Plotting to pdf

I was thinking of abandining the plt files and start using pdf format. I
have not had time to tinker with this option and would like to know if
anyone is doing this. My main reason being that we send plot files to
reprographic companies or clients and it would be easier to send pdf. We
currently use acad 2002 and ADT 3.3 on windows 2000 pro.

Can you get the line merge option to work?
(ex. text and lines in shaded areas are visible)

Does the PDF format convert the ctb/stb file correctly?
(some of our lighter line weights .001, .003, .005, .007) I was told
once that some of these are half pixels and may not convert correctly.
The plotters we use here read them without a problem.

Are all text styles recognized and print with clarity?

Can you customize your paper sizes to arch sizes ie. 30X42, 15X21 for
half size prints?

To plot to pdf do you use adobe acrobat writer, distiller, of a third
party application?

I may add to this list, these are my main concerns.Any input would be
appreciated. Thank you for your time.

 

We've done this with great success. Why don't you just try it, and verify
the results for yourself?
___

 

I suceeded on small format 11x17 and 8.5x11 but have an issue
with the shading and the lines merging. I have acrobat so I
also have pdf writer and distiller but cant see lines through
shaded areas.

 

While the lines merge option is there, in fact with any postscript device it
is ignored. Lines Merge is really just an old HP kludge anyway, and many
drivers actually ignore it. Our Ricoh laser printers ignore it too.
So to get a good looking PDF, you will need to do a DrawOrder to move your
poches to the back. Unless you are in R2002 and the poche is being Xrefed,
in which case you need to use the DrawOrderByColor ExpressTool, and choose
the handles option, thereby loosing associativity of hatches

Gordon

 

Most reprographers have Repro Desk. I am not trying to sell you anything
since our Océ Client Tools are free. You can download them from
www.oceplancenter.com. The LDF file format was specifically created so that
you could send plot files to reprographic companies.

 

Thank You

 

Hi Steve,

I still recomand the PLT format (HPGL2) for large format plotting. (I
explicit mention LARGE FORMAT)

See what happen when you create a PLT file.....

-From you app. (ACAD) you create a PLT file trought the driver. (The drivers
are free)
-Then you send the PLT file to the reprographics company. (There are
free/lowcost viewer out to check the PLT file)
-In normal case, they only need to "copy" this files to the plotter.
-The output is in 99.99 % correct. (if used the correct driver)
-The output is very fast. (Procesing time is just a few seconds, in most
cases)

Ok now see the PDF way.....

-From you app. (ACAD) you create a PDF file trought Acrobat or any other PDf
writer. (Acrobat costs money, some writers are free..)
-Then you send the PDF file to the reprographics company.
-The reprographic company need to open the PDF file(Acrobat reader), set
paper size, speed, orientation etc...
(Or they have a third party software,for plotting PDF)
-Then Acrobat again need to use the driver for the plotter (HPGL2), and
create a PLT to send to the plotter.
(Most of all large format plotters does NOT understand PDF)
-If all settings in Acrobat, while creating, and the operator on the
copyshop do everything correct, you get a correct output.
(But I can tell you that plotting PDF is not always just "simple", and
without problems.)
-The procesing time is from a few seconds to a few minutes....

So here again....
1. ACAD -> PLT is one conversion only. (One conversion and two posibilitys
of error : 1. ACAD 2. driver)
2. ACAD -> PDF / PDF -> PLT is two conversion. (4 posibilitys of error 1:
ACAD, 2 : PDF writer 3: PDF reader 4: driver)

What do you thing is better ?

For the copyshop it's much more work plotting a PDF, then still using the
good old PLT (HPGL2) format.

This is only my opinion..

In fact some copyshops has begon to "charge" more for plotting PDF then PLT.
The reason is simple :
They need more manpower to do 300 PDF plots, then to do 300 PLT output and
in most cases the plotters need longer processing time.
(so the output/hour is slower)


Regards
Toni

 

Thanks for your suggestion. My reason for wanting to use
pdf is because of my Repro company. We used to use a company
that had everything worked out. Then one of the partners took
it on his own to switch our Repro to save money. Now, I get to
deal with the headache. With Reprodesk - the plot flie retains
pens. For example reprodesk(mots widely used) also has a .pen
file. We recieve files from consultants and bundle the package.
Then send it to the Printer. 4 different trades 4 different .pens.
We use a variety of engineers and keeping track of their .ctb is
hard enough.

Steve

 

Fully agree.

Govert

 

If you are using repro desk you have a couple of options. Have your consultants send you plot files and add them in with your repro desk job. There is a pen set called "HPGLAUTO.PEN" that seems to work the best overall in repro desk. Another option is to set your consultants up with repro desk as well. They can send you their portion of the job and you can merge it with yours. Check with your repro company to help you out. If they can't talk to your boss about going back to a company that can.

If your looking at PDF's check out Acrobat 6.0. If your running a full version of Auto Cad you can do complete directories without opening auto cad. It also has the capabilities of controlling layers.

 

Use a PDF writer from Bluebeam especially developed for Autocad. works great, very fast, and amazing resolution. Relatively small file size. No difference in quality between large plots (PLT vs PDF) when using Bluebeam.

We've slowly switched and it allows project managers without autocad access to plot files at any size, safe, and can be printed to any device. Why create PLT's for different printer/plotters.