V14 - What happened to QuickDraw?

Jim Canale

 What happened to QuickDraw?  I was finally getting accustomed to using it to create a bunch of 2D orthogonal views in model space.   My experience with Generate Drafting Views is not as good.  It generates orthogonal views in separate paper space windows.   

Eric Fredrickson

I too am disappointed in the loss of xsolids and Quickdraw.  It appears that it will take me significantly longer to generate part models and drawings of them using the new version.  The drawings we produce can have 15 or more views with multiple sections.  I am sure the Generate Drafting Views can generate them, but we put different line types on different layers and change colors of specific line entities which I have not figured out how to do with Generate Drafting Views.  Maybe there will be some detailed instructions on how to change the views generated and do what I have mentioned here.

I know that I can use flatshot multiple times to generate views, but it is much more time consuming and does not put hidden lines on a separate layer like Quickdraw did.  Please bring it back.

Sakko

have a look at this thread
https://forum.bricsys.com/discussion/21606#21608
changing the visual style named Mechanical Drafting, or creating modified copies of it
and making them current for the respective viewports (...Drafting Views..) could be a solution...

Hans De Backer

We are currently working on improving/extending the control over the output generated by BmGenDraft, scheduled for Q1 2014

Jim Canale

I tried "Generate Drafting Views" briefly.  Very frustrating.  It places the views in paper space.    I want my views in model space, where they belong.  Paper space is for printing.   I couldn't figure out how to size and position the views.  They appeared to be locked.   They are also shaded, and I couldn't figure out how to apply dimensions.  I'd rather use Flatshot for every view, but it is labor intensive.

Richard Webb

I, too, was a QuickDraw addict. It was certainly, well, a quick way of getting a good set of 2D views. That approach does have a couple of real flaws (although one can work around them).

The biggest problem with QuickDraw is that the results are static; changes to the parent model do not cause corresponding changes in the QuickDraw view. It can, of course, be deleted, regenerated, and dropped back in the same position to align correctly in the paper space view. But those are several extra steps, with the side effect that dimension associations are broken.

The other problem is that one ends up with a lot of 2D entities in the 3D model space where they really don't belong. Model space for the objects and paper space for the views, annotations, and drawing frames is a better parsing.

So, yeah, I miss it also and I'll certainly keep V13 around for maintenance on existing drawings. But in the long run I do think that paper space viewports are the better method. I'll just have to re-train myself a bit for the different workflow.

Jim Canale

I don't mind if they want to develop "Generate Drafting Views", but I wish they would still include QuickDraw.  I want to make my 2D drawings in model space.  Also, since I still don't have a lot of experience in 3D, I am having problems incorporating some features in my 3D models.  I have had to finish the part specification in the 2D world.   I'm sure once I am a pro at 3D, having self updating 2D views will be helpful, but I would still want them in model space, for reasons too involved to go into right here.

Scott McKenzie

 Just my thoughts, I too am really missing QuickDraw - please bring it back, it was simple and an excellent way to make a bunch of views. The new (and old) methods of creating views from models require a lot of extra steps to get something close to what you could get right out of the box with QuickDraw.  That being said, the new commands are impressive in what they can do, but, for what I need to do with the drawings they are making extra work for me.

Jim Canale

 I don't understand why Bricsys replaced Quickdraw with a command which places inaccessible 2D views in separate viewports on a paper space layout.  To fill the open space on your paper space template, you have to position each view separately, then scale the conglomerate of views.  Then re-position the views, re-scale,  re-position, re-scale, etc., until it fits properly.    It is a tedious process.   Then you dimension the separate views from paper space!   If you use Ordinate Dimensioning, you have to activate the viewport, create a UCS Origin, then turn the viewport off and do your dimensioning .   How counter-intuitive is that!  It goes against all the concepts I learned when I took up Autocad and Intellicad.    I was told the new system keeps model space uncluttered, and changes to the 3D model are automatically transferred to the 2D views.  (That's nice.) 

I still think it's easier to create the 2D views in model space, dimension them there, open a viewport on the template and use "Zoom Extents" to fit the views.    Much faster.  As for keeping model space uncluttered, couldn't they have just as easily created a second model space for the ouput of QuickDraw?   AND automatically updated the contents of Model Space #2 when the 3D model was changed?

I apologize if it seems to Bricsys staff that I am grousing, and don't appreciate their work.  I DO!   You are creating an amazing product for a reasonable price, and the support has been FANTASTIC.  (Just try and get any help from the "big guys" at Autodesk, etc.)  I just want BricsCAD to be THE BEST!

Richard Webb

Play around with VIEWBASE in the 14.2 release. I think you'll find it to be quite a bit nicer than the setup in 14.1 family. The views now are true 2D entities, so dimensioning and snaps are more "normal" and we have hidden-line layers back.

WRT scaling, I'd suggest submitting a support request so that it gets an "official" look by the support team. Selecting (say) four generated views and then scaling up by a factor changes the size of the viewports but the scale change doesn't "flow down" to the generated views inside of them. That sounds like it would be do-able (yeah, because *I* don't have to program it ;-) just by having the viewport object's scale method chain to its child objects.

