PDF fails at large format?

[Cathy Hadley]

I have a client with two separate offices... both are having this problem.

When trying to print to the Revit PDF driver ... Revit fails with an error in the hyperxpdf.exe ... but... only at any size over 11x17?

Talked to support they say driver conflict ... we've taken off all other pdf drivers (bluetooth and adobe's) and still error ...

Anyone have any suspects? I've checked other networks and things are working fine... It must be something specific in THEIR setup, but how do I go about tracking it down?

Any suggestions will be greatly appreciated. Oh and I've already suggested the DWF driver (which works fine) and alternative pdf drivers (rejected by client).

CZH

[Wes Macaulay]

I've wondered if they haven't made the Revit PDF writer buggy on purpose so people will migrate to DWF :twisted:

I have not had this specific problem with the Revit PDFer... but i will use www.pdf995.com (http://www.pdf995.com) 's free product - with often better results.

[Cathy Hadley]

Both myself and even Autodesk support have suggested pdf995... but they are opposed to it... Sigh...

[adegnan]

I use both the Revit PDF writer and CutePDF to produce D-size sheets, just in the last week. So I'm not sure why you'd have the problem.

[Dimitri Harvalias]

Might be slightly off topic but I have noticed that when batch plotting to PDF if I try to save across the network the batch plot utility invariably fails. If this is what's happening try saving to a local drive then copying to your network drive. Also seems a little buggy when I plot at anything higher than medium resolution (which is usually acceptable output)

[Cathy Hadley]

I was at the client's site this morning... they are building a machine up from scratch... loading only one driver at a time till we find the conflict... my money is on a Bluebeam driver ... with no other printer drivers installed 30x42 still good to go...

If it is bluebeam then that will cause us a new headache...cause they will need to be able to use both?

I'll keep you posted on the progress.

CZH

[LRaiz]

PDF Writer which is shipped with Revit was really developed by a different company - Pinebush. Revit started using their components prior to Autodesk acquisition. Over time Pinebush turned out to be a mediocre supplier. I don't think they made any changes or fixed any bugs in their software over the last 3 years.

[GuyR]

I don't think they made any changes or fixed any bugs in their software over the last 3 years.
I've heard a rumour the PDF driver is no longer going to be shipped as of the next release?

Guy

[aaronrumple]

...which will steam a lot of Revit users.

(Our office standard is PDF for all archive documents.)

[adegnan]

I have a Revit/Pinebrush PDF installer separate from the Revit app... that I downloaded at some point. So for those of you who want to make sure you still have it, get it before its gone, if that rumor is true!

[aaronrumple]

Ah, but the "code" that allows it to run may no longer be included in future versions of Revit. We are upgrading Acrobat 6 to 7, so not a real issue for us. It would be a big hit for small firms (..and nice to be able to send out demo Revit with PDF printing capability to clients.)

[GuyR]

You'd also lose the hyperlinking of views, sections between sheets.

Guy

[Martin P]

I have a client with two separate offices... both are having this problem.

When trying to print to the Revit PDF driver ... Revit fails with an error in the hyperxpdf.exe ... but... only at any size over 11x17?

Talked to support they say driver conflict ... we've taken off all other pdf drivers (bluetooth and adobe's) and still error ...

Anyone have any suspects? I've checked other networks and things are working fine... It must be something specific in THEIR setup, but how do I go about tracking it down?

Any suggestions will be greatly appreciated. Oh and I've already suggested the DWF driver (which works fine) and alternative pdf drivers (rejected by client).

CZH


We have this problem also.... never found a solution to it.

[SCShell]

Hey there,
I have always used the PDF writer that was included in Revit for ALL of my printing and documenting. So far, I have only experienced one problem. (Trying to print underlayed "shaded with edges" views.)

I would hope that Revit and Autodesk will ALWAYS include some form of PDF writer with the program. (Everybody I know who use Revit also uses the PDF method to print.)

Steve

[Scott_Bloss]

We print all of our jobs to PDF 36x48 sheet size with no trouble. We really need this functionality it is part of our office standard. I would be really displeased if they stop shipping the Revit PDF writer with the software in the future.

[Rols]

We use PDF for ALL our large format Revit output with no problems, but we don't use any bluebeam products.
I would be truly irate if Autodesk yanked it from Revit. We use PDF mostly because of client requests. The choice between PDF and DWF isn't entirely ours, we have to listen to our clients. We also use PDF because it fits nicely with our archive system standards.
DWF has its strong points and purpose. It doesn't mean that we have to choose one over the other. The sooner that Autodesk realizes that they don't need to trash PDF to get people to switch to DWF, the sooner they can work on using BOTH technologies.
Sorry about the rant. Cathy, I hope you find your problem. It sounds like you're on the right track.

