Help me out guys, fishy post on a SketchUp blog

[f700es]

https://sketchuphub.com/sketchup-and-autocad-floor-plans/

 

Here we have supposed comparison of 2 PDFs, one from AutoCAD and the other from SketchUp (using Layout I imagine). I took a look as I use both and I think I might have found some BS. They have posted 2 jpgs of the plans as well as PDFs. I decided to look closer at the PDFs and see with out matched what I see from my own PDF files from AutoCAD. Low and behold when I open the supposed PDF from AutoCAD it is a raster PDF with very low pixel quality. That is SO weird as AutoCAD PDFs are vector output and suffer NO pixelation what so ever. I honestly think I have uncovered some flat out fabrication by the blog author.

[Cad64]

First off, I don't understand what they're trying to prove with that article. That Sketchup can do CAD work and produce good quality pdf's? So what? In my mind, Sketchup is a 3D design tool and Autocad is a CAD drafting tool. I would not use Autocad for 3D modeling/rendering and I would not use Sketchup for CAD drafting work. Autocad is the best when it comes to 2D drafting. I have not found anything better, and believe me, I have looked around quite a bit. There are a few programs that come close, but I would not consider Sketchup if I was looking for a good alternative to Autocad. Sorry, but that's just my opinion.

 

Anyway, yeah, I don't know what's going on with those pdf's. The one they are claiming came from Autocad is very pixelated when you zoom in. It's just a guess, but it seems like they may have done some post processing on that pdf, like possibly opening the Autocad pdf in Photoshop, save as jpg format, then open the jpg in Photoshop and print another pdf. I just did that with their Sketchup pdf and whaddya know? Pixelated pdf! I think they are doing something fishy in that article to make people believe that Skethup is better than, or at least as good, as Autocad. I'm not buying it.

[Neets1604]

Not that I need to defend myself...https://sketchuphub.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/AutoCAD-Floor-Plan-on-Autodesk-Viewer.jpg

[Cad64]

Not that I need to defend myself...

 

Not sure what that screenshot proves? Did you print the pdf from the Viewer? I have never printed a pdf from the Viewer so I don't know if that makes a difference, (not sure why it would), but pdf's that are printed directly from Autocad are crystal clear, no matter how much you zoom in. The pdf that you're stating came from Autocad is pixelated when zoomed in.

 

Did you use the same pdf printer for both the Sketchup file and the Autocad file, with all the same quality settings? The fact that your Autocad pdf is such poor quality makes me wonder about what's going on.

[f700es]

So it's still 'NOT' a PDF from AutoCAD but a viewer? Pretty sure that was not disclosed in the blog post. 1st off you'll not find any nose thumbing down on SU here but I do think that the blog post is more than a far bit disingenuous as I think the "A" plan is not a fair or accurate representation of AutoCAD's output since it did NOT come from AutoCAD.

So TIL (today I learned) that using a web based DWG viewer to print out a pixelated PDF is the same as the output from AutoCAD. Knowing good and well that it will look worse than the SU Layout PDF.

[f700es]

LMAO, just used that viewer and its PDF is a joke and this cat knows it. I mean come on, why go through such nonsense?

[Cad64]

LMAO, just used that viewer and its PDF is a joke and this cat knows it. I mean come on, why go through such nonsense?

 

In the article, it was stated that they have only limited knowledge of Autocad. If you're going to do a head to head comparison of two different programs, wouldn't you want a Sketchup expert and an Autocad expert creating the same drawing and then see who did a better job? If you have a Sketchup expert and an Autocad novice working on the same drawing, of course you're going to get different results.

 

And I agree with your previous comment. No Sketchup trash talking here. I just think these are two very different programs which excel in two different areas.

[Neets1604]

Guys, I no longer have access to a full AutoCAD license, which is why I have used the viewer. The PDF that I uploaded onto my Blog was generated from the DWG file you see above WITHIN AUTOCAD (when I had full access to AutoCAD). I don't need to explain myself to anyone. I can zoom in on BOTH PDFs perfectly fine on my desktop.

 

Please go and troll someone else, you're wasting my time.

[f700es]

I posted a nice reply to the blog, nicer than I should have been. I pointed out how certain inaccuracies have been discovered and seem to have titled the results towards the SU output. Any visitor can view my posts here over the years to see that I love SU but I fail to understand the snobbery towards Acad. I mean is it because some just could not come to terms with a complex program? Acad has lots of faults on it's own. There is no need to make up a failed test. We'll see if my post is "allowed" to show on the blog. The author does have lots of great information and seems to be very talented. As I said we'll see.

[f700es]

LMAO! We are trolling by calling out a clearly dishonest "test". OMFG are you serious?

[Neets1604]

You're all wrong and I find this hilarious.

[Cad64]

Please go and troll someone else, you're wasting my time.

 

We're trolling you? You came here.

 

I don't know what file you're looking at on your desktop, but it must not be the same one you uploaded to your blog because the one I downloaded is pixelated when you zoom in, see below. There's no way that pdf came out of Autocad.

[f700es]

LOL, you claimed that this was from AutoCAD and now it appears that it is not, it's from a viewer (your own admission and not the same thing). That's dishonest and you know it! Share the DWG with me and let me print it out to a PDF and offer up another comparison.

[Neets1604]

My screenshot of the same PDF.

 

[f700es]

We're trolling you? You came here.

 

 

Yeah, they were tipped off pretty quick too.

I found the post this morning on my tweeter feed. If you don't want criticism of a post then don't post it. It's that simple.

[Neets1604]

Site stats!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Neets1604]

Kay, I'm bored. I'm outta here!

 

Byeeeeeee!

[Cad64]

My screenshot of the same PDF.

 

Seriously? Again you can't do a proper comparison. Zoom in to the same degree that I did. Upper right corner.

[f700es]

My screenshot of the same PDF.

 

 

Through a browser, sure. CAD64 and I both used Acrobat (the worlds most used PDF program) and zoomed in as we (from YEARS of CAD use) know an AutoCAD PDF when we see one. I also opened the PDF in Adobe Illustrator as I know how AutoCAD prints it's curves to a PDF and I know how awful SU is with curves (it can't do them). This showed me that the PDF did not come from AutoCAD, as your blog claimed it did. A CAD viewer is NOT AutoCAD. This is not semantics or some subjective opinion, it is a yes or no that can be measured. Plain and simple. Again you have some great info and talent but there is no need in a comparison that is not needed. I know it's trendy to poop on AutoCAD over at Sketchucation, I see it all the time.

[f700es]

Site stats!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

What about them? TIL (today I learned) that site hits equate to being right or wrong.