Quirky - that is what I am talking about

[johnnyprc]

Ron and RCole:

I think the guys at Chief Architect would like to understand what you (and I) are saying about the 2D. Much of this thread is to point out that Chief's 2D tools need to be greatly improved (in my opinion, and sounds like both of yours). I've thought about doing exactly what Ron is talking about - export my model back into Vectorworks to clean up a nice set of ConDocs.

I do wish CA had the 2D tools the other programs did, and some people have suggested I dont know CA well enough. That could be the case, but I do feel I have not seen examples of 2D drawings coming from Chief that are as "crisp" as what we produce in other apps.

[fcwilt]

Ron and RCole:

I do wish CA had the 2D tools the other programs did, and some people have suggested I dont know CA well enough. That could be the case, but I do feel I have not seen examples of 2D drawings coming from Chief that are as "crisp" as what we produce in other apps.

There may be a difference between what you would like to produce in the way of ConDocs and what is actually needed out in the field.

I have built homes using ConDocs generated in CA and they were perfectly fine.

Perhaps builders are not that picky about the quality of the drawings if they are adequate to the task.

That said I am always in favor of CA being improved as long as the improvements add significant value.

[yusuf]

Ron and RCole:

I think the guys at Chief Architect would like to understand what you (and I) are saying about the 2D. Much of this thread is to point out that Chief's 2D tools need to be greatly improved (in my opinion, and sounds like both of yours). I've thought about doing exactly what Ron is talking about - export my model back into Vectorworks to clean up a nice set of ConDocs.

I do wish CA had the 2D tools the other programs did, and some people have suggested I dont know CA well enough. That could be the case, but I do feel I have not seen examples of 2D drawings coming from Chief that are as "crisp" as what we produce in other apps.

plse follow this link http://www.facebook.com/pages/Chief-...6990754?v=wall
Suddenly there, i have seen a post added before 3hours. a very nice design of a medical center by chad white using x4 and much alike with your excellent works in other softwares. If that elevations r done in ca with out any other 3rd party collaboration,clearly the feeling we(u,i and many others) have about the degree or extent, users exploit the capability of the software is also a factor and proved.and it is clear that we all feel that ca has some internal strength and wish improvements. Thats why we r talking about it. it is just because we like it. Plse be a fan on facebook and take a look at that post .in my view chad white has performed well in chief and it may become important for us to contact him for details and learn from him his technics.
Thanks

[yusuf]

i support most of your suggestions about improvements of the 2d, and generally ca act global and look around how other software's are performing. about market and brand name of chief architect i don't bother. let them first ask us to comment, they did not still respond either. rather i request to spend 1/1oth of the time you r spending searching market for a big company like ca,to do that for me and this may be value adding for both of us.

[johnnyprc]

Frederick: I am 100% confident that CA produces construction documents that are "perfectly fine". In fact, I am sure the primary marketing of CA is to design/build professionals - not as much architects.

There is a design process architects are taught that goes well beyond "perfectly fine". We study our handwriting and create an art of that alone.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ky5p-...feature=relmfu

Some architects, not all, take their drawings very seriously as part of the artistic aspect of our profession. I want my drawings to look better than what most builders draw, and I will take the extra time to apply what I have studied to do so. I believe the process itself can elevate final design.

I would just like my tools to accommodate this. In my argument (per this thread) I suggest CA would be better off to provide this ability in an improved way to appeal to architects as well as the design/build community. The 3D BIM of CA is the best I have seen.

[fcwilt]

There is a design process architects are taught that goes well beyond "perfectly fine". We study our handwriting and create an art of that alone.

Why?

Structures serve a purpose - how does artistic handwriting contribute to that?

Fine handwriting will not improve a bad design and a good design will not serve it's purpose any the less if the handwriting is not so good.

BTW I am an engineer - as such I believe that form follows function.

[johnnyprc]

Why?

Structures serve a purpose - how does artistic handwriting contribute to that?

Fine handwriting will not improve a bad design and a good design will not serve it's purpose any the less if the handwriting is not so good.

BTW I am an engineer - as such I believe that form follows function.

I guess it comes down to how far you will take an obsession. I feel like I obsess about my work.

In the movie "The Last Samurai", there is a section where Tom Cruse's character says about the Samurai: "they devote themselves to the perfection of whatever it is they pursue". Its a mindset that you get into that even the small things can be very important. I believe you will see that in all successful cultures and cults.

I propose that a person who views their "pursuit" in that way will produce better work by the nature their effort affords them.

[fcwilt]

I propose that a person who views their "pursuit" in that way will produce better work by the nature their effort affords them.

I think the law of diminishing returns may come into play here.

A builder who insisted that every piece of wood be cut to a 1/32", every nail be driven in exactly straight, etc would never finish a home in a reasonable amount of time at a reasonable cost.

Obsession in art is fine but when work needs to be done obsession may stand in the way.

A balance needs to be found.

[johnnyprc]

I think the law of diminishing returns may come into play here.

A builder who insisted that every piece of wood be cut to a 1/32", every nail be driven in exactly straight, etc would never finish a home in a reasonable amount of time at a reasonable cost.

Obsession in art is fine but when work needs to be done obsession may stand in the way.

A balance needs to be found.

