offset - is there a new variable for clever trimming?

[designerstuart]

has anyone noticed that the offset command has changed in 2010? (unless i am going mad) see image below. i'm sure if you offset a polyline, with no node at the crossing point, in pre-2010, it would end up as second image.

 

 

but now i get the 3rd and 4th types, which i admit is pretty good for offsetting both sides and deleting original construction line, but not always better that the original method.

 

is there a variable or option somewhere to change the performance?

 

thanks!

[Dadgad]

has anyone noticed that the offset command has changed in 2010? (unless i am going mad) see image below. i'm sure if you offset a polyline, with no node at the crossing point, in pre-2010, it would end up as second image.

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]31831[/ATTACH]

 

but now i get the 3rd and 4th types, which i admit is pretty good for offsetting both sides and deleting original construction line, but not always better that the original method.

 

is there a variable or option somewhere to change the performance?

 

thanks!

 

There are some interesting choices in the offset commandline options. I have never used it, but the layers offset could be useful in Landscape design or other Topographical applications. Perhaps you would be more comfortable with one of these other offset gap types.

[designerstuart]

yes i looked at the OFFSETGAPTYPE variable for the first time ever today - but all this does is set the connections between polyline segments to chamfer, radius etc. i think this problem comes before that variable, if that makes sense.

[Mike_Taylor]

I just tried the offset command as shown in your pictures in ACAD 2006 and I got the same results as the 3rd and 4th images. It may have been changed in earlier versions though.

[eldon]

has anyone noticed that the offset command has changed in 2010? (unless i am going mad) see image below.

 

I think that you may be going mad, unless you updated from a long, long way back. AutoCAD 2002 produces the 3rd and 4th images.

 

I don't usually use polylines that cross, so I had to check before posting.

[designerstuart]

well that is interesting. thanks mike and eldon, i was beginning to think that must be the case. could find no variable for it, no clever options. must be mad then.

[Jack_O'neill]

That's why I love this forum. Find something almost every day that I didn't know was there. I use 2010 and I get the fourth result. Guess I've never offset a polyline that crossed like that. Cool. That should make for some interesting logo designs.

[SLW210]

I tried on 2000i at home yesterday, it is the same as on 2011.

[tzframpton]

That's why I love this forum. Find something almost every day that I didn't know was there. I use 2010 and I get the fourth result. Guess I've never offset a polyline that crossed like that. Cool. That should make for some interesting logo designs.

No joke man, that is a sweet little variable!! I can have fun with that.

 

Although, the offset feature in Inkscape is far superior for logo design.

[Jack_O'neill]

No joke man, that is a sweet little variable!! I can have fun with that.

 

Although, the offset feature in Inkscape is far superior for logo design.

 

I'm sure. Maybe I'm just getting old, but I've played around with Inkscape and Gimp and Wings and some of the others. If I had time to really dig into it and learn to use it properly, or could sit with someone who knows those programs I might get somewhere. Most of the time, by the time I figure out how to get started I can have it done in AutoCAD. And if that fails, there's drawing board behind me with paper, a very large assortment of pencils, pens, pastels and watercolors that will get it done if I can manage to guide them to what I want.

[tzframpton]

Inkscape was a breeze for me to understand due to my AutoCAD skills. They have an extension online help repository as well.

[Jack_O'neill]

Inkscape was a breeze for me to understand due to my AutoCAD skills. They have an extension online help repository as well.

 

Yes, and I did some of the tutorial they offer. The Swedish flag, for example. It has you set the page size, then the grid size, then you draw 3 rectangles, merge two of them, then use the fill and stroke to set the colors. I don't think that way. In Autocad, I'd have drawn 4 lines for the first rectangle using direct distance entry, offset the top and bottom to get the the horizontal bar in the middle, offset from the left side to get the first line of the vertical bar, then offset it to get the second line, trimmed them up, added the fills and been done.

 

As I said, there's nothing wrong with the program itself, I'm just old and set in my ways. There was a time when tackling a new bit of software was just a good way to spend the day. Anymore, it's "ok, that's pretty. Now get out of the way and let me get this done."