Getting tired of this...

I'm with you 100%. Our contracts state the year of our Cad deliverable and that any conversions will be done at an additional cost and the original data governs. Meaning that if there is an issue with the conversion we are not liable. We're always the one delivering our data to subs(rarely, if ever do I need to send the data upstream) and hear similar complaints often.

Autodesk makes the conversions very unstable in my opinion...but then that's why we try to stay ahead of the technology curve...or very close to it.

When I convert files lately i simply explode everything two or thess times until it can't exlode anymore and then saveas 'xxxx version here' I really dont know how they can use that data, but they do.

I wouldn't be too hard on someone that refuses to be held hostage by Autodesk.

However, there is certainly nothing wrong with charging someone extra for converting files to suit them.

And it all began with the concept that computers would give the world access to all this shared data everywhere.
I can not get on board with programs that can not provide that concept.
In the business world, word processing programs are not any more complex than cadd programs are.
Any word processing program will open most any other word processing file and save to most any other word processing extension.
It is all about accountability and accessibility, not propriety as the industry appears to be headed.
0.02

This is a discussion that I find to be particularly maddening. The fact that we cannot do a simple conversion to a UNIVERSAL form of communication is bovine excrement. We can create standards for everything else in the world except those things that put billions of dollars into greedy bastids hands.

Oh for crying out load. How long does it take to save the drawing in an older version CAD?
It takes me about 15 seconds.

I work with a couple of engineers that still use older CAD (Ver10) and I always "dumb" the drawing down for them. Between these two engineers I have over 200 projects over the last 10 years, probably worth at least 250K. Sure I'll save it however they want it.

Dtp

foggyidea, post: 343988, member: 155 wrote: Oh for crying out load. How long does it take to save the drawing in an older version CAD?
It takes me about 15 seconds.

I work with a couple of engineers that still use older CAD (Ver10) and I always "dumb" the drawing down for them. Between these two engineers I have over 200 projects over the last 10 years, probably worth at least 250K. Sure I'll save it however they want it.

Dtp

With the Civil 3D if you save it down, you will lose alot of information blocks, symbols, etc... the points will be become text instead of points.

I always include the following with any file conversion,

Plans saved to older versions of software
Individuals or organizations that have requested that XXXXXXXXXX provide them with a computer-drawing file(s) using ‰ÛÏSave As‰Û to an older version of software then the current version do so at their own risk. Be advised that points, contours, tin lines, and other aspects of the computer-drawing file you received may not function properly. This is because of software limitations beyond the control of the XXXXXXXXXX.

If my AutoCAD 2007 aint broke, then I don't plan to "fix" (update) it.

Holy Cow, post: 343984, member: 50 wrote: This is a discussion that I find to be particularly maddening. The fact that we cannot do a simple conversion to a UNIVERSAL form of communication is bovine excrement. We can create standards for everything else in the world except those things that put billions of dollars into greedy bastids hands.

'">One Universal Standard

That being said, SE-QLD in Australia is trying to move towards a single Universal Standard. ADAC. We'll see how that plays out...

Ain't that the truth?:-@

Why not make printed documents with accompanying digital pdf format your deliverable? The CAD file is available at additional cost but the printed document and pdf is the only "official" documents.

C3d has an "Export to AutoCAD" function which is just a little different than "Saveas". It does a more thorough job of converting the special C3d entities to plain old AutoCAD entities. But it isn't a whole lot more complicated to operate.

Anyone who is using 16 year old software, or AutoCAD LT, should expect to have to make a special request to get compatible drawing data from a surveyor. There is no justification for getting "all up in arms" - unless he did make such a special request in advance.

By the way, IMO, AutoCAD dwg format is the de facto industry standard. That and Landxml.

I think it's humorous that some people feel as though the "latest and greatest" version of some software should be THE industry standard. My clients provide me with a multitude of various drawings and various versions. We do a real good job of getting by with Bentley. Every once in a while I run into one I can't open, but that's not too big a deal. In my particular case I rarely have contact with, or even know the name of the entity that produced the drawing. I usually work up our R/W calcs from a pdf anyway.

It's increasingly apparent the AutoCAD folks won't be happy until the only people that can actually see a dwg are their paying subscribers. Let them enjoy the view from their ivory towers, I have a living to make.