Yes, but what we are talking about here is to seek a tool that cuts the wood to a 1/32", or nail driven perfectly, without much more effort. My point is to make the 2D tools better so I can more easily attain my goal.

My comment before was in response to the issue of having the goal in the first place. If the builder doesn't even try to find the tool, since he doesn't value the effort, I think that defines his dedication.

Now we are getting into philosophy. Going back on track, I'd really like to see some improvement on the 2D tools within CA. I hope people agree.

[rongobong]

This has been an extremely interesting thread to read - I got sucked into it and read through all 13 pages. I come from an architectural background - have a master of architecture degree, worked in architectural firms using AutoCAD, and then moved to another state and got into the design-build remodeling industry. It was there that I was introduced to Chief Architect. My former colleagues heard the name and the Native American jokes began. However, I saw the program for what it was at the time - a much better 3D tool than AutoCAD's Architectural Desktop was. That program was horrible. Chief was a different way of thinking, but it worked a lot more intuitively.
The biggest issue I have with Chief is the same problem that Johnny describes - the 2D drawings aren't beautiful. That sounds pretentious, but most people with an architectural background are on the same page. Line weights are used to convey importance, depth, and clarity in a drawing. When you are doing redlines in AutoCAD for 8 hours a day, you begin to think in lineweights as you draw. Each line you draw has meaning, creates order, and is intentionally a certain weight. It's what makes a 2D drawing become 3D when you look at it. I wish the auto-generated Chief 2D drawings could implement that theory. The guy I worked for asked me why I didn't want to use different colors on my plots - make the electrical lines red, the walls green, and the windows blue. I almost barfed - to use color to signify importance on an architectural construction drawing - the horror! A good architect can use shades of gray and line weights to make even the most complex drawing easily understood. I think Chief Architect misses the boat on this concept, and it's a reality that I have had to come to terms with because the benefits of CA outweigh these issues for me. And I just don't have enough time to edit the automatic elevations to create the line weights I desire. However, I don't desire them just because it makes the drawing more beautiful - it's because it would make the drawing communicate better.
I think when it comes to the "crisp" argument, I've noticed that a line drawn with Chief Architect has a bullnose on each end, not a square edge. With heavier line weights, it makes the drawings look cartoon-like, and less crisp in my opinion.
Overall, I love Chief Architect and it makes my life easier. Maybe someday the lineweight issue will be addressed, or maybe not. Who knows? I will still be using CA, without a doubt.
Lastly, I do not design with CA, or any other CAD program for that matter. Every CAD program has its limitations or rules when it comes to drawing. A pen and paper are not limited by rules like "you can't have a curved back on a cabinet" or "a countertop cannot pass through a doorway" or the many other limitations that require me to think of a polyline solid workaround to make the 3D model look right. Once I have a concept, I put it in Chief - and then I test the 5 different roof options to see what looks best. Once it's in Chief though, there is no other program that is more powerful and user-friendly in my opinion.
Just my two cents...

[sutcac]

I think when it comes to the "crisp" argument, I've noticed that a line drawn with Chief Architect has a bullnose on each end, not a square edge. With heavier line weights, it makes the drawings look cartoon-like, and less crisp in my opinion.

I have always wondered about this too, and this is the first time I think I have ever seen this mentioned on this forum. This is the kind of specifics that the folk at CA need to know about. It's the kind of thing you should send a bug report into the support team on.

As far as your couch, I have noticed this issue too and it seems very intermittent. I will sometimes see this happen even in flat walls that are native to Chief. Then if I close, re-open, and take the same view, they disappear, or not. So, there is some kind of intermittent bug I think in the 3D generation.

I still think you can go quite a long ways toward automating the line weight generation through layers and layer sets with just a little CAD overlay and Edit Layout cleanup. And this is limited to vector views and I agree should also transfer to the render views. Not perfect, but certainly worth the trade-off to me for speed and the ability to try different things in the design, rather than fuss with minutiae in the drawing.

[johnnyprc]

Here is how Vectorworks does it. See the 2D tools are part of the main screen, and there are several options that you can quickly select without having to enter a "settings" screen. Making the sections of 2D tools and their properties from "flyout" floating menus.

See attachment

[johnnyprc]

rongobong: A great post, well said.

I ended up paying for an upgrade to Vectorworks 2013, maybe CA will never do what I want and I have to draw 2D in another app. I saw that someone from CA was veiwing this thread, and seemed to be interested, so I can hope they make CA a complete package for my needs.

At this point I am only paying for 1 CA station, and if it was complete I would buy it for 3 more of our computers. Otherwise I will just do the 3D models on 1 system.

[johnnyprc]

rongobong: I have to mention the design you have on your website - I really like how you dealt with the "no-man's" land area so many bad designs have. Doing the Banqette with the tri-sided fireplace was a GREAT idea.

Sorry to get off-subject again, but I just had to mention that - and for everyone else I included a pic - with your permission to show it (let me know if you want me to remove it for any reason).

Not off subject is the fact that you do your concept designs by hand. You don't even use Chief for your concepts I noticed.

[johnnyprc]

Example. Here is an example that people are asking for. This is from Sketchup. Notice how Sketchup places profile lines on the model that are correct. This is a sharp print (ive placed an image and PDF res best I can get for file size issue). CA would NOT have have the profile lines correct if printed from CA.