Results 61 to 75 of 224
-
09-13-2012, 08:03 PM #61
This does happen to be from a complete model, but it doesn't have to be. I do quite a few concept elevations for clients as part of an overall feasibility study that never take more than an hour. You really can use Chief in a conceptual way once you get more comfortable with it. It can print very sharp. In the B&W elevation, the lines are the same sharpness as any CAD drawing, only the shadows really depend on resolution, and that can be enhanced if necessary. In the watercolor/sketch elevation, the export does depend on your screen resolution. I have a 30" high-res Dell monitor so that isn't an issue.
Bryce Engstrom: Architect, LEED AP
www.engstromarchitecture.com
Chief X6 Beta
Sketchup Pro 6, Free 8, Thea Render, Lumion
Chief to Kerkythea & Thea Render Converter
-
09-13-2012, 08:14 PM #62Registered User Promoted
- Join Date
- Sep 1999
- Location
- Auckland New Zealand
- Posts
- 1,310
I could never start with a 3D design and expect to model fast enough for my creativity to flow through that process
No software can touch the speed of Chief for developing Concepts except perhaps Sketchup but that software is limited by its lack of tools for taking the project to the later stages.Gordon Martinsen
Auckland
New Zealand
W7 64 bit X5
i7 2600k 3.7Ghz
8 GB RAM
180Gb SSD
Nvidia GTX 560 1 Gb
-
09-13-2012, 08:16 PM #63
I think it's just about a paradigm shift. While I did learn some of these same things in school, I pretty much skipped completely over 2D CAD drafting entirely and went right to 3D way back when Chief started out as Home Designer 3D Deluxe (or whatever it was). So, I just don't see the tool as limiting my creativity. Indeed, it allows much more time for DESIGN and much less time for "drafting" the design.
As I said, you could nitpick the PDF I posted (which you did) but more careful mastery over line weight in your profile plan layersets, perhaps a little bit of CAD overlay in the vector view, and some Edit Layout (look it up) after you send the view to Layout and you would be right where you want to be with line weights etc. It's just about mastering the tools and getting over the inertia of being set in your ways.
Bryce Engstrom: Architect, LEED AP
www.engstromarchitecture.com
Chief X6 Beta
Sketchup Pro 6, Free 8, Thea Render, Lumion
Chief to Kerkythea & Thea Render Converter
-
09-13-2012, 08:17 PM #64
Bryce Engstrom: Architect, LEED AP
www.engstromarchitecture.com
Chief X6 Beta
Sketchup Pro 6, Free 8, Thea Render, Lumion
Chief to Kerkythea & Thea Render Converter
-
09-13-2012, 08:29 PM #65
Sutcac - I wasn't trying to nitpick as much as bring out the printing issue. I think that really is the problem with CA - lines are stacking up on each other in a way that changes the communication of the drawing. Profiles lines are meant to convey importance, and if you have them all over the place and then lacking in the right areas, I dont see how that is a good thing.
Notice how Sketchup deals with profile lines - it smartly knows what is what, and allows you to modify if you need. If a free program like Sketchup does that why not CA?
-
09-13-2012, 08:29 PM #66Registered User Promoted
- Join Date
- May 2007
- Posts
- 324
Johnny,
I understand what you are saying. I too begin with a basic concept in my mind and I flesh it out- one line at a time. It is within that process that the creativity comes out and begins to show itself. Then, the 3D model is created and the form is finalized.
I can relate because I still design in 2D. Trying to create a design with 3D "objects" just doesn't work real well for me. It is an entirely different way of thinking that I still can't grasp. I guess what I am saying is there are different ways of approaching anything, as we all know, and this is a classic example. Plus, I too would like to know how to better do the lineweight control where needed without creating yet more layers, annosets, etc.
-
09-13-2012, 08:31 PM #67
Some say virtue IS a necessity.
-
09-13-2012, 08:46 PM #68Registered User Promoted
- Join Date
- Sep 1999
- Location
- Auckland New Zealand
- Posts
- 1,310
I must admit it took me a view years to wean myself away from the need to conceptualise on paper before building the model.
When I started using Chief at V4 I did so with 5 others who were all eager to get into 3D modelling.
Unfortunately most of the others quickly gave up finding that the Computer was no match for the long learned and well honed skills on the drawing board.
I took the approach that I would need to take several steps backwards before reaping the benefits of the change over and it paid off in the end. Chief uses different logic to most other software (Revit is the closest) and anyone who applies logic learned with other programs is bound to find it quirky at first.Gordon Martinsen
Auckland
New Zealand
W7 64 bit X5
i7 2600k 3.7Ghz
8 GB RAM
180Gb SSD
Nvidia GTX 560 1 Gb
-
09-13-2012, 08:47 PM #69Registered User Promoted
- Join Date
- Feb 2003
- Location
- Oregon USA
- Posts
- 519
Thanks for the pics and the description of the point you have been trying to make.
One thing I would like to point out is that many of the folks that have responded to your OP are very experienced with CA and find modeling in CA second nature. Considering this, it makes the idea of creating concepts in 2D a bit of a hard sell.
One thing that comes to mind from your comments is that since you are using mulitple CAD applications it makes it harder to appreciate CA's CAD tools since they are cut from a bit of a different cloth than your more traditional apps.
There are many features that I find quite helpful in CA, such as the multicopy tool. Sometimes they hit the mark and sometimes not so much. It appears to me that in their attempt to simplify the CAD tools they have at times created a monster in such things as automatic snapping to create polylines and dimensions that try to out think the user.
