Can't See Inserted Image When Zoomed

[salarch2]

I am using Revit Architecture 2011.

I have inserted a .jpg of a floor plan that I want to trace over. I can see the image, but when I zoom in, the image disappears and turns to a rectangle with an X in it. Can someone please tell me how I can zoom into an image and still see it.



Thank you!

[iankids]

I am using Revit Architecture 2011.

I have inserted a .jpg of a floor plan that I want to trace over. I can see the image, but when I zoom in, the image disappears and turns to a rectangle with an X in it. Can someone please tell me how I can zoom into an image and still see it.



Thank you!

Firstly, check to make sure the image is set to foreground, and that it wasn't inserted on another (lower) level.

I have found these are my most common errors when having the issues as you describe...


Cheers,

Ian

[salarch2]

Thanks for the reply, Ian.

I checked that. When I zoom out, I can see it. As I use the pinwheel to zoom in, it disappears when I get to a certain zoom level.

[tropitech]

try setting your views detail level to fine

[iankids]

Definitely weird, I can zoom way, way in, certainly well beyond the point where the image is recognizable.

As a test, start a brand new project, import a different image and see how far you can zoom.

If you have the same behavior, I would now be looking at your video card. Is it on the list, is the driver the recommended on?

Cheers,

Ian

[Merlin]

I agree with Ian. I think you'll find this is a hardware issue.

John Mc

[eric.piotrowicz]

Sorry for the hijack but I feel that this is worth saying in case it saves some extra work later.

To each their own but tracing an inserted image??? How do you account for accuracy (or lack there of) in the inserted image? I've had this come up several times over the years and I have yet to find an acceptable alternative to just reading the existing drawings and modeling it fresh based on what the drawings state. Otherwise you end up with a model that matches the traced image and the building is 34'-6" wide even though the dimension string states 36'-0" because somebody didn't read the dimensions when tracing.

Just my $.02

[iankids]

Sorry for the hijack but I feel that this is worth saying in case it saves some extra work later.

To each their own but tracing an inserted image??? How do you account for accuracy (or lack there of) in the inserted image? I've had this come up several times over the years and I have yet to find an acceptable alternative to just reading the existing drawings and modeling it fresh based on what the drawings state. Otherwise you end up with a model that matches the traced image and the building is 34'-6" wide even though the dimension string states 36'-0" because somebody didn't read the dimensions when tracing.

Just my $.02

Hi eric,

I use this technique on almost every project.

As pretty much everything I do requires a town planning permit, I am required to provide information not only about the subject site but also the neighbouring properties and location of the site more generally. As a matter of course, I would often provide the basic layout of sites three or so houses away.

As this information is generalist in its nature, whether the building as described is slightly different than I have drawn is not of any great consequence.

I agree whole heartedly with your view that one shouldn't use this for the actual building you are working on, but it does have it's uses.

Cheers,


Ian

[eric.piotrowicz]

Hi eric,

I use this technique on almost every project.

As pretty much everything I do requires a town planning permit, I am required to provide information not only about the subject site but also the neighbouring properties and location of the site more generally. As a matter of course, I would often provide the basic layout of sites three or so houses away.

As this information is generalist in its nature, whether the building as described is slightly different than I have drawn is not of any great consequence.

I agree whole heartedly with your view that one shouldn't use this for the actual building you are working on, but it does have it's uses.

Cheers,


Ian

Ian,

For planning purposes as you describe, I would agree that tracing would be a reasonable approach. If thats what the OP is doing then there shouldn't be any trouble.
Its just been my past experience that makes me say "woah, there buddy" when the tracing method comes up in discussion. But then too, the majority of my past experiece has been with some rather "green" professionals. They have all turned out to be quite good but those early mistakes could have formed some bad habits down the road.
It sounds like we are on the same page though. :beer:

[Merlin]

You have to use whatever you have on hand. Sometimes you only have a picture....No, it's not accurate, but it's a starting point. A massing or sketch concept can be achieved from this while steps are taken to gain more accurate info.

my 5 cents
John Mc