[JDagis]

I use pdf files at all sheet sizes and have never had a problem. It is one of the most useful tools included with Revit particularly in e-mailing sketches to clients since everyone has a pdf reader - 8 1/2" x 11" is great and can be printed anywhere. I hope that this feature remains included in future releases.

[Dimitri Harvalias]

Cathy,
Any luck resolving the original problem posted in this thread?
I sent a set of 11x17 proofs to the client in the morning without problem, and then I spent a great deal of my evening last night trying to get a set of 22x34 drawings to print using the Pinebush PDF driver.
No matter what I tried (settings, download fonts, embed fonts, outline fonts, regular, high, presentation, print one, print a bunch etc.) the damn thing kept kicking me out and giving me that annoyingly unhelpful "would you like to send an error report" dialogue.
I uninstalled/reinstalled the driver a number of times, (which only brought to my attention how poor a job the uninstall routine does of wiping the installation from the registry) with no luck.
I finally downloaded PDF995and had to sit through one advertising screen after another to print my 22 drawings.
Because DWF is not yet supported by the OCE printers locally I had to use PDF.
Excuse the rambling nature of the post but I'm very tired and feeling cranky this morning.

[Wes Macaulay]

Here's a bizarre work around: try printing to DWF - multipage. Then print to PDF995 from DWF. It's one print job, so you'd only have one ad to dismiss.

[sbrown]

I hope adsk will start to lobby the print shops or educate them on printing DWFs none of the print shops around will touch it. So we have to make pdfs from our dwfs. I bet all it would take is for them to download the free viewer and click print.

[Dimitri Harvalias]

Any issues with things being 'lost in translation'? With two processes to go through I fear potential for more goofs. I'd still be happier if we could just find a more efficient way to print large numbers of drawings directly to our local print shops.

I'll have to give it a try Wes.

[jamesd10181097]

I ran into several issues with the Revit PDF writer. I encountered situations that would cause it to consistantly crash and issues with the font I was using would look jagged. I finally gave up on it all together and switched to PDF 995, the ads are annoying but you only need to pay $10 for a non-sponsered version and that is well worth it in my opion to avoid all the issues with the one supplied in Revit.

[BillyGrey]

PDF is becoming a universal bridge, a world-wide format that is accessible to everything from web browsers to publishing app's, to graphics artists, to e-books. I know we need to continue to develop and grow DWF, but it would result in a massive disconnect if PDF was eliminated from Revit now.

I use it constantly with clients for web-review, clients out of my area to take files to print service providers for review, or for bank/loan doc's, appraisals, etc. I even have a client who has been on vacation touring the US for the past six weeks, but we are continuing developing his residence because of the pdf/print service provider capability.

I don't think adesk should (perhaps doesn't) view PDF as competition, because it serves a very different over-all purpose than DWF. But for the non-technical, or PSP's, DWF is a long way from adoption.

[Chad Smith]

I hope adsk will start to lobby the print shops or educate them on printing DWFs none of the print shops around will touch it. So we have to make pdfs from our dwfs.
Would I be correct in thinking that most print shops use Oce printers?
Oce have already implemented DWF printing into their software so I guess most print shops would already know about this.

Personally, I don't think that DWF cuts it just yet as a deliverables format. They really need to sort out this rasterisation of views (http://forums.augi.com/showthread.php?t=9511) before we will be using it.

The new 3D DWF format on the other hand that is advertised as being in 8.0 will be used though.

[PaulB]

On the subject of PDF generally, we have had problems with larger file sizes say 10 - 13mb PDF, plenty of colours (shading with edges elevations).

We can create the PDF fine and view it within Acrobat Reader, all well up to now. Then we go to print the PDF to a number of different printers (from B & W to Colour Lasers to Professional Print Shop Large Format colour printers) and some of the details are missing, some are fairly heavy black lines, some are only printing the colour fills and some just don't print anything and come up with error messages.

We also had problems importing the PDFs into CorelDraw 12, came up with a message about invalid file, or something but was fine in the Adobe Reader.

In some cases the files produced when spooling can be up to 50mb and might take a while, especially when at the end of the spooling you don't get a print or you get half a print.

It could be the PDF printer itself that is producing the rogue files but we've used several PDF printers to print these files inc. Adobe, PDF995, Cute PDF, PrintPackPro602, Pinebush, etc.

So much for PDF being the universal document exchange format. Fine most of the time but oops sorry about the extra 2 days trying to get a print out from the files. How do you justify that to the client.

Our printers are asking that we send the files in a tif format so they know that it's going to work.

[BillyGrey]

Paul,

Is tif the answer then?
You are printing/viewing CD quality files in a raster format?

