Brooke

I try to insert a 2d tree on the active class and layer and its handles show as does it in the OIP but it is invisible. I change to different 2d symbol, of an adjacent palm frond, and it is visible. I go back to to insert one of the formerly invisible symbols and it is now inserted visibly. This little excercise may be repeated until circuits fizzle.

OK, thanks. For me it is labeled 'center,' and is clued by a crosshair. Turning off other selection snaps helped.

Setting the zoom line weights helped. Drawing is 1/4"=1'-0". Thanks, C W.

I see that flipping the symbol gives some latitiude in label placement, but is there any way to precisely control it? Am I missing some snap clue which allows this?

I'm just getting around to tweaking the graphics of my wall styles so they print/display as I want so I'm switching between 2d select and the wall tool in order to modify the graphic attribs of the wall types. Is there a quicker way to do this? My display does not accurately render line weights as produced in an exported PDF. Do the PDFs fairly accurately display what one might expect from a print? (I'm currently not equipped to make this evaluation myself.)

Didn't work for me. Organization shows Y in final use texture column. Detail edit as per your scheme. Use at creation is checked for all attribs. (This is for a glazed double bi-fold in imitation of NanaWall door.) VP refreshed without change. Changing fill to none and back worked so something is working.

It seems to me that any attribute lister and 'organization' settings should show an entry to reflect 'none' owing to an 'off' setting of 'use at creation,' as without it the info may be incomplete and misleading.

Yes, Ray. And not, both. On a sheet layer. Had no probs for a long while... Week or so, anyway. Current VP has class of the invisible objects as being visible. Curious thing to me is I can't change attrib of that object to 'by class' which is visible, but now I find I can change it to something else, other than 'none' or 'by class,' and it becomes visible. Sorry, here it is: the 'set at creation' somehow got unchecked on the class attrib setup in organization. It happened to a bunch of similar classes. There is no reason why I would intentionally set it up as such, so it must have been a little birdie. Thank you, Ray.

I developed a minor problem - nothing drawn in a elevation VP is visible; attributes can't be changed from 'none.' Current class is 'on' in VP. Invisible objects may be selected and edited but not made visible. This is a new step backwards.

Why does changing ortho views change view settings in a way which is persistent .... they do not return using previous views? Can this be avoided?

Yo, my goodness. Thank you.

Doesn't seem to work fully for me. OK for windows but not for window walls. (Maybe they are 'special.') No...Looks like my mistake: the window walls had different Z's and my initial VP began at Z '0', while they were at Z '-9"' and thus were not fully displayed.

I'm leaving what follows intact because it shows how jumbled my thinking became with the strange displays occurring; I have an idea of design layers as physical levels and so the superimposition of the elevations on the plan was/is not comprehensible... some mode I don't know about... and so I questioned my understanding of design layers. -------------------- the stuff left intact: I think maybe this was the result of the clicking to edit the design layer from the viewport and having that change some design layer settings without me understanding it. As I recall, when I checked my design layer settings in the organization menu, 'design layer-1' was checked, active, while normally it is not. Could this be the reason I was getting unexpected display of elevations across plans as unselectable data? Clearly my grasp of design layers is flimsy at best. I got more or less the same result with Pete's suggestion as with Pat's: while in plan, clicking num lock arrow results in elevation superimposed over plan, but with many objects not displayed, implying a change of display settings of the design layer-1 or design layer floor-1, though since I haven't been using these they were configured unknowingly (maybe still at their defaults?). Seems like the prog should make an effort to keep current settings if not instructed to do otherwise. So from a plan, num lock arrow brings up design layer 'floor-1", while editing the design layer from the viewport brought up design layer 'design layer-1.' In both cases the respective design layers are turned on where they had not been (no surprise, I guess) and I could not get it off in an attempt to get back from where I came, neither was undo effective, as it doesn't work with views (?) or somesuch. So I need to configure the display settings of the design layers which are made active by these actions and learn how to de-activate the design layers, and/or learn how to work with them active.

That is a good and helpful point, Pete. Thing is, in this project I'm needing to get some docs ready for a preliminary historical review and so am as much interested in 'appearances' as 'reality.' Looks like I'm using the wrong vehicle for getting design and presentation work done at once. And I must confess while I'm a former acad user from DOS days most recently my intensive work has all been SketchUp. That's implies a rough migration path, me thinks. Also I found that some items, e.g., window walls don't display in 3d though they do in viewports (or am I wrong about that?). At any rate, I'll keep your tip in mind. Thank you.

Thanks, Pat. For me, though, that was of no help... Maybe when I have my design layers set up better. (Matter of fact, somehow trying it seems to have screwed up my saved views, bigtime: shows elevation view elements inserted into plan view with other major class and data problems.Undo ineffective; hope I managed to copy an interim backup.)

It is a big limitation of the program that one cannot select objects in viewports or do anything much in them: they are what they say they are: viewports, looky only (as if the whole gig is not a viewport, except as herein defined). But window walls, for instance, don't display in 3D mode so you can't edit them there realtime, either. I'm looking at doors and windows and walls and such in VP elevations trying to get things to look right, if not be right, and I have to shut down the view to get back to the objects to edit them and then update the view? Of course there is very slim chance that my greeness is missing something (I know I'm missing quite alot, to be sure).

Thanks much, tali and Bill. My secret hope is that my situation is not quite as dire as it sounds... likely it's just that the help is helping. For the green, workflow tips are invaluable.

I think perhaps the answer to these questions is that these things are what you as the creator want them to be. You be THE DECIDER, for better or for worse. 'Slab' usually refers to the floor structure, but it may be convenient sometimes to push some other stuff into that thickness.

What is it?

No, that much I figured out. You were clear enough. I wasn't clear enough with the 'huh?' which was pointed at editing annotations as a means of drawing, which seems a bit camouflaged.

Thank you, Pat. Thank you very much.

Embarrassed to say that I do not know how to and cannot find out how to dimension (size, not annotate) an entity as I draw it, rather than after; say a simple line, 6' long...(no grid).

Very cool and useful tip (and huh?).

This was the ticket for me to hack together (momentarily) the text part of this question...changing the size of variously sized text individually would have taken more time, unnecessarily.

Munching, munching... The distinction between the class/layer settings for the picked VP, in th OIP, and the settings for the sheet layer, in the condensed 'Organization,' are just now getting into my head........ It is likely going to be a long while before my digestion is such that the conceptual framework for these systems seems clear, concise, consistent, correct, practicable and tasty. But that may just be asking too much. Frustrating to say the least, but if you guys can do it, maybe there is hope. Thank you for your help.