Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and I respect the right to people and professionals expressing themselves, but I am wondering if I am the only one that finds the artistic style (or lack thereof) of some fellow surveyor's plats and advertisement as cringe-worthy as I do.
I deserve any and all negative comments I'll get for bringing this up, because it is a matter of taste, but there is no accounting for taste. I think it could safely be said that plats that are visually pleasing, are far more likely to be assumed as being correct. I freely admit that this shouldn't be the case, though, as some people that are brilliant in other ways will come to the office wearing plaid and stripes together. On the other hand, some people are just lazy.
I have seen quite a few examples of plats that I like far better than my own, but the percentage of ones that nearly make me ill are far greater. Examples of cardinal style sins IMO are:
Plats/Plans:
Simplex text
Blatant overuse of italics
yellow on a white background, ever
using the default carlson point block style, and on the face of the plat
neon colors on a website
using 30 different text styles on one plat
Website/Vehicle:
Full vehicle wrap advertisements
logos that looked dated in the '80s
overuse of certain styles of: plumb bobs, tripods, and north arrows for logos (I have seen some that look nice, but that's the exception - not the rule)
colors on the website that could induce a seizure
cheesy graphics
etc.
Sorry if this causes any offense. This is America, do what you like. I think these things matter more to some people than others. To me, it matters.
🙂
Wellllll...I don't necessarily disagree with your comments, BUT
I don't really care all that much about such things, IF the data (regardless of the font) on the plat has some semblance to reality!
Just look at the POS data on the "Utah Lat/Lon" thread below.
GIGO, and no amount of "prettiness" alters the fact, that no matter how much you polish a turd...it's still a turd!
o.O
Plats/plans - 1 layer but 37 different line types/colors OR 82 layers all using the same colors/linetypes ARRRGHHHH !!!!
We had a fellow who was a very good designer but would not or could not put things on appropriate layers. Water, sewer, property line, edge of pavement, whatever - layer 0. Our poor draftsmen (what few there are left in the world) spent too much time sorting things out.
Andy
I agree completely. Should have added: correct data is the prettiest thing of all - just don't wrap it in a turd?
TrueType fonts. I don't know why anyone would not be using a TrueType font in 2016.
I once worked with a CAD guy that put everything on 0, and it was all white/black.
Plumb Bill, post: 353551, member: 226 wrote: Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and I respect the right to people and professionals expressing themselves, but I am wondering if I am the only one that finds the artistic style (or lack thereof) of some fellow surveyor's plats and advertisement as cringe-worthy as I do.
I deserve any and all negative comments I'll get for bringing this up, because it is a matter of taste, but there is no accounting for taste. I think it could safely be said that plats that are visually pleasing, are far more likely to be assumed as being correct. I freely admit that this shouldn't be the case, though, as some people that are brilliant in other ways will come to the office wearing plaid and stripes together. On the other hand, some people are just lazy.
I have seen quite a few examples of plats that I like far better than my own, but the percentage of ones that nearly make me ill are far greater. Examples of cardinal style sins IMO are:
Plats/Plans:
Simplex text
Blatant overuse of italics
yellow on a white background, ever
using the default carlson point block style, and on the face of the plat
neon colors on a website
using 30 different text styles on one platWebsite/Vehicle:
Full vehicle wrap advertisements
logos that looked dated in the '80s
overuse of certain styles of: plumb bobs, tripods, and north arrows for logos (I have seen some that look nice, but that's the exception - not the rule)
colors on the website that could induce a seizure
cheesy graphics
etc.Sorry if this causes any offense. This is America, do what you like. I think these things matter more to some people than others. To me, it matters.
🙂
I will second all of this without the apologetic tone.
Steve
PS: You should have your license revoked for using yellow on a white background. I'm too old to see that crap.
Much of what was mentioned relative to plans/plats is dependent upon the final product. Not everything is a work of art. Most of it is simply communicating graphically in the simplest form possible that will complete that communication. Gilding the lily unnecessarily is pompous.
Mark Mayer, post: 353556, member: 424 wrote: TrueType fonts. I don't know why anyone would not be using a TrueType font in 2016.
AutoCAD has had independent line weights for like 20 years, right? So why are most still using color based line weights? I haven't seen a pen plotter since my private sector employer laid me off in 1994. That's my biggest gripe.
Mark Mayer, post: 353556, member: 424 wrote: I don't know why anyone would not be using a TrueType font in 2016.
I confess to dinosaur status in this regard. TT fonts were such poor performers when first introduced into AutoCAD that I never gave them a second look. Doing so is on my list of things I should do, but it's a very long list.
Jim Frame, post: 353565, member: 10 wrote: Doing so is on my list of things I should do
It's so easy. That's part of what makes it difficult to figure why they aren't used. Really improves the look of your drawings.
CADD can be used to create a drawing that is the same style as taught in drafting class in HS and College.
