Hatch "snap" is annoying(Version 2004)
Printed From: CAD Forum
Category: EN
Forum Name: AutoCAD
Forum Description: Discussion about AutoCAD and AutoCAD LT, viewers, DWG and DWF formats, Design Review, AutoCAD 360, add-ons
URL: https://www.cadforum.cz/forum_en/forum_posts.asp?TID=1578
Printed Date: 21.Apr.2026 at 06:37
Topic: Hatch "snap" is annoying(Version 2004)
Posted By: rataylor
Subject: Hatch "snap" is annoying(Version 2004)
Date Posted: 19.Jan.2009 at 19:43
|
Hatching a section view is great but annoying when moving/dimensioning, etc. the object because you really must ZOOM to pick an end point/mid point. Is there someway to prevent snapping to the HATCH entities(short of using a SOLID hatch)in Autocadd 2004?? Thanks.
|
Replies:
Posted By: nameci
Date Posted: 19.Jan.2009 at 20:14
|
Hey Rataylor,
Go to OPTIONS, SELECT DRAFTING TAB, AT THE BOTTOM LEFT CORNER OF THE DRAFTING TAB BOX UNDER OBJECT SNAP OPTIONS, MAKE SURE THE IGNORE HATCH OBJECTS BOX IS CHECKED. Hope that helps, let me know, nameci 
|
Posted By: rataylor
Date Posted: 19.Jan.2009 at 20:27
| No such option(Object Snap Options). Does your 2004 have it ? |
Posted By: Vladimir Michl
Date Posted: 19.Jan.2009 at 20:39
|
No, the [VAR]OSOPTIONS[/VAR] variable is available since version 2007. ------------- Vladimir Michl (moderator) ARKANCE - https://arkance.world" rel="nofollow - https://arkance.world - Autodesk Platinum Partner |
Posted By: nameci
Date Posted: 19.Jan.2009 at 20:51
|
Sorry, I use 2007 and 2008. What about hiding the hatch. Can you right click
in 2004 and select the isolate object option? |
Posted By: Breeze104
Date Posted: 19.Jan.2009 at 20:56
|
If it is not on a layer by itself you should make one for it and then you could just turn the layer off untill you are done doing what you want and then turn it back on. ------------- Breeze |
Posted By: rataylor
Date Posted: 19.Jan.2009 at 21:08
I made a layer for HATCH and will cut off when I need to Dimension or move, etc. Thanks for the tip!!
|
Posted By: rossassociates
Date Posted: 20.Jan.2009 at 10:32
| We've got it under 2005.. |