True type font - HUGE plt file

[Michael Coviello]

Hi,
I'm using a true type font in Revit. When i make a PLT out of my General Notes Page it is HUGE (13MB) How do i get the file size down?
I compared this to autocad using the same exact TTF and the plt made from autocad was 2.5MB.
then i tried an SHX font and the file size dropped to 450kb.

When i use the revit pdf writer the pdf is 80kb.
Is there a way to get the plt file size down or should i just not use the 'plot to file' option.

[Scott D Davis]

Revit only uses TTF, so substituting another 'type' is not an option. Did you try plotting 'vector' and 'raster' to see if there is a size difference?

[Michael Coviello]

Raster option produces a 15mb plot file; while the vector option is a 13MB plot file.
After seeing this i don't see any reason for plot files.

[aaronrumple]

Using the standard Revit PDF Writer?
Might try setting the TrueType font download option to Outline. It may be defaulting to bitmap. Having it set to outline resolves some other printing problems with TTF's.

[Steve_Stafford]

Now I'm getting confused...better lie down? Are we talking PLT (plot files) or PDF files?

[aaronrumple]

Whoops - my bad. He said PLT.

Still check whatever print driver settings you have. Sounds like the TTF's are being sent as bitmaps.

[Michael Coviello]

I'm talking about PLT files. the pdf's are fine straight from revit.

We typically make PLT files as a record set (old autocad habit) now i'm considering just using pdf. Do any of you out there use plt's for recordsets for project 'milestones'?

[studio3p]

.plt files used to be useful to me when I was using Autocad and I knew that I was going to have to print several sets of drawings at inconvenient times (I would drag a bunch of .plt files into GoPlot and not have to think another thing about them until the printing was complete). In terms of a record set I find .pdf files to be much more useful (and reliable for that matter). This is particularly true when a project is a few months or years old and the ability to see the sheet on the screen prior to printing can save quite a bit of time and paper. The missing link in the pdf strategy is the batch plotting routine. .pdf files are also independent of the printer, so years from now when you're printing to the latest and greatest you won't have a bunch of worthless .plt files.

[LRaiz]

Is it a PLT file or PRN file (standard naming in Windows world)? Is there a size difference if you use PRN?

[aaronrumple]

Architects use PLT. PRN is not all that common as a file extension.

[LRaiz]

Architects use PLT. PRN is not all that common as a file extension.
I know that architects are special and are emotionally attached to PLT (like many of them still attached to a black background ;-) ). However entire world of Windows printer drivers uses PRN and I wonder if there is something crazy going on that was inadvertently introduced by a different naming convention.

[aaronrumple]

Most os the 3rd party batch printing tools and service firms use PLT. Nothing magic here. Just that this can from old DOS AutoCAD and stuck. AutoCAD defaults to PLT - so talk to that design group.

[J. Grouchy]

I know that architects are special and are emotionally attached to PLT (like many of them still attached to a black background

Funny also is how many people got so attached to color = lineweight as opposed to an actual graphical representation of lineweight on the screen. Myself, I got pretty attached to typing inches...so I got really good at converting Feet-Inches to just inches so I didn't have to type the apostrophe or quote symbols. It sometimes take awhile to get into the flow of Revit...old habits die hard.

[LRaiz]

We must be talking cross purposes. I am not trying to change the way how people name their print files. Neither I am trying to criticize existing tools. All I am asking is to make an experiment and see if there is some crazy bug in Revit print to file implementation and if this bug may be side stepped by naming output PRN instead of PLT.

[Steve_Stafford]

We must be talking cross purposes. I am not trying to change the way how people name their print files. Neither I am trying to criticize existing tools. All I am asking is to make an experiment and see if there is some crazy bug in Revit print to file implementation and if this bug may be side stepped by naming output PRN instead of PLT.I have been able to send a prn file to the same plotter as a plt file without negative consequences in the past. I have also just changed the extension and submitted them too. fwiw

[aaronrumple]

I also find no difference. I usually let Revit go out to prn and then rename from a cmd prompt.

[Steve_Stafford]

I also find no difference. I usually let Revit go out to prn and then rename from a cmd prompt.Since Revit will print to both extensions I find I forget to reset to plt...that's how I found out the plotter didn't care which extension I used. I just submitted the prn files using GoPlot the same way I would have with plt...no problem.

[janunson]

I'm talking about PLT files. the pdf's are fine straight from revit.

We typically make PLT files as a record set (old autocad habit) now i'm considering just using pdf. Do any of you out there use plt's for recordsets for project 'milestones'?


We are mostly an AutoCAD shop, so we've historically used PLTs for all record keeping sets. WE're now transitioning to use PDF for all this work. PDFs are working better for us because:

1. They can be locked down better than PLT so they can't be changed later,
2. We can send them to a client and they can view and print but not change, and we don't have to alter our record files or convert them to do this. Also, nearly everyone already has Acrobat reader so we don't have to educate them on the viewer.
3. PDFs are much smaller than PLTs and save network space.
4. Our Plotters dont care which we send (Oce)

So i definitely recommend PDF.

[Steve_Stafford]

...so we've historically used PLTs for all record keeping setsI realize you are replying to the earlier comments, so I'm not asking you specifically necessarily. Your comment just makes me wonder, aren't plt files device specific in some way. What guarantee do you have that you'll be using the same plotter the file was intended for when you actually want to print it? I have tried to submit a plt file to a different plotter than what the file was created for with poor results in the past. Seems the pdf or something like that is much "safer", whatever that means. ;-)