[BUG+WORKAROUND] High Scale Viewports
-
Hi all,
Since a long time now there's a bug on high scale drawings that has been pestering me when using Layout from day one.
I've been doing all my construction docs in Sketchup+Layout and I draw every detail in Sketchup using SectionCutFaces.
It's a very effective method of drafting 2D details at 1:1 scale using your 3D model for reference and then iterate back on the model until it matches details.
Sending model to Layout allows you to have both model and details at any scale you want as long as your raster hatches look good at those scales.
However there's a bug with Layout viewports that makes a small viewport with a large scale of 1:1, 1:2, 1:5 or even 1:10 to misalign the raster image on from the vectors in a Raster/Hybrid rendered viewport.
The thing is that it's this hatching that matters at this scale so I had to find workarounds to the bug wich were always cumbersome and convuluted:
-
Scale up and down the viewport randomly until the error was not that drastic/visible (lots of trial and error);
-
Scale up the viewport to a bigger size than what I needed and then Clip mask it (a lot of work for many viewports and not that much flexibility);
-
Ditch Hybrid mode altogether and use Vector only detail drawings (looses informative raster info.)
However, I've just found a workaround wich I want to share with you guys, in case you also need it.
It also has it's limitations but it's way simpler than the above, it's flexible enough to be used for a lot of scenarios and can probably shed some light into what's happening in the backstage, eventually helping Trimble fix the bug: -
The workaround is simply to use square based viewports or 1x2 rectangular based viewports.
Take a look at the gif for more info:
I hope someone at Layout team picks this up and investigates it deeper.
NOTE: Crosspost from here:
http://forums.sketchup.com/t/bug-workaround-high-scale-viewports/26887
-
-
I think that working with images in technical drawings is not good. It has problems because quality images are too big, slow and not precise like in this example. Try exporting to AutoCAD and you'll see what I mean. There should be vector hatching and color fill for that.
-
@srx said:
I think that working with images in technical drawings is not good. It has problems because quality images are too big, slow and not precise like in this example. Try exporting to AutoCAD and you'll see what I mean. There should be vector hatching and color fill for that.
Well, I disagree. Vector hatching, color fill, oil painting, handpainting, collages or raster images all are presentation complements to the accuracy you need on lines.
Apart from lines and dimension lines, north arrow, and the eventual scale ruler, there's nothing more in a technical drawing that needs accuracy.
What we need is legibility and raster is perfect for that.
We don't need perfect vector hatching, because noone will measure anything in our hatching.
Exporting hatches to CAD is also not needed as consultants are able to work only with the vector lines we send on the exports and final drawings can be shared to contractor on paper, pdf or even CAD with background images.
It has worked for me every time.
If, by any means, you need another workflow because of someone in your team having an absolute need for vector hatches, then you can always export the CAD file, and hatch final drawings... I would avoid it as it isn't as fast as having it all inside sketchup.
You could also use Skalp, but then you'd have to model the full model's layers to get hatching, and that is a bit too much for me.
-
Awesome find, thanks JQL! That misalignment drives me crazy and I am very pleased that you figured out this little trick of sizing the viewport to 1:1 or 1:2; I would never have figured that out.
-
I'm glad I took the time to share it then!
I have found that this workaround isn't true for some cases, but I haven't figured a pattern better than this yet.
Squares work alright for most cases, but 1x2 rectangles some times fail. The thing is that every other rectangle fails a lot more...
Of course, the smaller the viewport the stronger the chance for failure but I managed to get my details much faster simply by using this rule since yesterday.
-
@jql said:
We don't need perfect vector hatching, because noone will measure anything in our hatching.
Exporting hatches to CAD is also not needed as consultants are able to work only with the vector lines we send on the exports and final drawings can be shared to contractor on paper, pdf or even CAD with background images.
Hatching is not the choice because of the precision, but for CAD files to be manageable. Background images are slowing things down so consultants can not work fluently.
Color is only a number.Hatch is a few numbers. Background image has bitmap representation of many kbytes. Try to export large project with background images to AutoCad and you will see the difference. You can not work with it. And when you change the scale you have to change background image resolution. It has to be at least 150dpi to look OK. Hatch and fill color are parametric so they do not depend on scale. The question here is why one would waste so much energy and resources just to have images in technical drawings? I would use them for presentation up to 1:100...nothing more.
-
All nice topics Saurus! Thanks!
