robdyck

Makes sense, I guess. And last time I checked, the customer is always right!

Interesting project Bob. There must be a reason for the desired remodel, because at first glance of your photos, the existing front of the building looks a heckuva lot nicer than the rendering (no offense intended).

Layers, make 'em all black. Then you can leave the color on. Most users have a separate 'working' layer set with colors for their own distinction, and another layer set for the drawings that get sent to layout. FWIW that focal blur on the edges of your rendering makes me wipe my eyes to get the sleep out! I'd suggest getting rid of that and using a photo editor to 'fog' the edges.

@Tdgdesign I've got a question: In the sample pdf, you've got the framed exterior portion of the building greyed out, but the foundation shows concrete fill. I'm sure you'll have a reason, just curious as to why? I'm not sure if that drawing was close to complete but I noticed the joining line for your greyed out polyline of the structure. Not sure if you are aware of the polyline subtraction tool that will create a clean hole in another polyline.

I get that, but in your posted pdf, it doesn't appear to show any of the characteristics that make 'line drawings' unique. Here's a thought. Perhaps experiment with 2 sections overlaid. A vector view in the back with all your structural items, maybe grayed out a bit, and then a line drawing on top with only architectural items visible. If you can reduce the number of items displayed in the line drawing, you'll get more speed and reliability, and some experimentation might still offer the style you want.

Without a posted plan to examine, its difficult to zero in on the issue. That being said, I don't see the reason to use the 'line drawing' style for those sections. It will greatly reduce performance, and it looks to me like a 'vector view' will provide the same results, but with the benefit of more stability and increased speed.

Layers can control that. Maybe post a screenshot of a few sample layout pages?

I'm using it now to complete an enormous house plan and I did notice that every edit was slower, but I kinda forgot about the update and that it might be the reason. It's taking about 10-15 seconds to complete a simple task like moving a wall over by a few inches. I'll do a restart and I'll let you know if I notice anything. If any file will cause a crash, it's the one I'm completing now!

I opened the pdf. I don't see your problem...Can you point it out?

@ACADuser If you want to avoid 3d I like your idea of a 'simple symbol'. I recently did a timber component plan and I used notes to schedule it. I didn't like it because the note has no direct correlation to the object. However keep in mind that notes are really the only choice we have for compartmentalizing schedules. Your simple symbols will become 'fixtures' and I don't think you can pick and choose fixture types for schedule reporting. They're either in or out. They should be layer controlled along with their labels, or like notes, allow us to create our own types of fixtures. Not an easy decision! Let us know how you choose to proceed.

@Renerabbitt That may or may not work for what @ACADuser has in mind but that's a great tool to have in the tool belt. I like your idea and it will get used! Thanks for the video.

I've recently started using text macros more and more and with thoughtful use, I'm very pleased with how useful they can be. Multiple different rich text objects would still have to be selected or replaced individually, right?

One at a time. For some reason you can't edit the text of multiple rich text objects. The dilemma: do you use rich text objects for the improved editing and because onscreen, it's easier on your eyes, or stick to standard text which allows multiple editing, doesn't slow your computer down, but makes your eyes bleed? Experience and repetition tells you when and where to use which style. Maybe someone else knows how to multiple edit the text for rich text?

I'd suggest you don't use a cad detail. Remember that if you adjust those cabinets you'll have to redo the cad detail...not cool. Also, if you adjust your cabinets, in elevation view you may lose your dimension....also not cool. For stability, I'd suggest placing a 'point marker' in you elevation view. It wont leave you in the middle if the night. You can adjust its appearance, layer, and draw order so no one else knows it's there! You might not like cad lines and points, but I don't like weeding for altered or missing dimensions. Point markers and cad lines placed behind your drawing are a great way to add dimensions that don't have to be redone if theres changes. Vertical items like toe kicks, c tops, wall cabinet tops don't get altered often. You can edit cabinets to your hearts content without losing the dimensions!

Its simpler. No casing, no lintel, no sill. Adjust your frame size to make it smaller than the wall. For a PVC window with a nailfin, I'd use 3" with a -1.5" offset. Experiment and in the window dbx, switch it to plan view, or show it with the wall.

Internet.

i agree, It is messy. As mentioned earlier, dimensions should be to cabinet boxes only. That should also be mentioned in general notes. I would never dimension to a countertop, unless it was a critical area, and that would be shown in a separate detail, larger scale and noted.

It's not complicated. Send the ortho overview to layout, send a floorplan to layout. Using draw order tools ensure the floorplan is on top of the overview. Set layers as desired. No mess, no fuss, repeatable, automatically updates.

Here's on with more squiggle, blurrier paint, and the top cut off at 78" .

Yes. This one took me 20 seconds. It's an orthographic floor overview, watercolor, line drawing on. Simple method would be to send it to layout behind a layerset showing only the room labels.

You can also copy the window in place, and adjust all of it's settings separately. Windows and doors can occupy the same space at the same time. Separate layer control, schedule control etc. Also handy for creating accurate casing details around entry doors mulled with transom windows. Another example would be getting glass railing to display accurately across separate view styles. In a vector view elevation, I don't like glass railing blocking the view of the wall behind, so I always create the glass on a separate layer which is turned off for vector views, but on for most other renderings.

https://3dwarehouse.sketchup.com/

Use a polyline solid to model your post, at least if you want it's behavior to remain stable and predictable. It's simple and it keeps you in control! Draw the p-solid in elevation / section view.

The frame of the window absolutely works different than the jamb of a door! Really annoying for making entry door with transom units. Sounds like you're working through the trial and error approach that it takes to learn this behavior.

Just a little tease, huh? Show us more! Looks like a great project!