Font Vni Romans.shx

[Herodoto Tenk]

Thebest way to answer your question is to actually test it. Create a drawing (or use an existing one) and populate it with text using the Roman.shx font. Do a "save as", to a slightly different name, then change the font to Arial. Now print it. Then create a PDF file and print that. Send a copy of both files to a friend and have him do the same. Any problems? Yes or No?

The only downsides are of course the bit of work needed to convert existing details, blocks etc. over to Arial, but it's not a hard fix. And like ReMark stated I have seen Truetype act wonky when printing. I have seen text appear not filled in. But I think the advantages outweigh the disadvantages.

Yessir... the non-overridden aspect of it is ambivalent, however it can be advantageous on both sides of the coin. It's the end-user's call, ultimately. I for one use screening techniques and bolded fonts for alternative distinctions.

That's a good issue to bring up. I'm wondering about out telecom group. The sometimes have Dtext that is beside other text that needs to be bold to distinguish between proposed and existing. And they accomplish this with changing the color which in turn changes the printed thickness. Good point.

Monospac has a lot of similarity to RomanS, but is a True Type Font so our standards are smoother between AutoCAD and Revit. Also not having to worry about .ctb colors is great. Different disciplines can have different color text without worry of lineweight.

Recent editions of AutoCAD have TrueType versions of their old pen-plotter fonts. After a brief search, I couldn't find anything similar except a non-TT sans-serif font. I'd just use "Arial" if an exact match is not necessary. But if you must have an exact match, email me and I will send you the Windows TT version of RomanS.shx. Or you could have a consultant send you the font file.

The font worked okay, but doesn't respond to lineweights. In other words, the text strokes have a fixed width for any given text size. Applying bold helps only a little. I need something with adjustable weight, or I need a couple more fonts for different lineweights of the romans.shx.

It's been over 20 years since I've used an SHX font. Assuming you've changed the width factor because RomanS uses too much screen space why not just switch to a TrueType font like Arial Narrow or AutoCAD's Swis721 Lt BT? They're easier to read while taking up less screen space than what you're using now. It should eliminate your PDF issues.

Personal Pet Peeve that wastes even more screen space: I've never seen a book in all caps and if you used all caps in any online forum it's considered offensive. Up until CAD was introduced all caps was used for drawings because it was easier with both hand lettering or Leroy. I still see occasional drawings done in all caps which besides being hard to read uses a lot more screen space.

Because that's how it's always been done here before has been used for way too many excuses like not using Paper Space for plotting that's been around as long as many CAD users have been alive or being afraid to start using that newfangled Multiline Text or Annotative anything.

Romans uses a fine grid (14 x 21?) to define each line of a character. True Type fonts in contrast use Bezier splines to define smooth curves for each character that maintain the appearance of a smooth curved even when scaled up.

Note that each uses a mono spacing for the numerals 0 - 9 but uses different widths for alphabetic characters. It should be noted that although the True Type RomanS_IV25 could have has smooth curves it was defined to have straight lines of the old grid based line fonts. In the image below the first line is Romans, the second is RomaS_IV25, and the third Arial. Arial use the full capabilities of splines to create a smooth curve.

I have found that the only way around this is to use a true-type font for all my text styles. Is this correct? The true-type font looks pretty blocky on the drawing (especially when you do a zoom-extents on it), but when you zoom in on the drawing, it looks fine and plots fine to either a plotter or laser jet printer, whereas the romans.shx appears fine on the drawing, and plots to a full size plotter fine, but appears funny when plotting to a laser jet printer or PDF file.

We print our final drawings to a PDF file and upload it to Sharepoint so that others in our Co-op can download it and print the drawing out if needed. But when they plot it out, anything that has a .SHX font looks funny.

Thank you for the speedy response and solution. For some reason the fonts folder was not loaded in the search path. Does this mean the person using this computer before me deleted the folder? I assume CAD automatically uploads it upon installment, but I incorrectly assumed it was still there....

If it was missing from the path I am not sure how this could have happened. It is possible a prior user could have done it but that would only be the case if you logged on using the exact same account.

