Transitioning LDD to Carlson

It took about 60 days of playing before I was comfortable to leave LDD3 and start full on Carlson... but after some time with Carlson you will regret not switching years ago.

I suggest getting a demo, testing it, making sure it is going to perform as you need/expect it to. I would also finish out the year on your current setup and start a new year fresh FULL on Carlson.

I transitioned from Carlson to Land Desktop, then from Land Desktop to Civil 3D, and now that I work for myself, I am back with Carlson. It's just easier to survey calculate and draft with Carlson. Simpler and faster.

Land Desktop worked, but there always seemed to be a built-in lag in the software. The adjustment routines stink and I don't think they changed from the beginning.

Civil 3D is great for surface generation and editing. I actually enjoyed drafting topo with C3D. Labeling is very advanced and can do a lot of things, if you know how to build the label styles. Parcel creation was flaky. It would work, but wait till you have several thousandths of error in a lot, or a curve. Someone should tell Autodesk that boundaries are based off points and not lines. As far as survey commands, they could have ported some commands from LDT menus and saved us some headaches. (Yes, I know about the transparent commands- they work poorly.)

Inverse, traverse, and sideshot are all I need to do my work. Drawing lines between point numbers is very simple and the reason I chose Carlson way back when.

Softdesk does not ignore the surveyor. AutoDesk bought them and has done VERY little to expand the functionality.LDD was Softdesk "reworked" and AutoDesk has been trying to kill it for YEARS.
If you take a close look at the Carlson Survey with embedded AutoCad, I think that you will find that a lot of your LISP routines are there, just called something else. I think I had ONE that was not there. Until I learned how to do the same thing Carlson's way, and that even worked better.
The transition from LDD is minimal. Functions are very similar, just renamed to something else.
I talked my company into switching over from AutoCad to Carlson and have not looked back since. It just makes economic sense. AND once you learn how to use it and get all the bells and whistles set up you will find that it does much more than LDD did and much faster. (It workes in "real time" insted of the multiple steps I had to do in LDD. I LOVED my LDD, but Civil3D in not LDD, costs too much and is way too cumbersome for my tastes.)

If you know your way around Survey & Civil CAD programs, it should be an easy transition. This guide could also be a good investment to help you out:

A Practical Guide to Carlson Survey 2013

:beer:

I do not know how well Carlson with Intellicad works, but Carlson Stand Alone with embedded Autocad (about $3500.00) is a great program. If it is not in Carlson you probably didn't really need it. We have both Carlson Survey Stand Alone and C3D and they both do a good job but Carlson is 1/2 the cost and does not have the burden of a $1k per year subscription.

If you are using LISPs you made, Carlson Standalone is not for you. The subscription price is the real savings. But wait, a transition from a decade old software package means you did not really go with the subscription in the past.

I went from Softdesk's Survey Complete (cad 12) to LDD3 and the transition was seamless as they were the same program. The one thing that drives me crazy to this day are the points. You can work with them though.

I agree 100% with the points comment.

The point that the two of us tried to make was the fact that the "custom lisp" stuff is probably already in Carlson Survey. That is the case that I hit. I had 9 or 10 "custom lisp" routines and found all but one of them already in Carlson. )Evidently their software geeks read The Swamp also.)
Until they get Intellicad where it needs to be, the lack of LISP ability is not a reason not to get the embedded version. Hopefully, the day will come when Intellicad has the stability and performance of the embedded AutoCad version. When that day comes, I will switch over.

The Intellicad version runs LISPs... I runs circles around LDD with it. Those still paying for autoDesk are simply getting burned on the price for reluctance to change.

but the Carlson geeks won't have one that you have written unless you send it in

if you are just downloaded lsp files then they probably have them

i recall one a guy made that was slick enough - TRIM and EXTEND at the same time.

it is on my list to learn lsp, but i have a few other things that trump it at the moment

My biggest concern isn't going from LDD to Carlson, it's going from AutoCAD to IntelliCAD, which is why I want to keep the option to purchase regular AutoCAD in the future, and install Carlson over it, which the intelliCAD version offers. I know that Stand Alone AutoCAD/Carlson is a good deal, but LISP is really important to me. I probably have 100+ LISPs, and I'm always looking for new ways to incorporate LISPs to save time and do things "my way".

