Jump to content

Does anyone draw in scale 1:1?


Petri

Recommended Posts

My newest trainees (interior designers) think that it would be a good idea to have all design layers in scale 1:1 - because in AutoCAD you always work in 1:1.

I explained about 10 times that it is only an "apparent" paper scale and that actually you work in 1:1 scale, but to no avail.

Does anyone draw in scale 1:1? Why would anyone do it?

Link to comment

Because they do not understand that they actualy draw 1:1?

Because they used to work with ACAD?

Because they do not care about seeing lineweights?

It's not important on wich scale you set your layers. The scale of the layer is just the way you want to view your drawing. So the only advantage of choosing a specific layer is that you can 'see' how you're lineweights and hatches (if they are scale dependant) will look in that scale.

So it's best to draw on a layer with the scale you most use to make prints. That way you will see beter if you're drawing will print ok. It's also good if you want to make a quick print in your design layer withouth setting up a sheet layer.

I think the person who works with the drawing should choose on which scale they like to see the drawing. It just the way you want to work.

Link to comment

Perhaps you need to approach them from the other direction, Why they should not draw at 1:1.

1:1 is simple, everything is the same, no thinking and minimum learning to do the drawing required on their part, but potentially massive problems in getting the output to look the way they want.

I have found the interior designer and landscape designer tend to be the most sensitive of all the groups as to the apperance of their drawings. Drawing at 1:1 gives you the least control (or maybe just more difficult control) over the appearance of your drawings.

By setting the layer scale at your final output (or close), you can turn on the Zoom Line Thickness pref and actually see how the drawing will look. If you draw at 1:1 and print at 1:50, then you will probably have to go back and adjust line weights to get what you want as an output image.

If they need to output at a known standard set scale, then drawing at scale also makes sense. Have they every done a drawing at 1:1 and found that because of the way they laid it out they had to either use a strang scale (1:60?), or a much larger scale (1:100) to make it fit on the desired paper size? If you draw to scale and know the paper size in advance, you can eliminate most of those problems.

If they are familiar with AC, perhaps they don't care about those issues. In which case, you either need to convince the boss to set an office standard that does use scales.

An associate of mine here in California had a similar problem, but in that case, the boss only wanted to use a single layer and no classes. The two arguments that helped change that case where 1. Why only use less than 1/2 the capabilities of a program you have paid for, and 2. That is not the way VW is used. If you try to get tech support, they will tell you you are using the program wrong and to do it the other way.

Pat

Link to comment

Tell them they're not really drawing full size in Autocad either. They're always thinking of the scale at which the drawing will be printed, and setting lineweight, text size, dimension scale, and linetype scale accordingly. The only difference is that in Autocad the user has to manage all that with a pocket calculator, and has to remember the intended scale or write it down.

The fear of not drawing full size comes from early Autocad, before viewports, when people would do very strange things to get drawings at more than one scale on the same sheet; sometimes drawing the detail many times as large as it really is so that it can be printed on the same sheet with a general view at a smaller scale.

Link to comment

I found scaling in AutoCAD really easy to understand. Draw everything full scale and upscale the "notations" and "borders" times the plot scale. After a while, you memorize all the common scales. For example, if your drawing scale is 1/8"=1-0", draw at 1:1, then plot at 1/96, etc.

You can mix scales in AutoCAD by using xrefs -- so long as you know the eventual plot scale when you are drawing the xref.

I actually got more confused with Vectorworks scaling and sheet layouts, probably from my AutoCAD experience. VW is simpler than it seems.

Link to comment
They're always thinking of the scale at which the drawing will be printed, and setting lineweight, text size, dimension scale, and linetype scale accordingly.

All these items can be saved in template drawings. I had a template for every scale. Or you can write scripts in Autolisp to change all the settings, though I never got around to it.

Also, I had a procedure for changing the scale of a drawing in midstream. That was not so easy as in VW unfortunately. It involved inserting the drawing into a template of the correct scale, rescaling the notations and border, and resaving.

Or, just switch to Vectorworks.

Link to comment

using layer scale is the best of both worlds.

you still think in real world sizes like we always have drawing board.

you still draw at presentation size (WYSIWYG), like a drawing board.

The inform is accurate like Computer are for.