The missing SHX font message is likely the result of your Support File Search Path not being set properly. In more extreme cases, there could be something wrong with your CAD installation, which might require you to repair your installation.

Anyone know of or even have a good .shx font for AutoCAD? I am absolutely sick and tired of architxt, and simplex makes me ill to look at it. Just something nice and clean (and nice). True type is not an option as they make files drag bigtime. Oh yeah, freeware is preferable. Pickens have been Slim thus far. Thanks!

Is this for presentation drawings or construction documents? For presentation drawings, I can't think of a single .shx font that looks as good as a half-decent TrueType font.

For construction documents, stick to something like Simplex.shx or Romans.shx. For one, they're legible and reproduce well in bluelines, and secondly, if you're sending these CAD files to outside consultants or clients, you can be assured they'll have the same fonts loaded on their systems.

Few things are more annoying than some architect who insists on using some obscure fonts that produce a dozen error messages whenever I try to load the drawing myself because I don't have the same fonts loaded, and then ends up substituting that hideous txt.shx font by default.

Will yield by far the fewest errors.

Seriously, romanS.shx with an 80% width factor is golden. There is nothing more contrived than a technical drawing with stylized fonts that dont translate to your consultants, ultimately replaced with romanS anyway. Use a thicker pen if you want them to be richer in print.

You guys are not helping. Seriously though, after I made the thread I remembered how pissed I get when someone uses a funky font on their drawings and that open font window pops up. I'll revisit those two (although I know I'll hate both) but I'm so tired of what I use now. This would be for CDs, so presentation does not matter. I use a truetype (the office logo font) for the title block stuff.

In that case, stick with simplex or romans. Construction documents are meant to communicate your design intent as clearly as possible, not to be an art project unto themselves. To that end, common utilitarian fonts are your best best.

I just looked. RomanS and Simplex are pretty much the same exact font. I was worried that Roman would look like Times New Roman but they're not too bad. I'll probably go with the .8 factor; that's what I previously used.

Blueline prints.. hee hee... now that takes me back!

We use simplex for most of our notes, but manipulate the height & width to make it skinnier and more elegant. We also use Arial for "important" notes & labels but kept at a minimum - Arial tends to kill plotter pens!

i dunno, i'm a font dork and i happen to dislike romanS and simplex too. i found this website that sells a true-type-to-shx converter (though i haven't ordered it yet):

in my mind there's nothing wrong with using a unique font...just be nice and pass it along to your consultants

I am in need of some advise. I am working on a project that requires the parts be engraved with identification letters and numbers. The customer I am working with is providing me files in ACAD format. I have tried some test imports with simple ACAD fonts - romans.shx - looks like the font of choice. My problem, is that the imported parts file is a series of labeled parts already nested on 4' x 8' sheets, and Mastercam sees the indentification letters & numbers as a Font. I have discovered that the engrave toolpath will not see the ACAD letters. Is there a method of exploding the font into geometry so that the engrave toolpath function will work. I have created letters in Mastercam from the Create - Letters command and then analyzed them, and they are broken up into geometry and are not considered as a font.

bill it is great advice rchoward gave you. It is also a good idead to make sure that you have nothing on the same layer in either mastercam or Autocad so that when you bring it you dont have the possbility having things right on top of each other. So when you want ot trun ofthe layer wit hthe text you can and not have to worry about change layers in Mastercam.

As one who drafted for quite a few years before computers came along, and

took pride in good lettering, I personally HATE the "blueprint" fonts that

come with Acad. They don't look anything like an architect's lettering, more

like a very non-observant high school student's attempt at it. Back when we

had to learn this skill, the slanted horizontals were the first thing you

had to learn not to do. And the skinny compressed letters just look bad --

it takes a width factor of at least 1.5 to get these fonts into the realm of

proper letter proportions. You won't get any points for using these, from

anyone who cares about lettering. I'd rather see plain simplex.There are a number of good hand-lettering style SHX fonts around, but I've

never been able to find a TTF that even came close. Like Jack, I don't mind

StylusBT. It doesn't really look architectural, but at least it isn't ugly,

just a neutral "hand" style.

3a8082e126