MikeOxon

Fortunately, I still have Studio2 on my laptop, so I convert to Studio format on that and then open in Studio3 on my desktop Mike

EDIT - Now resolved in Studio v.3.3.451 (Jan 2015) I followed your suggestion and it worked! S-A have replied as follows: "Hello Mike, The DXF was using a property called 'bulge' which was missed in V3. This issue will be fixed in our next update (sorry no projected time known). Prior to the DXF fix being released, if you’d like, you could manually select each line segment that should be a curve, and just select curve. As demonstrated in image below: Three segments have already been converted, the fourth is selected and ready to be converted to curve. Sorry for any frustration. Best wishes Silhouette Support Team" I already have various work-arounds but there is hope that all will be well in the next software release - some day! Mike

You mentioned in a previous post that you are still getting the hang of this site - it's not easy but 'blogs' are not really the place to ask questions like this. If you look in the Forums instead, there is a Narrow Gauge area at http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/forum/185-narrow-gauge-modelling-prototype/ Look through the posts there and try using the ';search' facility. If you don't find anything relevant, then that's the best place to post your question. I am surprised that the Narrow Gauge Forum you mentioned wants loads of information from you, before they reveal who they are! In these suspicious days, I avoid websites like that. They should give you information about themselves, up-front. There's a good blog about building a WW1 military 0-16.5 narrow-gauge railway at http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/blog/1344-up-the-line-1918/ Hope this helps

I'm amazed by how well the cylindrical tank has come out, especially since I know how cruel photographs can be. I also like a little bit of 'roughness' in a model - the real things ain't that neat Mike

Your wiring interconnects double up as pipes really well. It all looks great - and very good photography, too Mike

Now I know what my technique is called! i can never resist taking photos when I've only finished one side.

In practice, I think brass can actually be an easier material to work with, mainly because it bends and holds it's shape. Also, a good etched kit has a very satisfying precision to the fit of all the parts. Somewhat heretically, I also believe that modern glues are satisfactory for their construction, so that soldering is not essential (though it can be great fun if you take the plunge, especially when you start sweating parts together with the aid of a gas torch!) Trying some overlay coach sides is a good place to start.

Wait till you try one of those etched brass kits, where the designer has included every jot and tittle. Until I made one of those, I knew nothing about safety straps and so on. it's all invisible, of course, unless the wagon falls on its side. I guess that the same is true of your vacuum cylinder but it is better than many RTR models, where such things are just vague moulded 'lumps' sticking down underneath

These look splendid work-horses, and the Westinghouse pumps give a special 'character'. I've seen many strange things growing out of locomotive chimneys but that curly thing is the strangest yet

Thanks, Mikkel. For me, Pendon is quite close to home but I don't go very often. Perhaps that's a good sign since I tend to go when I feel in need of inspiration whereas, at present, I seem to be jogging along quite happily Back-scenes are a real problem when viewed 'for real' whereas, In photographs, it's easy to position the camera to make the perspective look 'right'. I think they are best kept 'low key' to suggest depth, rather than anything too detailed.

This looks magnificent, and beautifully photographed, too. I can almost feel the weight, just from looking at it

I suspect that your facility to convert curves to vectors is what happens when I use 'explode' in Autosketch. I can confirm the large files and that it does solve the problem. DraftSight looks quite good but I am reluctant to invest too much effort because it keeps asking the user to renew registration and I wonder how long it will stay around as a free program

Thanks for spotting that, Anotheran - it may be the root of the problem (although the v2 manual had exactly the same list) It would appear that I have to avoid using any 'compound' tools such as rectangles or polylines and, if I do hit a problem, I can always 'explode' a file, even though it produces a huge output. As JCL points out, I only need to do this once. In addition, I have Studio2 on my laptop and Studio3 on my desktop, so I can also use v2 as a file converter, if necessary. I shall also follow JCL's suggestion to try for a response from Silhouette's software team. Mike.

Please do forward to wherever it might be useful. I've sent info. to S-A but only seem to get stereotyped replies. Their latest suggestion is to try a larger packet size but I cannot see how this correlates with my findings! I suspect that reading the DXF may be handled by a dll file in the Studio package and I shall investigate if it's possible to use the v2 version with v3. EDIT: DXF is handled by main studio.exe file, so this would need to be updated. It's no longer much of a problem for new drawings, if I bear in mind the limitations, when drawing in Autosketch.

