOut displays content like you would see on a printed piece of paper. You can set the DPI (dots per inch) in LayOut like you would set a printer. If you increase your DPI setting, your SketchUp models will appear less blocky. To change the DPI in LayOut, please follow these steps:
Click the "File" menu.
Click "Document Setup..."
In the left pane, click "Paper."
Select your setting in the "DPI" drop-down list.
For best performance and appearance in LayOut, we recommend that you avoid setting the DPI value higher than 150 DPI.

Of course in my Document Setup there is no "dpi" setting.

JQL

@pbacot said:

Of course in my Document Setup there is no "dpi" setting.

Never seen that myself either!

But that MUST be related with raster part of the output as vector part will always be vector so it doesn't have anything to do with dpi nor will it decrease quality or even create heavier files.

With older versions of LO (8-2013) I was using both vector and hybrid viewports as vector was much faster but couldn't handle textures or shadows. With 2014, I've noticed everything could be on hybrid rendering. With 2015 Layout became MUCH faster and I don't worry about it anymore even if I always have the working settings on Low (wich only affects texture quality while working and on the screen you don't notice it too much.)

The good thing about this is that you can always export to CAD and delete the images folder and you have some clean drawings for engineering consultants, while pdf output to clients are always good looking.

I haven't done much competitions where images (renders and other kind of images) are key so I see no need for High quality settings output.

If you have only a few textures why don't you use low quality only. Basically it would work for shadows, and fairly simple or undetailed textures, wich could include some simpler hatch textures.

The file would be much lighter and faster to export.

It's a shame vector doesn't include shadows...

pbacot

Good Points JQL. I would have to use hybrid for now, to provide some sort of texture for some surfaces. To produce even a construction drawing with no "hatch" for things like stone, horizontal siding or roofing is a step backwards from 2d CAD, and arguably unprofessional. And to add all this anywhere but in the model (or some other "automatic" means) means a lot of work and room for error, each time you make a change,

sonder

FWIW. I export all my CD's at the low setting. It prints beautifully and is much smaller in file size.

JQL

@unknownuser said:

FWIW. I export all my CD's at the low setting. It prints beautifully and is much smaller in file size.

Never had the guts to try that myself. Will do on my next set. Thanks for the info.

pbacot

Sonder, your experience is always worthwhile to hear about. Thanks! I'll look at that too. I would think shadows would become blocky looking--whereas jagged edges of textures are obscured by lines.

sonder

Shadows reproduce just fine on "low". Make sure you print it and you will see the resolution is more than enough for a 24x36 set.

Richard

If you are printing to a good PDF writer (adobe acrobat eg), you can create alternative settings to the default in which to can nominate the downsampling of colour or greyscale images. This way substitution of in model textures isn't an issue!