Hans De Backer

@Richard Webb:

...Selecting (say) four generated views and then scaling up by a factor changes the size of the viewports but the scale change doesn't "flow down" to the generated views inside of them. That sounds like it would be do-able (yeah, because *I* don't have to program it ;-) just by having the viewport object's scale method chain to its child objects.

If the intent is not just to scale the size of the boundaries of the selected views, but also to change the scale of what is displayed inside the viewports, 
setting 'Display Locked' to 'No' will make the scaling 'flow down'

@Jim,
using the dwg format is an attractive and obvious choice to exchange drawings, because many applications out there can display, print, annotate or edit them.
Introducing Model space #2 boils down to modifying the dwg format into something else: great, but it would be the end of exchanging drawings with other parties.

Still, the above remark should not give the impression we do not listen to user feedback, we really do, we evaluate it carefully and appreciate it, often learn from it. Please don't stop sending us your feedback, it is taken into account and helpful.
We intend to further improve the approach for generated views, thanks for bearing with us, and sharing the intention to go for the best possible result.

Richard Webb

@Hans De Backer:
If the intent is not just to scale the size of the boundaries of the selected views, but also to change the scale of what is displayed inside the viewports, 
setting 'Display Locked' to 'No' will make the scaling 'flow down'

Of course! And that can all be done for all affected viewports at one time by drag-selecting and then changing the "Display Locked" item in the property window. Excellent!

Eric Fredrickson

The new generate drawing views is a huge improvement over what was in the last version.  I just have a couple of questions.  Compared to Quickview, there is one view missing.  The back view is not available.  Also, Quickview took into account the current UCS when generating views.  It appears that to get the views I want, I will have to rotate the model itself to get the particular views I am looking for.  Also, when sections views are generated, section lines are also added to the view you selected.  I cannot figure out how to revise these.  The lines and annotation are obscuring the part detail in the view and the lettering is too large.  I need to be able to position these lines and the end arrow lines where they will not interfere with where I want the dimensions placed.  I know I can delete them and manually add my own lines and annotation,but I was wondering if I am just missing something here.  Adding the capability to save the views back to model space is the other piece that I need.  Thanks Bricsys.

Eric Fredrickson

What I meant to say at the end of my last post was that I needed the new capability to get the generated drawing views back into model space and to thank Bricsys for providing that feature.

Louis_Verdonck

 Dear Eric

You wrote: "...It appears that to get the views I want, I will have to rotate the model itself to get the particular views I am looking for."

Please notice the ORIENTATION option of the VIEWBASE command, which allows to choose the orientation of the MAIN view, which is the Front View (parallel to the YZ-plane of the WCS. Other options are: Back, Left, Right, Top and Bottom. Choosing a different orientation it is not necessary to rotate the model.

Louis_Verdonck

 Correction: main view orientation (Front) is parallel to the XZ plane of the WCS.

Eric Fredrickson

Thank you for the information on orientation.  I should have went through all the options displayed on the command line and I would have seen this.  The other question was about section lines.  Should I just plan to erase and manually redraw them to the size and position that I want or am I missing the way to adjust the ones that Bricscad created?

Louis_Verdonck

Sections created by the ViewSection command are live sections, which are updated instantly when the section line is moved. Deleting the section line, deletes the section. Layout of the section line is currently hardcoded. A work around is to move the section lines to a special layer (currently section lines are created on layer 0) and switch off the display of this layer. Now you can redraw them as you like.

paul ulrix

the section line can only be a straight line now ?
So far i really like the viewbase and sectionbase tools, I don't miss quickdraw anymore.b it's easy to copy the views in modelspace anyway.

Jim Canale

@Hans De Backer:

@Jiim,
using the dwg format is an attractive and obvious choice to exchange drawings, because many applications out there can display, print, annotate or edit them.
Introducing Model space #2 boils down to modifying the dwg format into something else: great, but it would be the end of exchanging drawings with other parties.

I don't understand.    With "Generate Drafting Views", Bricsys create a new type of restricted 2D view in paperspace.   Didn't that also break the mold?    Are all the other CAD packages (Intellicad, Autocad, Turbocad, Solidworks, etc.) able to deal with these objects?   And I stand by my assertion that it's hard to use.  When I position, scale, and dimension these 2D views, I feel like I am operating in a tight box, unable to spread my arms out.   Model space gives me a sensation of freedom of movement.  That is why I will stick with placing 2D views in model space and reserve paper space for formating my hardcopy printouts.   I don't see "clutter" in model space being much of an issue.  It is infinite, is it not?

