You can use a template interchangeably, but the process of field to finish is completely different so you can't mix those. You can't take your C3D description keys, point styles, point labels, survey figures, etc. and make those work in Carlson. So yes, you would have to create the Carlson specific files from (mostly) scratch.?ÿ
Here is what is currently possible:
- The Carlson Field-to-Finish does provide many field/feature code import options including one for C3D:
Specifically, the Code Table Settings -- Import Civil3D Codes provides the method to import "Civil 3D .fdb_xdef file codes into the Carlson Field to Finish (fld) code definition file."
- Additionally, common Civil 3D object data found in DWG files (e.g. points, centerlines, surfaces, etc) can be brought into Carlson via the File -- Import -- Civil 3D -- All command. While I'm not a personal fan of putting data back into proprietary Civil 3D objects, there is also a File -- Export -- Civil 3D Drawing command to aid with interoperability.
As stated, drawing template (*.dwt) files can be used interchangeably between the products. The ability to specify which DWT file Carlson uses upon start-up can be found under Settings -- Carlson Configure -- Startup Settings. The placement of the DWT file can go just about anywhere and a suggested location can be found/specified via the CAD Options routine:
I hope this information helps.
The ability to import codes would be new since the last time I used Carlson. That seems great, though without styles there would still be a little work involved in the translation. Still good to know.
Since we were talking about templates I think item 2 would be outside of the template formation. I've worked at a couple of places where they had project specific items (points, alignments, surfaces) already in their template. Not a good idea IMHO.
I am curious though, about the difference between Import Civil 3D All and using LandXML. Unless I'm misunderstanding you and you're saying you can import things like surface styles and alignment styles??ÿ
@blitzkriegbob The primary difference between the C3D Import All and the LandXML route is that C3D users don't have to first export their (data) to LandXML and then export their C3D to "regular" AutoCAD DWG to share with clients that don't have C3D.
The intent is to directly convert data in one form into data in another form (styles notwithstanding). Between the two described methods, the end result is essentially the same... the ability to use and share data that is otherwise stored in the DWG in the form of proprietary objects. Another benefit is that this conversion can be performed outside the AutoCAD environment thereby giving the market a choice of technology products when it comes to the utilization of data.
Having said this, the only "style" information that can currently be converted via the C3D Import All is that established for traditional Plan & Profile sheets (this has been given as a common and "complex" challenge when trying to match output standards between the applications). "Surface styles and alignment styles" (and others) can be generally replicated with minimal effort by the end-user.
While we're on the subject, I've been a staunch advocate (regardless of the technology used to develop a project) that the data for the project be externalized to a future-ready file format (such as LandXML) at desired milestones and?ÿcertainly at the conclusion of the project for future recovery procedures. I continually receive inquires from persons who say "We have a lot of legacy data produced by application "X" (perhaps no longer developed or supported by the original vendor or desired by the person/organization), how can we use this data today?"
The effort to develop data conversion tools can be fairly substantial. Especially when the data format continually evolves.
My recommendation for organizations has been (again, regardless of the adopted technology platform) to prepare for the data needs by those that follow us; (say) 20 years from now. The list of technology providers over the past few decades has been expansive. Many are still out there today; others have faded or vanished from the market. Yet, the data produced by these applications can serve as an important component for future projects. "Analog" paper plan sets have served an important and historical role as they are human-readable (for the most part) but require stringent and bulky storage efforts to preserve their content. Digital plan sets can be stored and conveyed electronically but the format of the data can be problematic when the digital (and often binary) format becomes unavailable, unsupported or too expensive.
If we, the market, take the few extra moments at the completion of a plan to put our data into a redundant format that we (and/or others) can access in the future, the value and usage of that data increases (dare I say vaguely similar to that offered by the Rosetta Stone). The process takes only a few moments and tends to make the data much more portable and useable into the future.
I hope this information helps.
My recommendation for organizations has been (again, regardless of the adopted technology platform
) to prepare for the data needs by those that follow us; (say) 20 years from now. The list of technology providers over the past few decades has been expansive. Many are still out there today; others have faded or vanished from the market. Yet, the data produced by these applications can serve as an important component for future projects. "Analog" paper plan sets have served an important and historical role as they are human-readable (for the most part) but require stringent and bulky storage efforts to preserve their content. Digital plan sets can be stored and conveyed electronically but the format of the data can be problematic when the digital (and often binary) format becomes unavailable, unsupported or too expensive.If we, the market, take the few extra moments at the completion of a plan to put our data into a redundant format that we (and/or others) can access in the future, the value and usage of that data increases (dare I say vaguely similar to that offered by the Rosetta Stone). The process takes only a few moments and tends to make the data much more portable and useable into the future.
Very well said.
This is why I am really excited about the new NGS data formats for observations, especially since they will cover all types of obs.
XML format is easy to manipulate or transform.
LandXML has a few drawbacks but is supported by a ton of programs.
Actually, I'm leaning more towards Carlson now.?ÿ If I can load my Civil 3D template and a big chunk of the stuff will immediately work fine in Carlson then that's probably good enough.?ÿ And if I don't like it after a year I'll be out about the same amount of money as a Civil 3D sub, so really not much to lose.
What do the Carlson users here think of the surface building in the software??ÿ I've been told it's noticeably worse than Civil 3D, so I'm curious to get additional feedback.
I've used both. I wouldn't say that Carlson is worse at surfaces than C3D, it's just slightly different. To me the biggest annoyance with Carlson is when it comes to editing a surface. I'm going from memory, but I think when you're trying to edit triangles that Carlson changes the color of them to white and does away with other entities within the surface. I like that C3D lets me have a surface style for editing that will keep colors and entities that I like to see while I'm doing the editing. I try to avoid editing triangles in Carlson by spending time creating a tight boundary (shrink wrap).?ÿ
The company I worked for always negotiated the price of AutoCAD while I worked there. Normally getting the previous year??s price when they tried to raise the price on them. They did that for several years while keeping the price the same. I bought the assets of the company a few months ago and looked at getting some more seats straight from Autodesk. Through their negotiations with their reseller, they were paying several thousand dollars less per year on the six seats of AutoCAD they had. ImaginIt is the reseller if anyone is interested.?ÿ