I'm curious,

Thanks

[PaulB]

Billy,

No I don't believe tif is the answer, I think the printers probably print more graphic design stuff than dwgs. They also say that if there is a problem with a file if it's tif they may be able to edit it to get it right but I wouldn't think that would work anyway.

We haven't struck this issue many times as the files are usually smaller so we will keep pursuing the pdf track until a better or more reliable alternative comes along.

[ppelegrin]

I hope adsk will start to lobby the print shops or educate them on printing DWFs none of the print shops around will touch it. So we have to make pdfs from our dwfs. I bet all it would take is for them to download the free viewer and click print.

While slightly off topic. I beleive the main mechanism that can help is by the end-users (yourselves) suggesting DWF to the print shops - and clients as well. No different to the way PDF started - except PDF had, IMO, less competition than DWF has today. Put another way, despite Autodesk advertising, the main influence that will cause DWF to become mainstream (or fail?) is you and I asking for it and promoting it.

Both PDF and DWF formats have strengths and weaknesses and issues that need to be constantly addressed


Regards,
P Pelegrin

[SkiSouth]

Because I use a multiple processor machine (4) I have to use Windows Server 2003 to take advantage of the processors, and therefore, I could not get the Pinebush driver to even load. (as Windows Server 2003 is not supported) I have been using the PDF driver created by Adobe furnished with Adobe Acrobat Professional. Works fine, only appears to be Slower and more painful though to get multiple files out named properly.

Also, the local print house uses OCE plotters exclusively. I send all plots via HPGL2 format to them using the OCE driver.

PDF's are used to inform clients/contractors of different issues or clarifications on RFI's.

[Haden]

I beleive the main mechanism that can help is by the end-users (yourselves) suggesting DWF to the print shops - and clients as well. ...Put another way, despite Autodesk advertising, the main influence that will cause DWF to become mainstream (or fail?) is you and I asking for it and promoting it.
What about us organizing a very vocal lobby to Autodesk to continue to support pdf? Any ideas on how we might be heard more loud and clear? I can echo what many have already said about the universal need for pdf files.

I personally have had no problems with the pinebush Revit PDFwriter since my initial problem with text in schedules not aligning in vertical columns because I was using a font which was the old true-type format rather than the new open-type font format.

And Aaron -- I don't think the Adobe Acrobat 7.0 is much better than 6, since it STILL does not address architectural/engineering paper sizes in a standard list. You must create a custom paper size just to print to 24x36 or 30x42! I use it to create 8.5x11's from my other applications such as MS Word, etc. I have yet to try the PDF995 for creating pdf's from Revit, since the Pinebush has been working fine for me.

[Haden]

Both PDF and DWF formats have strengths and weaknesses and issues that need to be constantly addressed
BTW, I have also yet to use DWF-- Can someone tell me why at this point I should even try, (other than maybe that new 3D DWF feature in 8.0) when we all know the problems with trying to get clients to download another viewer, knowing that I even have the occasional frustration of dealing with some people who don't even have the adobe reader installed?

[SkiSouth]

And Aaron -- I don't think the Adobe Acrobat 7.0 is much better than 6, since it STILL does not address architectural/engineering paper sizes in a standard list.

I use Adobe Acrobat Professional (6.0). This is a screen shot of the standard paper sizes.
Several Arch formats are furnished. Did I miss something here?

[Haden]

I use Adobe Acrobat Professional (6.0). This is a screen shot of the standard paper sizes.
Several Arch formats are furnished. Did I miss something here?I guess the fact that I apparently have only upgraded to Adobe Acrobat 7.0 Standard instead of Professional would explain that. :Oops: (Sorry.)

[ppelegrin]

BTW, I have also yet to use DWF-- Can someone tell me why at this point I should even try, (other than maybe that new 3D DWF feature in 8.0) when we all know the problems with trying to get clients to download another viewer, knowing that I even have the occasional frustration of dealing with some people who don't even have the adobe reader installed?

Hi Haden,

First, I appreciate the need or requirement for PDF support....

I believe the major points to consider are:

* DWF's are in vector format, dimensions can be read accurately
* Zoom in and out (without losing clarity)
* They can now view 3D model data
* The potential for file sizes to be considerably smaller (Vector vs Raster formats)
* DWF files can hold 'data', i.e. have some form of intelligence, PDF's being a Raster format are intrinsically un-intelligent.
* Ability to add drawing sheets after initial creation of the file (PDF is a one time snapshot, you cannot selectively 'add' pages later)

I guess if any of those features listed above do not help you in anyway, there is no reason to consider DWF. But sure as anything the industry will change, thats about the only guarantee anyone can make.