The information is usable and co-ordinated like computers are for.

Link to comment

"the boss only wanted to use a single layer and no classes. The two arguments that helped change that case where 1. Why only use less than 1/2 the capabilities of a program you have paid for, and 2. That is not the way VW is used. If you try to get tech support, they will tell you you are using the program wrong and to do it the other way."

Pat -

I am one of those people who really prefers to work on a single Design Layer - and to use a plethora of Classes (I'm not sure I get the "no classes part.). For me, that IS the way that VW is used. I don't see that as being "right" or "wrong" - just the way I work. My thinking:

1) Light sources don't work across layers. (At least, they haven't in the past.) By using a single layer I don't have to create Layer Links to create rendered scenes.

2) I don't have to use "Align Layer Views" or the like to view all of the model geometry from the same direction and perspective. IMO, that extra step should be unnecessary.

FWIW, I don't work on multi-story building drawings and ViewPorts handle whatever scale variations I may need for things like details. Also, w. Saved Views and the tree structure potential in Class naming make handling even hundreds of Classes incredibly easy.

Link to comment
By drawing in the scale that you plan to print your sheets, you can tell in advance how your drawing is going to fit on your sheet.

You're talking about AutoCad, right?

With AutoCad, you insert the border at the scale you intend to plot (x96 for 1/8" scale, for example), and then you can see how much space you've got for the drawing. You still draw at 1:1 scale.

This topic is all over the place. We really need to be standing around a monitor to see how it's done.

Link to comment

"the boss only wanted to use a single layer and no classes. The two arguments that helped change that case where 1. Why only use less than 1/2 the capabilities of a program you have paid for, and 2. That is not the way VW is used. If you try to get tech support, they will tell you you are using the program wrong and to do it the other way."

Pat -

I am one of those people who really prefers to work on a single Design Layer - and to use a plethora of Classes (I'm not sure I get the "no classes part.). For me, that IS the way that VW is used. I don't see that as being "right" or "wrong" - just the way I work. My thinking:

1) Light sources don't work across layers. (At least, they haven't in the past.) By using a single layer I don't have to create Layer Links to create rendered scenes.

2) I don't have to use "Align Layer Views" or the like to view all of the model geometry from the same direction and perspective. IMO, that extra step should be unnecessary.

Andrew,

I have no problem with "you" deciding what workflow works best for you. The problem in this case was that the "boss" who would probably use VW 10 houra a year was trying to define how the rest of the staff should use the program. And to limit her learning curve (or lack of understanding), she was going cripple the "capabilities" of the program [OK, she was not actually going to take them away, but shw was going to try and make the staff not use them.]

You know and understand the capabilities and when it is appropriate, I am sure you would use multiple layers. If you don't need them for your work, then you don't need them. But I would not expect you to tell an architect to do a complete plan set for a 3 story building to use a single design layer when multiple layer (stories, details, legends, etc) make more sense for that application.

Pat

Link to comment

As a road designer the ability have layers & classes is the reason I have VectorWorks. I can't envision having road alignment options, road surfaces, drainage, utilities, cadestral, contours, DTM, landscaping, buildings, geotechnical all on one layer. Being able to turn layers off & on well viewing various objects assigned to classes provides visualizations that ease the job of designing & providing alternatives that are much appreciated by clients & the public & especially other road designers using AutoCad.

Link to comment
"I think your wrong on this one. I have a seperate layer for my lights, and I can render fine. You just need to turn that layer on."

Hmmm. Not a huge deal but I was curious enough to run a quick test: 1 extrusion on 1 layer and 4 light sources on another. I rendered the "extrusion" layer. No-go on the light sources working...

How do you render? in Design layer? or with a viewport?

It always work with viewports.

Link to comment

So...you're taking advantage of "Update All ViewPorts"? I can see that being valuable. One click and off to lunch...

Absolutely not! I think Update All Viewports is one of the most dangerous commands in VW. It should be Update All Viewport on Layer!!!!

I have a very large file of data sheets for a line of valves. There are about 20 different valves and each data sheet has about 7 viewports on it.

I acidentally selected the Update All Viewports command one night about 10PM. I decided to just let it go. At 9 AM the next morning, it was still updating.

Be very careful with the Update All Viewports command.

Pat

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...