The basic tools have worked in the past, and so far as I know are still working quite well for creating lines and dimensions in a traditional sense. If I am hearing you correctly, you are making the point that it may be of benefit to everyone if CA were to move in the direction of being a little more main stream than they have been in the past with their CAD tools?
But, no deal on creating concepts from 2D elevations from my perspective. Creating the model and publishing views from the model are more in line with my thinking on the matter. I do appreciate your input on such things as editing elevation lines for better printing and presentations.
This has been a very interesting thread.Rod Cole
V2 thru X5
-
09-13-2012, 10:14 PM #70Registered User Promoted
- Join Date
- Aug 2011
- Posts
- 66
I disagree, I have always been able to replicate pretty much any presentation style that I've come across and liked. How simply one can do so comes down to how organised and well thought out the process to acheive the final product is.
I think the way Chief utilizes layers, layer sets and custom libraries work perfectly to enable a smooth and productive worklflow with a well setup template from conceptualization stage right through to construction. Ive attached an example which I believe replicates yours which was reasonably fast to produce via creating a layerset with custom linetypes and lineweights, CAD boxes with fills and hatches, revision clouds used to create landscaping items layered up to generate colour and definition and can be added as a library item.
I do however agree that more control in 2D would be beneficial, in the way of custom hatches, ability to have a selected fill and a different backround colour without having to have multiple copies layered with different attributes, graded fills to generate skies or fill windows and an auto area fill tool are some examples.
-
09-13-2012, 11:29 PM #71Registered User Promoted
- Join Date
- Mar 2007
- Location
- Bay Area, California
- Posts
- 1,334
Ive read this post from first to last and took it all in. At first I was taken back by your brutal honesty of opinion but also appreciated your candor.
First I would like to say irregardless of chiefs abilities your elevations were outstanding, some of the best Ive seen in a while. No matter what elevations throughout this thread, they all look fantastic. Great job on those.
I also liked how you backed up your arguments with concrete examples from other programs. Many of us havent used autocad lately or vectorworks so by showing us how old school chiefs toolbars were, I could see by your comparisons how you came to that conclusion.
Someone mentioned toolbars jumping and yes, Ive noticed just today having to readjust the toolbars five times because they are bouncing around even when locked.
I also liked your example of the elevation lines. This clearly gave us an idea of what the competitors quality is like, when a lot of us havent seen it. For the most part you make a great argument and have backed up with examples how chief could improve. Glad you posted, got a lot of us thinking.
When I first read this, I was getting ready for the cheerleaders of chief to start firing off an argument but was surprised because not a lot was said. I think a lot of this had to do with showing us comparisons and good examples of what you were talking about.Chad Cardin
MEMBER SINCE V9... NOW X5
-
09-14-2012, 04:51 AM #72
I'm not an architect nor can I draw at all
I think the benefit of doing a model first is that when the client says
move that window over there etc
a handdrawn elevaton needs to be re-done
even a 2D cad drawing would need some re-work
where the 3D model is just a few clicks
the 3D model also allows for additional views to be done from various
angles where the 2D drawing again would have to be created fresh
possibly from scratch
since I can't draw a straight line I have to use the 3D modeling method
LewLew Buttery
Castle Golden Design - "We make dreams visible"
Lockport, NY
716-434-5051
www.castlegoldendesign.com
lbuttery at castlegoldendesign.com
CHIEF X5 (started with v9.5)
-
09-14-2012, 06:17 AM #73
You guys should watch this video. Thank you guys for the comments, at the end of the day I am hoping CA starts to think about this. There are a lot of architects who don't find CA "professional" nearly based entirely on my points.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ws1fb...feature=relmfu
-
09-14-2012, 06:57 AM #74
By the way for those thinking Chief starts at $495, here is screen shot. I was wrong about $79, it starts for $59.00 - for "enthusiasts" (and that is MSRP, i have seen on sale for $19). The few people I have admitted using Chief to at my AIA meetings, looked at me like I was from another planet. One said "you get that cheap software to work for you"?
They have no idea. Chief is hurting themselves more than they know.
-
09-14-2012, 07:05 AM #75
It seems like you are blurring the line between the design and the tool. You are familiar and comfortable with your tools, and want the new tool to be similar so that it too will be more quickly comfortable, which is understandable.
I watched the video. Adding that with what you said above, your take away point for me, is that the ideas which lead to the design come from the designers experience and education. They bring that to the table and couple that with the clients wants and needs and then work through the challenges to bring them together. This is a similar scenario to a majority of service oriented work.
The process, whether it be hand sketching, hand drafting, CAD, 3D modeling, or even scale model building shouldn't be the bar that determines good design. The design should determine.
There are many things in Chief that can use improvement. But, for the majority of the people that use it, I just don't think that they want to use it to design line by line, like you do. I have a friend architect who uses AutoCAD, that will not generally use a component (a group of lines) from one project to another because, like you, he feels that he is short changing the creative process by doing so. So, I get where you're coming from. (By the way, he also thinks Chief Architect is for home owners, but is in conflict when he sees some of the models built and rendered with it.) But, that doesn't mean that it is short changing the process for others that do not share that concept of an ideal.
This is an interesting discussion. But, what I would like to know is what changes specifically do you want to be applied to the CAD tools. Just because I may not use them the same as you will doesn't mean that I wouldn't like them to be improved.
And that sample print?Kind Regards,
Dave Pitman
Current Version: X5
System
Win-7 64 bit
Intel i7 930 (2.8 ghz x 4)
Nvidia gtx 260 (1 gb ram)
12 gb ddr3 ram