EDIT - Now resolved in Studio v.3.3.451 (Jan 2015) I've been dissecting some DXF files to try and understand the problems with rounded corners that I've described earlier in this thread. Autodesk provide a reference manual about the format at http://images.autodesk.com/adsk/files/acad_dxf0.pdf (It's not easy reading!). There are many different versions of DXF files but the ones produced by my Autosketch v5 are in a plain text ASCII format, which can be read with any text editor, such as Notepad. The text in a drawing file is divided into several sections, including a HEADER (containing various settings, such as units of measurement), TABLES, GROUPS and ENTITIES. I've been looking at the ENTITIES section, since this is where the components of the drawing are listed. For test purposes, I drew a simple rectangle in various different ways, using Autosketch, and then compared the lists of ENTITIES in the DXF files. The files I produced were: Rectangle.DXF: use the 'rectangle' tool, to draw 30mm x 50mm rectangle Multiline.DXF: make the same drawing using the 'line' tool to draw the four sides Rounded4.DXF: use the 'edit round' procedure, to provide 5mm radius corners between the four sides Joined.DXF: use the 'edit join' tool, to join the elements of the rounded rectangle into a single object Exploded.DXF; use the 'explode' tool to break the joined object into its component parts Inkscape will not display the Rectangle.DXF and Joined.DXF files. Studio3 displays them all but Joined.DXF has diagonal-cut corners. Studio2 displays them all correctly. DraftSight displays them all correctly. Shapes cut with the two versions of Studio from Joined.DXF (which was my standard method for producing rows of windows) are shown below: Looking at the text files, Rectangle.DXF and Joined.DXF contain POLYLINE elements, whereas Multiline.DXF only contains LINE elements. Rounded4.DXF is similar to Multiline.DXF but adds several ARC elements, and Explode.DXF has a very large number of small LINE components. A comparison of the ENTITIES sections of these files is attached below, for anyone who is interested. CompareEntitiesDXF.doc It looks as though some programs (INKSCAPE and STUDIO3) cannot interpret the POLYLINE statements correctly, whereas STUDIO2 and DraftSight can. The work-around for the moment is for me to use simple lines and to avoid joining entities in files that I wish to transfer to Studio3. Mike

I'm very grateful to JCL, who looked at my file and found that it would not display in Inkscape. As a result, I have made various test files and found that there seems to be a problem whenever I create compound entities in my old version of Autosketch (v5.03). If I use the 'explode' command in Autosketch before exporting the DXF, then Studio v3 displays rounded corners correctly.The penalty is that the DXF file is very much larger (Mb rather than kb) and takes several minutes to process on my dual-core Pentium. The older Studio v2 interpreted the compound entities correctly but the new version does not. It appears that Inkscape cannot read them either. Mike

It's worth noting that JCL made an index of pages where various topics start in this thread Some time ago, I made an index of pages to the various topics that JCL covered in his original notes and tutorial. I found it very usseful when I started so, in case it will prove useful to other new users, here's a list of my links: JCL #1 Posted 24 November 2013 uses for Silhouette cutters JCL #2 Posted 24 November 2013 Index to pages on this thread JCL #11 Posted 25 November 2013 software/materials/consumables JCL #21 Posted 26 November 2013 File types/Studio/Inkscape/Corel/Serif/etc JCL #22 Posted 26 November 2013 Preparing a project JCL #27 Posted 27 November 2013 Project - Coal Merchant's Office-1 JCL #45 Posted 29 November 2013 Project - Coal Merchant's Office-2 JCL #62 Posted 29 November 2013 Project - Separating/Cutting/Cleaning up JCL #73 Posted 01 December 2013 Maintenance of the machine JCL #74 Posted 02 December 2013 Project - Studio files Of course, there's loads of other great stuff in this thread, but those links make a good start! Mike

First thing I tried,Jason I seem to recall that you use DXF to transfer from Inkscape, so have you tested any similar patterns?

Help please ! EDIT - Now resolved in Studio v.3.3.451 (Jan 2015) I have reported the following problem to Sihouette-America but without, so far, any satisfactory response. Their first response did not relate to my problem at all and their second suggestion was to delete the folder com.aspexsoftware.Silhouette_Studio, which has had no effect on my problem, though (of course) it did lose all my custom settings. (I had been careful to keep a back-up!) I have designed several coach sides by creating the initial drawings.in Autosketch v.5.03 and transferring DXF files (Autodesk R12/LT2 format) into Studio version 2. The curved corners of windows and panels were rendered correctly in Studio v.2.9.45 and I have successfully cut these on my Portrait machine After updating to Studio version 3.0.417, however, I now find that the corners are rendered as diagonal cuts, as shown below (same initial file in each case): . I have found that if I import the DXF files first into Studio v2, where I convert them to studio format, then they display correctly in v3. Has anyone else experienced this and does anyone have any suggestion for a way ahead? For the time being I shall have to continue using v2 but that means missing some potentially useful functions in v3. Incidentally, Silhouette seem to have some network problems, as my latest request resulted in seven messages by return, each stating "Your message To: Support : Re: DXF file import problem .... was deleted without being read ...". Mike

There is a new type of pen holder for the Cameo/Portrait machines, shown on the US site http://www.silhouetteamerica.com/shop/materials/sketch-pens/item-number/pen-holder2-3t It uses collets to hold the pen, rather than the previous poor arrangement of set screws, which easily strip and won't hold a circular object securely. The minimum diameter is stated to be 8mm so, if you want to use a diamond dresser, a larger diameter version will be needed (or packing) The holder doesn't appear to be available in UK as yet.