I have found that people (myself included) often see that the "obvious" standard should be whatever standard they are using.

I will often be contracted to do boundary and topography work that is sent out to other companies (e.g. engineers and architects) for them to use in their design process. And, I find that often they aren't using Civil3D. Some are using older versions (e.g. AutoCAD 2007 LDT), some are using different versions (e.g. AutoCAD LT), and some are using different programs (e.g. Microstation). I will export to these other formats and happily send them the files. However, as has been mentioned, a lot of information can be "lost in translation".

The biggest issue I get is the point data for my topography shots. When my drawings are exported to any format that is not a Civil3D-compatible format, the points becomes simple blocks. Then, I get the call that goes something like this:

Them: The text on these points is rather small. Can you resend the drawing with the text bigger?
Me: Well, the size of the text is a function of the drawing scale when I export it. I can up the scale for export and resend it.

Then, after I do that:

Them: So the text for the points is all overlapping and I can't read the elevations and descriptions. Can you resend it so the text isn't overlapping?
Me: Well, if I go through and adjust every single point so that the text isn't overlapping before I export it, that would take me like 4 hours because there are over 1000 points. I'd have to bill that time to you.
Them: What? They don't all have to be moved. Can't you just move a couple of them so I can see them?
Me: Can't you do that?
Them: I don't see what the big deal is to move a couple of points. The other surveyors don't have this problem.
Me: I'm actually not seeing a problem. On my end, the points look just fine.
Them: Let me send you a plot of what I'm seeing.
Me: No, I know what the problem is. But I'm telling you that there are only two ways to solve it. One is me taking 4 hours to manually adjust the position of the text on almost every point in the drawing. The other is for you to use a version of AutoCAD that handles points in a database. I'd be happy to send you an export of my points file.

I absolutely understand using older versions of AutoCAD (or non-AutoCAD). I absolutely want to provide a product that my clients can use. I just need them to understand the work involved to provide them these things. I don't want to "hold their hand" and explain to them how AutoCAD works just because they want to 1) have it they way they want it, 2) have it right now, and 3) have it for free.

Scott Ellis, post: 343995, member: 7154 wrote: With the Civil 3D if you save it down, you will lose alot of information blocks, symbols, etc... the points will be become text instead of points.

Exactly, Include surface data, profile data (existing and proposed), cross sections, survey figures...the list goes on and on.

Saving back or even export to CAD is the easy part. Having it actually work on the receiving end with actual Civil3d Data (not plain lines and blocks) is the diffcult part.

As skywd has so eloquently pointed out...it ends up costing me $ to address these things.....which is why the very specific electronic deliverable needs to be clearly identified in the contract. More importantly it needs to be understood by both parties and not just some wording thrown in to appease the owners.

On the topic of standards, I find this comic particularly applicable.

https://xkcd.com/927/

Tommy Young, post: 343970, member: 703 wrote: I wouldn't be too hard on someone that refuses to be held hostage by Autodesk.

However, there is certainly nothing wrong with charging someone extra for converting files to suit them.

Well said. No software is right for everyone. That includes Traverse PC, Carlson, Civil 3D, etc. As surveyors, we are used to looking at the evidence and making decisions for ourselves. To be scolded for making a decision that is correct to us is not fair or rational. Every surveyor is used to weighing the evidence to come to a correct conclusion. If Civil 3D or Carson or MicroSurvey or Traverse PC or any other software is the right decision for you, it is the right decision... Period. No one but you has the right to make that decision.

Having said that, of course billing for the additional time it takes to convert a file is reasonable. What isn't reasonable is if your software provider makes it difficult for you to convert the file to something usable by others. I have found that LandXML files work very well in most cases. How difficult is it to produce a Land XML file in Civil 3D?

Pain free. Takes a matter of seconds. Rather intuitive also, which isn't a given with many C3d commands.

Yer ahead of me I still use LDD 2006! Works perfect for what we do. When time comes to change it sure ain't gonna be anything from Autodesk.

I haven't had time to really examine this (understanding Linux Mint has priority) but so far it looks very promising:

https://www.bricsys.com/en_INTL/bricscad/interface/#featuresNav

I think Jim Frame uses this.
B-)