DWF's were made with CAD/Architecture/Engineering requirements in mind. The PDF format was created with a much larger group in mind, for a much wider group of applications. I guess I see the PDF argument, much like:- why use Revit when the whole world uses AutoCAD - simple, Revit is a better tool, worth using even if goes against the trend (PDF versus DWF?).

While I appreciate that a major stumbling block is the client that prefers PDF, the fact is that those in the CAD world have for the last 25 years dealt with many, varying/changing 'formats' that their clients prefer to use when receiving our data, and this will continue to change in the future. People post here that many customers like looking over their shoulder, seeing the live 3D interaction of a Revit model, many clients now appreciate the extra 3D views that are becoming standard (along with Working Drawings).
Why not offer the same ability - interactive viewing electronically - makes perfect sense to me. As you say, even with PDF there is no guarantee that every client can easily view your electronic 'files' - however the only alternative is to go back to the drawing board - literally.

If one out of ten clients will accept a DWF file is it worth offering it to them? Does it need to be a much higher number before you offer it. I propose that offering 3D images, Renders, fly thrus, animations, extra views to give better clarity - all these things many people offer, and many clients now expect, yet few pay for it. I guess I see the offer to give DWF in a similar vein - no-one is asking for it, prefer not to change from what they use today, however some clients will appreciate it when they see the benefits first hand. I always suggest to clients never say no to a client that requests PDF files, however if you also send a DWF with a URL link to download it, I would be surprised if not one client uses it - this is how PDF files started.

Now that the momentum for BIM is starting to build, surely supplying more data than a simple Raster snapshot, is going to become a necessity - for the clients, other consultants that do not use CAD, the builder, contractors and so on. I do not believe BIM was only intended for a select few Architects and Engineers using particular CAD applications. When BIM becomes more mainstream, I highly question the usefulness in raster files such as PDF's (recognising the need right now). However I appreciate some of these potential benefits are not necessarily a reality today, nor are they demanded.

Here is an extra thought, while today the onus is on you to send all amended files to every other party (PDF to one party, DWG files to someone else, DWF to Harry etc etc), how about a system in the future that simply allows you to 'notify' appropriate parties that changes have occurred - it is then up to that party to access those changes at a time it best suits them, additionally, rather than download every file, or even just the modified files, but a system that automatically downloads only the changed information - now this would take a big load of our IT systems reducing the bandwidth considerably. While there are some systems that provide some of these features today - I believe this will become more mainstream in the future and ease the burden of sending PDF's, DWF's, DXf's etc. (This is not an add for Buzzsaw).


Regards,
P Pelegrin

[Haden]

Very well stated, P! Thanks for the discussion. I do really look forward to trying the 3D DWF options.

One minor point, though, is that it is possible to add pages to a PDF file, since you can drag & drop pages from one file to another, but I get the impression that what you describe in DWF is a more intelligent collection of pages than what a PDF file can have. I have noticed that after I assemble a series of sheets in one PDF file that the bookmarks contain residual listings from previous files that the various pages used to be a part of.

[janunson]

I don't think the Adobe Acrobat 7.0 is much better than 6, since it STILL does not address architectural/engineering paper sizes in a standard list. You must create a custom paper size just to print to 24x36 or 30x42!


I have Reader 7, and it picks large format just fine, you just have to have a printer that has large format paper available.

[Wes Macaulay]

Also, the local print house uses OCE plotters exclusively. I send all plots via HPGL2 format to them using the OCE driver.What driver is this, mate?

[SkiSouth]

What driver is this, mate?

Wes,

Our print shop uses the Oce 9800 plotter. I just called and confirmed they don't do anything else to my plots other than load them in repro and then run them.

I use the "outdated" Oce 2.8.2 Raster Driver, downloaded from the Oce website. - (I think I still have the zip file if its not still on the website)
Specifically:

1. Set the plotter up as a Oce 9400 NOT an Oce 9800.
2. Under the Printer preferences - Finishing MUST be set up in all categories as Printer Default.
3. Turn Remote Control Header Present OFF.
4. Plot to a file as your Port.
5. Send your plots to your local print shop for HPGL2 Happiness.. :smile:

Just a note, a pen weight of less than .01 has a tendency on the Oce's to greyscale. ( A percentage of the line is lost due to resolution of width). It's still prints - just not a solid line.

[bowlingbrad]

Set the plotter up as a Oce 9400 NOT an Oce 9800.

Don't you just love it? I'm glad it's not just me :-|

It seems that every time anyone gets the new and improved printer or plotter, YOU HAVE TO USE THE OLDER DRIVERS!! :banghead:

[Wes Macaulay]

Ah - that one again. I made a set of test plots last year using various formats - the Oce raster plots came out a bit too light. And I didn't want to pump up the lineweights because the in-house plots didn't look right.

Looks like I'll have to go spend some time in a print shop again!