Roy Klein Gebbinck

@ Jim:
Model space is definitely not infinite. There is a min. and max. value for coordinates. And the closer you get to 'the edge of space' the greater the loss of accuracy. This is why you should select your units carefully and, if possible, create your model near the origin.
Example of an accuracy issue: http://bricsys.com/common/support/forumthread.jsp?id=22250

Knut Hohenberg

@Jim, Hans:

As far as I know, modelspace is basically just another block in the database, so I don't see how having an arbitrary number of 'scenes' (to use blender terminology) would break dwg compatibility. Of course, other programs would initially just see scene #1 (modelspace), but the other scenes could probably be accessed by most in some way (Block editor in AutoCAD? - QCAD for example allows you to switch the main editing window to any block defined in the dwg). Layout-Viewports that reference these additional scenes would probably be broken in AutoCAD, but - as Jim said - isn't that also true for the ones generated by bmgendraft?

Having more than one scene might offer real advantages beyond seperating 3d from 2d content and from layout - it may serve well e.g. to model multi-story buildings, or to keep variants of a model.

There may well be severe problems that I don't see, but I think the proposal merits some investigation.

Anyway, I can just second that doing all annotation work in paperspace is not a viable option for all use cases.

Hans De Backer

@Jim: "I don't understand.    With "Generate Drafting Views", Bricsys create a new type of restricted 2D view in paperspace.   Didn't that also break the mold? "

Commands like VIEWBASE and entity types like Drawing Views exist in AutoCAD, so adding support for them is not like breaking the mold.
To avoid confusing by offering similar-but-then-again-quite-different approaches for generating drawing views, we discontinued the quickdraw approach.
We appreciate your valid remarks about placement and scaling that were more convenient with the quickdraw approach, and are looking for the best way to integrate such improvement in the drawing view creation process.

Jim Canale

Hans, and everyone else. 

I wanted to say again, that I think BricsCAD support is outstanding.  I also appreciate the help of forum participants.  It's been very invaluable.       I've got a long way to go before I understand all that was said in this thread.   My head hurts!    I guess beginners like me need  videos, WITH audio.   It's a slow, painful process to force new ideas into this tired old brain. 

Scott McKenzie

I am wondering  how to obtain the back view of a solid using the viewbase command, I can easily have the software create a front, top, left, right, bottom and four isometric views and then export those back to model space but I am needing to create the back view...

Richard Webb

Two ways. When you start at the new layout page, choose Orientation [O] and then bAck [A]. That will make the back elevation the "anchor" for the other views.

Alternately, place the initial view (default = Front elevation) as usual. Go one position right to place a side elevation and continue on to the right to place a reverse view of the original anchor. The "go one more" option only works off to the right side.

Tomas Polak

Hi,
I am new to BricsCAD, so I never used QuickDraw. But I too feel that when I use Generate Drafting Views I "I feel like I am operating in a tight box, unable to spread my arms out," as Jim put it nicely.
In my recent project I was drafting few furniture pieces. My workflow was this:
1] I modelled them in model space
2] I created one layout for Generated Drafting Views, created Generated Drafting Views from each piece of furnitre - all of them were on one layout.
3] then I used Export 2D Drafting Views to model space to move the views to model space
4] after that, I did annotation and hatching in model space. After that, I created a layout for each piece of furniture.
5] I export - print those layouts

The problem with this workflow is this:
A] there's no way (to my knowledge) to add another entity to already Generated Drafting Views. If I want to add a door to a cuppboard, I have to use boolean operatiopn to join that door with other entity, which is already in the views. Or am I missing something, is there a way to add entity so it will be in Draftign Views?
B] when I change one of the pieces of the furniture, I have to delete all of Drafting Views in model space (I do that by manually isolating 0 layer and deleting all line there).  Then I have to repeat step 2 each time - Export 2D Drafting Views. The nice thing is, I managed to move them into the same place in model space after each change.

I would love to do all my annotation in paper space, because that would remove my problem B], but it's just not practical for me.

I hope this functionality gets better in time because it shows a lot of promise.

Tom

Scott McKenzie

Hi Tom,

To solve A, Create a little cube or sphere that will remain as a lone entity but is included with your selection when you are creating the drafting views using the viewbase command.  I would place this little cube off of your actual model by a few inches/feet in all axis so that you minimize the amount of 'real' geometry that this little reference cube is hiding when you create your views.  If you need to add a door to your cabinet but want to keep all entities of the cabinet separate, union your new door to the reference cube and update.  Once you generate your views, clipping out the cube by stretching the viewports would be a simply way to hide the cube.  But it would be really cool to add the functionality to add or remove solids from the generated views and recreate, the problem might be once the view has been exported back to model space and exploded or edited.  

Solving B is a little trickier and I can't think of a solution.

Is there a way to define which layers the hidden and object lines are placed on?  I would like to set these layers to match the layer names and settings defined in my template drawing.

Tomas Polak

Hi Scott,
thanks for the suggestion.
It's an interesting workaround. If the dummy cube was inside of my geometry's volume, I wouldn't even have to resize the viewports. The cube would have to be very little to create just a point in viewports. It's doable but still just a workaround.
I don't know how to move automatically created hidden and visible lines to human created layers.

Tom

Scott McKenzie

Yup, the cube could also be placed inside, but it does become a bit harder to select, however, like you say, the upside is that you don't have to worry about it hiding geometry or having to clip it out of views...