@srx said:
Hatching is not the choice because of the precision, but for CAD files to be manageable. Background images are slowing things down so consultants can not work fluently.
My consultants usually don't need hatching so the CAD exports have no images on them.
However it facilitates construction very much.´
@unknownuser said:
Color is only a number.Hatch is a few numbers. Background image has bitmap representation of many kbytes. Try to export large project with background images to AutoCad and you will see the difference. You can not work with it.
That is true, that's why I don't work with CAD at all. Image info is way richer than vector for describing material and color properties of a project. CAD is just... dull...
So my CAD files have no hatches at all, they're just geometry for consultants... I don't need them and I don't think consultants need them too.
The only time I'd like to have hatches in a cad file is for permits. It's easier to create dwf files from CAD files and in portugal that is standard format for permits (wich I hate actually).
@unknownuser said:
And when you change the scale (of an hatch or image in CAD) you have to change background image resolution. It has to be at least 150dpi to look OK. Hatch and fill color are parametric so they do not depend on scale.
I think quite the opposite actually.
What happens to a CAD hatch is that, if you scale it up, it always keeps the same lineweight. A scaled up vector dotted hatch will either have the same amount of dots and the become invisible if too apart from each other or it will have to be changed (parametrically or manually) so they get a greater density of dots.
A Sketchup raster hatch will always be completelly scaled up. Dots will keep their distance but they will be zoomed in so they will become larger and the hatch keeps it's legibility and density. In my honest opinion having a dotted hatch based on a small 256px jpg looks much better at all scales than a dotted hatch in CAD.
And you can do so much more. You can use real images, colorize them, make them abstract, and they will always tile and work.
Also, don't forget how easy it is to assign a material to a face in sketchup and how hard it is to assign a hatch in Autocad.
@unknownuser said:
The question here is why one would waste so much energy and resources just to have images in technical drawings? I would use them for presentation up to 1:100...nothing more.
[/quote]
Images are a part of my Sketchup process. The materials you see on my tech drawings are inherited from my concept stages, my permit stages, my renders with Thea, they carry a lot of info, from wood boards size, to paint color, to small brass details... Everything is there already why would I waste time taking it out?
But most importantly why would I waste that information?
That's the beauty of sketchup. I can have it!
I want it on my Technical drawings and I want my contractor to look at the renders I created with Thea and immediatelly associate what he sees in my construction docs with them. Basically it's the same model and he clearly understands the render and now he will focus on how to achieve what's there much easier.
And it facilitates conversation in construction site so much when they understand my drawings.
It never happened when I was producing them on CAD, but now it does and the contractors I work with can really feel the love I put on the project so it's easier for me to convince them to do incredible things.
But it's also practical in terms of giving me less work.
I have some trouble setting up hybrid viewports in Layout but images represent materials so I write less on Construction Docs.
I could use more colors on hatches wich would be easy to achieve and even easier for the contractor's to read but I like black and white hatches because they are neutral, and do not interfere with space material's colors.
Hatching is a great deal of my Architectural design process as at a certain stage I want to study the model by studying the layers that compose it's constructive systems.
I've hatched all my model before I even send it to layout.
The way I hatch in Sketchup is very fast and though it's slower in Layout to have hatched+textured viewports, it's also a great way to check for errors as I'm building viewports at a slower pace. As they are made in Sketchup I correct them in Sketchup.
So the model I take with me for construction site is incredibly rich!
Also I use hatches at 1:50 to 1:1 scale viewports but never display them at smaller scales like 1:100. I use styles to control that and it's very effective. Using styles I can have a single scene in Sketchup displayed at 1:100 scale without any hatch or wall layer lines and still have the same scene, at 1:1 scale with all layers lines and hatches.
All this clearly compensates the hardest part of my project wich is Laying out stuff in Layout. (And exporting to DWF when I have to.)
-
JQL Thank you for the knowledge you are sharing with us. The question of workflow is my passion too and I think I am wasting too much time on it.As for your arguments I agree. I've been there, and also like the images from Sketchup as presentation tool. I agree one do not need hatches for consultants, but only for final DWF print for approval, but the images are slowing things down a lot in AutoCad when it comes to it.
IMO, the real value extracted from Sketchup is not information carried in images, but in combination of geometry and semantics. The BIM. -
You're very welcome, most of it was collected here at Sketchucation too, and I'd share/learn less if you didn't question my options. So thanks!
Advertisement