Do you favor STBs or CTBs more?

[cadpro78]

I am just looking to get some opinions from folks regarding the widely spread controversy of which is better... STBs or CTBs? Right now, the architectural company I work for using CTBs but we are greatly considering switching to STBs. Our reasoning is that we will be able to see the lineweights on the screen to what they are rather than not seeing the actually line weight when using CTBs. Of course, most of the workers in our office are used to (dare I say it...on this board) Microstation and they like seeing the line weights. But besides my views aside, what are some of everyone's else views about what to use? And don't forget to try to answer why you would like to use that particular way. Thanks for any help offered.

[sturner]

Displaying the lineweights on-screen will degrade drawing performance in my experience. using color tables is simpler you know what the line will plot based on the color on the screen. the majority of Eng. firms we deal with use CTB's which make drawing interchange easier you are not fighting with a STB drawing trying to get it to plot or having it affect your drawings.

[benf]

I like STB's better because you have maybe 20-30 styles to manage instead of 256. Also, you have to memorize or use a chart to determine what your line weight is.However, I don't know if just switching to using STB's will allow you to see your lineweights as they will actually plot. For that you would need to have all the objects in your drawing (including blocks) all drawn with the proper lineweight property AND use a named plot style to control the other plotting properties. I use 20+ Styles in 6 STB's to control lineweights. I assign named plotstyles to layers and use different STB's to control which layers plot light or dark depending on whether the drawing is a Plumbing, Piping, or HVAC drawing and whether I want to see exisitng objects light or dark. STB's and named plot styles are a more logical way to organize in any case. Color dependant plotting is old and derived from pen-plotter technology. The only reason it is still used today is that there are a lot of people who have "just always done it that way". Anyway, I hope this helps!

[TerribleTim]

Holy cow! This is a topic that never dies! We use the .CTB method here. I like it, but only because I've always used it. You can argue that since the addition of true color for hatches and what not, the .CTB can do what the .STB does. But the .STB crowd will argue otherwise. . .watch. . .here they come. . .wait for it. . .

[Brian Myers]

I'm a long time CTB guy, but frankly STB just makes more sense. They have more dynamic functionality...but... there is nothing wrong with using STB or CTB if one or the other works for your firm. After all, its about making money and productivity and not just using something because it seems like the better choice. If CTBs are causing problems for your firm then change.. if not I'd leave them alone.

[jaberwok]

I agree that using stbs gives more control and so has the potential to be better but, since all my clients might just as well be using R10 ( ), I'm stuck with using ctbs. That's not really a complaint since I'm one of the old buggers too.

[ekubaskie]

I agree that using stbs gives more control and so has the potential to be better but, since all my clients might just as well be using R10 ( ), I'm stuck with using ctbs. That's not really a complaint since I'm one of the old buggers too.

This old bugger changed as soon as STBs came out.

What I see as the problem now, though, is that everybody makes it too complicated. Some folks have as many named styles as they did color-based.

Initially I had a few styles for screening. Since we got truecolor, I haven't needed but one: Normal.

[ekubaskie]

One of my first names styles was "black". I still colored my lines the same as under CTBs, but I turned lineweights on. I think it really helped in making the transition, retraining my vision to use "physical" line weight as in my hand-drafting days - after a couple months, I went actual color and stayed.

If the color table idea were natural, or even a LITTLE bit intuitive, wouldn't every graphics program do it? Imagine telling the GIS crew they had to start using your CTB in ArcMap. (Well, OK, that would probably be kinda fun )

[Firmso]

CTB is the way to be...

[SRBalliet]

CTBs here.