I've used Carlson before, and their canned FTF routine is lightyears better than LDDs, but Carlson had some weirdness about it, too, like I recall that "endpoint" would snap to the ends of the cross of a point node, so you had to be very careful when selecting the endpoint of line if it had a point node there. Some other stuff I didn't like, but overall I thought Carlson was good, just needed some getting used to.

You can buy Carlson with embedded ACAD for a lot cheaper than that - $2600 or so (legal copy - don't worry).

Buy the embedded ACAD version. You won't regret it. It'll be the ACAD that you're familiar with. So you'll only have to learn the Carlson surveying routines, etc.

> The point that the two of us tried to make was the fact that the "custom lisp" stuff is probably already in Carlson Survey. That is the case that I hit. I had 9 or 10 "custom lisp" routines and found all but one of them already in Carlson. )Evidently their software geeks read The Swamp also.)
> Until they get Intellicad where it needs to be, the lack of LISP ability is not a reason not to get the embedded version. Hopefully, the day will come when Intellicad has the stability and performance of the embedded AutoCad version. When that day comes, I will switch over.

I've written dozens of lisps over the years, and I still use quite a few every day that I've added to my menus to do things Carlson can't. I cringe to think how much productivity I would lose if I couldn't use them. I'd recommend staying away from the embedded acad version.

For example?

Not trying to be contradictory, but are you saying that these routines are so necessary and unique that you can't find a way to adapt by learning new commands or work-arounds?

We're talking about a program that costs less than half what C3D does, and which seems on its way to becoming the industry standard.

> For example?
>
> Not trying to be contradictory, but are you saying that these routines are so necessary and unique that you can't find a way to adapt by learning new commands or work-arounds?
>
> We're talking about a program that costs less than half what C3D does, and which seems on its way to becoming the industry standard.

What I'm saying is that if the OP is lisp-literate, there's no point in investing in a package that will leave his hands tied. What if he needs to compute the 3D slope area of a surface model? I do that often, and if I have to choose between spending more $$ and buying Carlson's Civil Module or running my lisp, I'll save the $$ and run my lisp. I also utilize my lisps to attach/retrieve extended entity data, plus lots more cool stuff. Guess I'm a custom operator.

I'm not sure, but I bet that Carlson does that.

If you're a surveyor, then Carlson can probably do everything that you need it to do - unless you have some sort of niche that requires something special.

If you're a draftsman, Carlson will do the job, but I'd bet that ACAD probably has some extras - so you might want to stay with that.

Believe me, I hated Carlson when I first started using it, having used LDD/Softdesk/AdCADD for 12 years prior. Now, I wouldn't go back, even if it cost less than Carlson.

> I'm not sure, but I bet that Carlson does that.
>
> If you're a surveyor, then Carlson can probably do everything that you need it to do - unless you have some sort of niche that requires something special.
>
> If you're a draftsman, Carlson will do the job, but I'd bet that ACAD probably has some extras - so you might want to stay with that.
>
>
> Believe me, I hated Carlson when I first started using it, having used LDD/Softdesk/AdCADD for 12 years prior. Now, I wouldn't go back, even if it cost less than Carlson.

Nope, according to Carlson tech support only the civil module will do that. Only the civil module will do cut/fill contours and cut/fill grid ticks too. I process surface models every day, so I know my work load is somewhat atypical. Overall, after making a few tweaks Carlson is a good product despite the quirks and occasional crashes, much better than Eagle Point. Never had the misfortune of using LDD. I need my lisp.

Ok, you know what's right for you.