Jump to content
Guest jt6572

DIMENSIONING DEBATE: MODEL OR PAPER SPACE?!

Do you dimension in Model Space or Paper Space?  

182 members have voted

  1. 1. Do you dimension in Model Space or Paper Space?

    • Model Space
    • Paper Space
    • I have no idea what you are talking about


Recommended Posts

WannaBeCader

Sorry still don't see the light :D Advantages???

Monday I start with a new employer and they are the second out of 3 that dim in ps :cry:

Bloodwig ARE YOU HIRING???? :shock:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
f700es
Sorry still don't see the light :D Advantages???

Monday I start with a new employer and they are the second out of 3 that dim in ps :cry:

Bloodwig ARE YOU HIRING???? :shock:

 

I hope the new job goes well :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Bloodwig80

no were not hiring. im actually working on transitioning our entire worksystem into Inventor 3d so if anything its the other way around. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lazer

Advantages are a hard 1 to do as both methods get the finished result.

Its down to what method you are use to. I cannot say where ps dims better ms dims because i have never dimed in ms so if i say somthing you will shoot me down,( u knowing model dims and what they can do better than me :( :) .

I was shown ps dims at college (Authorized Training Center) the tutor goes on training days every year and is incuraged to teach pupils the new way to dim. Alot of time was put into 1 on 1 and group teaching where i went (and still go) to get pupils to use to ps dim.

Its standard teaching for a Authorized Training Center to teach PaperSpace Dimensions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
f700es
especially when others don

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lazer

I wonder if people have argued at work over this...by reading all this I understand how it could start somthing :lol: ...and yea not locking a vp is out of order..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Bloodwig80

my argument for doing dims on MS is that i have already a dim style made for every scale in my template file. so when i start a new job, i look at it and decide what scale it will be. then i add the dims in the style of the scale picked.

 

if i need to change the scale of the drawing, i just isolate the dims layer and change the dim style globally and boom its all done.

 

if i was to put the dims on PS, then suppose i need to rearrange my Layout so i can fit more things in there, i have to worry about selecting the vp AND the dimensions and that can be a PITA if i leave one or two behind. So yeah, I do everything in modelspace. the only things in PS are the T-block and VP's nothing else. ever.

 

same thing with text, rev marks, etc. every text style in every scale, every standard symbol, pretty much every standard is made already in my template file so when i start a new drawing i dont do anything from scratch except the actual job layout and shtuff. :geek:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WannaBeCader

Dee,

I would never shoot ya down, you've already shown me that ps dims can assio. Its something each person needs to weight out, (unless like me the boss has made my mind up :D )

You made a good point though, and this thread could go on forever, with the bottom line being to each thier own.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DANIEL
Thanks F7, that

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lazer

Daniel lol .......look WannaBeCader finished this of with a great saying and i quote "with the bottom line being to each thier own."

 

And he also said " this thread could go on forever"

 

u just had to sneek that last comment in there didnt u.... :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
J-LYLE

Ive worked for a few diffrent companys and each one has a completly diffrent standard some in ms some in ps. Both have advantages and disadvantages, just depends on what type of work your doing. Like now im doing sturactural plans and I like the ps way but for these type of plans, that im xrefing into several diffrent sheets, it would be much more work to not have the dims and notes with the xref in ms. With details like footing and beam connections and so on I like using ps because 1 txt size 1 dim txt size and for me its easyer to manupliate my sheet to make everything fit the way i want because i dont have to wory about missing anything with the det just grab the vp and the notes.

 

Saw this thred was getting long and just wanted to add my 2 cents. :)

 

With the vp not being locked I agree nobody should leave the vp unlocked but like here and i sure everywhere else people do,.....so i have a 2key lisp "fv" that i wrote to lock all view ports and a "tv" lisp to thaw all vports

 

> :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lazer

J-LYLE your comments are more than welcome,

 

good point about using ms/ps for what ever method

is best to use at the time...

 

Hope i didnt sound like i was trying to close the topic, its a great debate and everyone who has a point feel free to say...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DANIEL
Daniel lol .......look WannaBeCader finished this of with a great saying and i quote "with the bottom line being to each thier own."