Hi Mikkel, I try to take your advice regarding eating an elephant. Even though mine is a small creature, I still tackle each small scene separately. Photography is the common theme that underpins most of my other interests, so these photographs help me form my ideas about how each of these mini-scenes can be developed. I like to keep them small and compact. I printed the backscene sheets using the 'draft' mode on my printer. I think the slightly 'washed out' look works very well, by making the scene seem to recede, rather as though it is a misty morning across the fields. For the time being, I shall probably stick with a series of overlapping A4 paper sheets but I could take a digital image to a local printer, for output as a 'banner'.

I've suggested a method in the forums at http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/89310-estimating-dimensions-from-oblique-views/ I put it there because the editor won't let me use illustrations in a reply to a blog post Mike

My 'gut feel' is that your first tender pic is a 2500gal - I think there are too few vertical rivet lines for 3000gal, but I don't pretend to be an expert,and it does look short between the wheels. I found this a very interesting post although, as you say, knowing more can become a pain sometimes. It looks to me as though it might not be too difficult to file down the frames of some of the 'later' models, to represent the earlier types? As someone who uses tender-drives, I'm always pleased to see well-heaped coal loads in real photos, convincing me that the need to cover a tender motor is not, actually, unrealistic Mike

I love the ripples in the side panels - so different from our beautifully smooth models

In my previous post, I described a little about the location of North Leigh station on the branch line to Witney, originally planned in 1849. For some reason, this line was omitted from Bartholomew's 1/2inch map of 1903 but I have restored it to its rightful position, in order to show the location of the station and its proximity to the tunnel through the ridge of high ground between North Leigh and New Yatt. The later, cut-off, which allowed trains to run directly from the Worcester line towards Witney is not shown on the map but it diverged close to North Leigh station, to join the OW&W main line near Wilcote. The map clearly shows Wilcote Manor, home of Sir John and Lady Wilcote, plus their lively daughters. This region of the Cotswolds was long famous for its many stone quarries, perpetuated in the name of the nearby village of Stonesfield. Some of these quarries were served by a narrow gauge (2' 6") railway, with an exchange dock at North Leigh station. Unfortunately, all these lines seem to have been omitted by the map-makers, and even diligent searching will fail to find any traces on the ground, today. My own model, therefore, seeks to re-create this lost world and provide a glimpse of what life might have been like in the area, towards the end of the 19th century. The following photograph shows the chute that was used to transfer stone from the NG railway to the main GWR system. A Hudswell Clark 0-4-0ST has recently taken over from horse power, for shunting wagons under the chute. On the upper level, a stone train has just arrived from the quarries, ready for unloading. The quarries run along the edge of a steep scarp slope, above the town, and the following scene shows the small workshops nestling under the much-quarried slope. Small farms dot the countryside immediately below the quarries and the railway also serves to bring goods and to carry animals, and occasionally people, to and from these scattered communities. The sheep-nibbled turf is represented by dyed lint, whereas the longer rough grasses are made from pieces of a very old long-haired camel coat, suitably dyed and painted! In addition to the quarries, the NG line also serves a saw mill, since there are extensive woodlands in the area of Wychwood Forest. The saw-mill has a curiously 'Black Forest' look, probably a whim of Sir John's. The following scene shows a short train of bolster wagons, which has delivered several large logs to the mill for sawing. The water-wheel that powers the mill can be seen towards the right of the picture. Later, the sawn timbers will be taken to the yard, on the upper level at North Leigh. There is still a lot of work to be done in all these areas and a large part of my purpose, in taking these photos, is to help me visualise possible ways ahead. The back-scene behind the saw-mill does not yet exist - just a plain white frieze - but I intend to print something similar to the scenery that I have added to the photo. Another aspect, revealed by the photos, is a distinct lack of human activity! I have a substantial backlog of painting to do, both of several sets of figures and of various horse-drawn vehicles, which I hope will add more 'life' to these scenes. Plenty to keep me occupied Mike EDIT : I felt that I had cheated a bit with the last photo, so I printed the back-scene onto some sheets of A4 and stuck them onto the frieze. Here's a genuine photo - un-retouched! This is an example of using test photos to suggest the way ahead 🙂