Quirky - that is what I am talking about

[dshall]

Its funny, I was just reading a post recently by another architect selling his X4, and he said:

"Its like im fighting the 3d model. I also find it quite skittish"

That is very similar to a post I had. The truth is that Chief has THE BEST possible BIM CAD out there (even for light commercial), but they need to clean this program up for architects to be interested.

I also own VectorWorks, and Chief needs a lot of work on 2D tools for detailing - mostly how they work. Also, printing is very odd. The drawings just don't look "sharp". I don't know what it is, but for you lifelong Chief users, if you see other CAD systems - it is much sharper. That was also the complaint of the other architect.

The "skittish" and quirky issues need to be resolved. The interface needs to be updated in a very bad way. The icons look so old and cheap. They almost need a re-name too, as the idea there is a $3k+ professional version of what some people buy a Costco for $79 is not appealing for architects. When my clients ask me what I use for software, I don't say "Cheif Architect" for fear they say "oh, i have that program too", "can I get the file to make changes to materials?" When I hand them a $15-20k bill it just doesn't go over well.

15-20 k bill? Are you nuts? Are you designing a 30 unit apartment complex or a 2000 sf addition. I too would question your billing..... Are you nuts? Why don't you show us an example of your work. what do you mean by skittish, please be a bit more specific or lose all credibility, thank you.

[sutcac]

I'd pretty much have to support my colleagues above. Yes, most architects don't use Chief, but it's mostly because they just don't know any better, run with the herd, and/or fall for the behemoth marketing budget of Autodesk. I have a good number of projects that top the $15-20K range and I get no complaints from clients about my drawings, renderings, or the 3D experience they get in the design process. Most are AMAZED.

Two words- USER and ERROR

[Ron Ravenscroft]

I'd pretty much have to support my colleagues above. Yes, most architects don't use Chief, but it's mostly because they just don't know any better, run with the herd, and/or fall for the behemoth marketing budget of Autodesk. I have a good number of projects that top the $15-20K range and I get no complaints from clients about my drawings, renderings, or the 3D experience they get in the design process. Most are AMAZED.

Two words- USER and ERROR

Well said, BUT, slabs, schedules, easy condocs are not even close to being "up-to-snuff". I can not believe how cumbersome using cad is in many instances. At times the Chief people are a little off the make on what is important.

[rcole]

I used to keep a little note next to my computer screen to remind myself to not get too wrapped up in creating complex 3D models.

The note read "Lines on Paper = Dollars"

It is no wonder to me that good CAD tools are considered such an important aspect of a professional CAD system.

[fcwilt]

I used to keep a little note next to my computer screen to remind myself to not get too wrapped up in creating complex 3D models.

The note read "Lines on Paper = Dollars"

A object oriented program like CA will create lots of lines way faster then traditional CAD.

Modeling has so many advantages it's hard to imagine using just a 2D CAD program.

[rcole]

Yes, that is very true, and I agree that printing from a model is by far the better way to go.

For me that is even the case for concept applications. Crank the model and go. In that sense 2D tools are best used for final edits to elevations and documentation.

There is another application for good 2D tools that should not be overlooked. That is the creation of custom 3D objects. I have attached a custom window surround that I did yesterday.

I could have done this in CA using the tools available, but it would have taken way longer and been much harder to work with. In this case I used 2D profiles to create the 3D geometry that makes up the Symbol object in Chief.

I see also that I want to change a few things on the surround. Again, easy in another app, but a pain using Chief. Walls, window, paneling, and custom chair rail in Chief, but the custom surround was done in another app.

Just saying that it would be nice if Chief stepped up and gave us a few tools that worked in a more traditional fashion. The reason I use other apps is because I have found that it is easier get the model done by what ever means required to get it right than to fight with Chief.

Back then I would use CAD tools to fix problems with the model rather than fight with Chiefs automatic modeling features. Now I use other programs in order to solve that problem. Why, because they have better 2D tools that I can use to create 3D models. 2D tools are fundamental to 3D modeling in many ways.

Edit: Creating complex models is not as difficult for me now as it was then, but that is mostly because I don't use CA for those situations any more. Even with features such as Ray Tracing, unless your business is producing renderings, we still get paid mostly for putting lines on paper. Good modeling tools and good CAD tools are both very important to me in order to produce work in a timely manner.

[fcwilt]

There is another application for good 2D tools that should not be overlooked. That is the creation of custom 3D objects.

I would think that to create custom 3D objects you would need a program that would work in 3D. How does one create 3D objects in a 2D program?

Just saying that it would be nice if Chief stepped up and gave us a few tools that worked in a more traditional fashion.

I like DeWalt tools but they don't always make the tool I need - then I need to go with another brand. Sort of the same situation - CA will likely never be able to be all things to all people.

[johnnyprc]

Well said, BUT, slabs, schedules, easy condocs are not even close to being "up-to-snuff". I can not believe how cumbersome using cad is in many instances. At times the Chief people are a little off the make on what is important.

I would say architects want to have the feel and ability to "purely design/draw", almost like they did with traditional media. In a large way that is why Sketchup has done well, along with the newer Vectorworks - 3D with freedom.

With the QUIRKY elements CA still has, it doesn't allow you to get into a design flow easy, having to always think of: "what was that work-around again"....

That said CA is still better OVERALL than the others. Many things you can't do obviously with Sketchup...

[Ron Ravenscroft]

I would say architects want to have the feel and ability to "purely design/draw", almost like they did with traditional media. In a large way that is why Sketchup has done well, along with the newer Vectorworks - 3D with freedom.

With the QUIRKY elements CA still has, it doesn't allow you to get into a design flow easy, having to always think of: "what was that work-around again"....

That said CA is still better OVERALL than the others. Many things you can't do obviously with Sketchup...

I want to applaud you for the way you have conducted this discussion. I tend to get off track sometimes to my disadvantage. I use Chief in a different way, I do my preliminary design with a sketchpad, then I Start a Chief model. Once the model is approved by the Client I export the plans, sections and elevations to VirsaCad via DWG. VCAD is still a 2D program but I can finish a better set of ConDocs with it. That is not to say some of the users produce great drawings with Chief. My guess is that they are willing to spend more time on the program that I am. I have attempted a couple of small project entirely with Chief. I found myself drawing details in VCAD and importing them to Chief due to faster 2D in VCAD. ART was dropped a few years ago, it may be time to get chief going in a more Architect friendly direction. I mentioned areas for improvement the other day, there are more such as metal studs, hollow metal door frames, etc.

Ron