 

And he also said " this thread could go on forever"

 

u just had to sneek that last comment in there didnt u.... :)

 

:twisted: ... i did add the wink at the end :unsure:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
scoopdeville

I have dimensioned in both model and paper space. I prefer paper space by far. I am an architect and we are constantly looking at the drawings in different scales. Dimensioning in paper space allows all the dimensions to be one size. We sometimes use a lisp routine to set overrides so the dimensions fit the viewport scale. We also write different dim styles so that dims for different scales don't upgrade to an incorrect scale. We use the same background often in several differnt drawings, such as a demolition plan, floor plan, reflected ceiling plan, mechanical, electrical, plumbing plan etc. If we dimensioned on the plans there are times when the dimensions don't apply correctly. I find there are pros/cons to both systems and have developed a preference to paper space.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WannaBeCader

OK This topic is alive again, so now I'll comment.

When I said this could go on forever...well it could, but by no means did I want to kill the topic. I really want opinions so I can make a good decision. Just seems like talking Republican/Democrat, Ford/Chevy everyone has dif styles.

Sorry Daniel, I've been with 2 companies that use PS, and I stand by my vote (MS). Just set a dim style, maybe 2 if you use dif units, check the "dim to paperspace" box and (NY accent) boda bing youre done!!!

 

P.S. Toyota's the BEST :shock: :shock: :shock:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lazer

Over time I have come to respect ms dims

 

1 everyone emails me ms drawings.

2 its simple and quick.

3 everyone emails me ms drawings and they dont stop all the time ms dimed drawings.....

 

Its a great debate because autocad have a tool called paperspace and everytime a tutor ( Autocad Authorised College) goes on an update course he/she is shown the power of ps dims, then he will teach all new students as he/she should do.

 

Yes ps dims have problems at the moment but the future is paperspace dims. :wink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Slickrick2000
I have dimensioned in both model and paper space. I prefer paper space by far. I am an architect and we are constantly looking at the drawings in different scales. Dimensioning in paper space allows all the dimensions to be one size. We sometimes use a lisp routine to set overrides so the dimensions fit the viewport scale. We also write different dim styles so that dims for different scales don't upgrade to an incorrect scale. We use the same background often in several differnt drawings, such as a demolition plan, floor plan, reflected ceiling plan, mechanical, electrical, plumbing plan etc. If we dimensioned on the plans there are times when the dimensions don't apply correctly. I find there are pros/cons to both systems and have developed a preference to paper space.

 

From the view of a Mechanical detailer, I would have to thank an architect that uses PS to dimension his drawings. It saves me so much time when I have to clean up a background. (layer isolate the text/dim you say?? Well not all people know how to correctly place there text/dim on the correct layers either).

 

I also started off diminsioning in MS but have since learned that dimensioning in PS is such a better way to go.

 

Let me tell you why.

 

When I draw a floor of a building, I (as everyone else hopefully) draw it 1:1. After drawing it, I send it off to other trades to overlay with what they have drawn. My drawing is busy with all the stuff I have to draw, and dimensions would make it imposible to see the entities that need to be coordinated. I do place the text in MS, I.E. top and bottom elevations, because they need to see those, and since we do not overlay in PS the text stays in MS. The dims go in PS since everything is in 1:1 and no dims are needed for overlays.

 

One thing I hate is when someone sends me something and all there xrefs are attached.....arrgh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SEANT

I always assumed the proponants of PS dimensioning tend to work more with 3d, solids in particular. The ability to stretch solids along with the dimension is not so easily achieved - thus that asset to MS dimensioning is not available anyway. There is also the marginal increase in effort to keep dims with 3D objects and not floating off in space.

 

But, as this thread shows, it pays to remain flexible, especially with regard to x-refs and such.

 

I do work primarily with 3d solids and became such a fan of PS dimensioning that I do it with AutoCad 2000, where dimension associativity is not available. It required quite a bit of VBA to at least get 2000 to scale dims automatically, and dimension radius and circumference. For me, it was worth the effort to avoid the "tedium" of dimensioning in MS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...