That was and still is the industry standard.
Proper line weight and letter size is a must for everything, OMG, don't show a utility line with text 3 times larger than the text showing lot number and acreage.
I don't mind when someone wants to personalize their style, just keep it to letter width and oblique angles and keep with the standard look the office has been using.
You can zoom in to a microdot and sign your name in the North Arrow if you want, just never inappropriately put anything on the drawing that does not belong there. I remember getting a low score in school for creating a seal of my own design. It was not legal because I had no license to place any kind of seal on a drawing, lesson learned Mr Betts.
Most especially, don't make it look like a cartoon full of bubble quotes with odd and exotic lettering and designs.
Romans or Frugal Sans or Leroy lettering are the only styles to use for everything because being simple is better than being complicated.
😉
Dave Karoly, post: 353562, member: 94 wrote: AutoCAD has had independent line weights for like 20 years, right? So why are most still using color based line weights? I haven't seen a pen plotter since my private sector employer laid me off in 1994. That's my biggest gripe.
Color me guilty. Old dog. Old tricks.
Posting some drawings would make this thread more interesting.
More of a content than style issue but construction drawings that do not have the data needed to actually build anything but do have little people, machines, and trees sprinkled throughout are a pet peeve of mine.
For websites: too much flash, also for a industry that goes to scenic and interesting places as a matter of course the number of field pictures taken in the parking lot of the office is to high.
For field work I would like to throw out:
Painting/flagging ever single shot
The use of lower case letters in layout, poor or unclear handwriting, switching colors mid job or ignoring color conventions all together
Construction layout that does not make clear what exactly is being offset and how
Placing points that can be removed with a finger and thumb alone
Traverse points in Wheelchair ramps
Marking the adjoiners property in boundary survey
Data collecting from the mons in the city
What trips me out is really good looking work that is dead wrong or contains fictions, that point where you realize the person doing the work knew how to do it right but made a decision not too is always kind of interesting.
"I deserve any and all negative comments I'll get for bringing this up, because it is a matter of taste, but there is no accounting for taste. I think it could safely be said that plats that are visually pleasing, are far more likely to be assumed as being correct. I freely admit that this shouldn't be the case, though, as some people that are brilliant in other ways will come to the office wearing plaid and stripes together...."
Human perception is indeed a curious thing and I am in full agreement with your statement above.
My VP is female, as well as our Senior Cad tech. Both of whom are very meticulous and double check every survey plat that leaves this office, but before that happens, the VP and Senior Cad tech ÛÏallowÛ me to review everything first and subsequently correct issues I missed.
Our checking procedure is in two parts:
1. Compliance with minimum technical standards. We always surpass MTS.
2. Plat aesthetic qualities. We prefer perfection with respect to intelligible readability, clearness and the ability for the recipient to understand the document.
ItÛªs worked for me for 28 years. B-)
Loyal, post: 353553, member: 228 wrote: Wellllll...I don't necessarily disagree with your comments, BUT
I don't really care all that much about such things, IF the data (regardless of the font) on the plat has some semblance to reality!
Just look at the POS data on the "Utah Lat/Lon" thread below.
GIGO, and no amount of "prettiness" alters the fact, that no matter how much you polish a turd...it's still a turd!
o.O
Loyal is correct of course. The information on the plat must be correct. However, if you have exact and correct data and you can't read it, that isn't good.
The trend I'm seeing is the "automated labeling" that happens so much in CAD. You get someone that lets the software label bearings, distances, points, and features and doesn't go through it and actually see if it is legible, then it is a problem.
CAD can do some amazing things for any user from amateur beginner to seasoned pro. But in the end, the product that goes out from me is either a hard copy on paper or a static PDF copy. In either case, all the client see is the black-on-white of the plat. It doesn't matter how clever the software was that put my labels there if you can't read or understand them.
I took hand drafting in high school (it is what got me started towards surveying). At my first job out of college, we had a designer/drafter that did everything by hand. And everything this guy did was AMAZING! It was a work of art. So when I would be working inside and drafting maps, he gave me a LOT of tips and pointers for how to make the final product look professional and be clear and concise. And since that's what the client sees, I think that's how it should be shown.
Been scanning plats, those hand drawn ones look so much better than new ones.....
Not the ones I did,,,,,,but from a professional drafter,,,,
MightyMoe, post: 353985, member: 700 wrote: Been scanning plats, those hand drawn ones look so much better than new ones.....
Not the ones I did,,,,,,but from a professional drafter,,,,
Yeah, that's my problem. My hand drafting is... less than legible? Let's just say that it makes chicken scratch look amazing by comparison.
I've seen some drafting from the 1800s (ships and details) that were true works of art. Looking at them makes me think each drawing must have taken a month with incredible minute detail.
I'm in the same boat as others here.... my hand writing (and others I work with) is shameful.