Quirky - that is what I am talking about

[lbuttery]

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

Lew

[johnnyprc]

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

[johnnyprc]

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.

[sutcac]

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.

I have gotten exactly the same reaction. One of the many reasons I discontinued my membership with the AIA this year. There is one other architect in my (fairly small, rural) area that I know uses it just based on the images on his website.

Personally, CA should change its name for the flagship full blow software. The problem is that Chief Architect is the name of the company, but everyone relates it to the name of the software. Due to that, the $20 Costco version makes laymen think they are buying Chief Architect

I have said more or less the same thing on this forum many times. It is so ironic that a software called Chief Architect (which just sounds silly on the surface of it anyway), doesn't really market to architects at all and the architects on this forum are so often maligned just for being architects.

[Chad Cardin]

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.

I think johnny has a good point. I think its the marketing he is talking about. As I was reading his post I couldnt help but think of Toyota and Lexus. I dont think Toyota would be selling too many $100,000 Toyotas if they were priced as such without thinking about renaming it to Lexus.

Many people out there who dont 'know' what chief is hears chief architect as chief architect, they go to costco and see the $79 dollar special they see that as CHIEF ARCHITECT. Those same people dont log onto chiefs website and see that the professional version is well over $2000 and has more features.

I have to agree, if this were my business I would probably call the home versions something completely different, with perhaps a tiny (extra tiny) label saying made by the makers of chief architect, if they were going to keep the Chief Architect name for the top of the line flag ship.

Good point Johnny, I agree with your brand imaging explanation.

I also was thinking of my own experience with this. Several people who know I use chief said, oh yeah we were going to remodel our place and paint so we saw chief at the store and were going to buy it to help us with our color choices. I never knew you could do all that you do Chad with such an inexpensive software it was less then $100. It would be great if it were only $100 and could do what it could do but the truth is it doesnt nor does that lesser version do the half of what the full version does. So Johnny I can see the awkward conversation that you had at the AIA, its like you have to explain further, if you dont want to appear to be less then professional about your software you use.

[Dave Pitman]

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?

[johnnyprc]

OK, we all know 2D tools are the simplest part of the program. Why not have more and better tools for people like me? Make it so schooled architects/designers who have been taught to approach things a certain way, CAN with CA. I'd love to have the same 2D tools as Vectorworks and/or AutoCad.

Improve the UI (user interface). We need to feel that our tool is not a toy. More importantly, the flow of drawing should be greatly considered.

Personally, CA should change its name for the flagship full blow software. The problem is that Chief Architect is the name of the company, but everyone relates it to the name of the software. Due to that, the $20 Costco version makes laymen think they are buying Chief Architect.

My clients always ask what software I use. I sometimes export my CA model into 3D Studio Max - when i have a "live" meeting - just so it is in a framework of another app people respect (i am not joking).

CA is hurting themselves with the name recognition being with the "cheep" apps.

[perryh]

I think people are forgetting that Chief was developed as a residential design software and some people have found a way to go commercial. It was never intended for large commercial projects in the first place.

[johnnyprc]

I think people are forgetting that Chief was developed as a residential design software and some people have found a way to go commercial. It was never intended for large commercial projects in the first place.

Yeah, but now it is so good if they came a bit forward I think they would be the best hands down - why not go for that?

[yusuf]

Creativity. i just start the particular assignment in mind. then on my way i get
some thing i did not have a thought. i believe,to me ca is like simply writing in the default font then editing! all of them starts from single point.

[johnnyprc]

sutcac - I went to your site - good work. That is exactly why CA is so good. All that would be very hard in other apps.

[johnnyprc]

yusuf - did you do that metal glass frame in CA? I have been wondering how to do that.

[yusuf]

yusuf - did you do that metal glass frame in CA? I have been wondering how to do that.

yes jony.
thank u
i will send you as a custom library item or a plan that contains it

[yusuf]

yusuf - did you do that metal glass frame in CA? I have been wondering how to do that.

sorry i had to respond earlier.
some times connection is slow and a bit difficult
to respond on time. suddenly i found a plan you posted earlier
and did the widows in it.
you perform well in others so ca needs you!
in a short time hopefully you will be doing your nice jobs in ca

[Doug Park]

Thanks for the input on printing. To recap what I got out of this is that it isn't a printing issue at all, but an issue in how we convert a 3D model to lines. Is that correct?

Chief tries to create a faithful representation of the lines that one would get when converting a 3D model to lines. In some cases, as was pointed out, the desired result is more artistic and requires some manual work to get correct.

This can be done quite quickly using the tools in the program, but I would imagine that most would rather we did it for them automatically.

Unfortunately, it is nearly impossible to program artistic decisions as they are rarely consistent.

We could probably do a post process look at lines and try to make them heavier or remove them depending on the situation to get closer to the look you want.

Up to this point in time we have been mostly focused on making sure the lines are all there and accurate. Going the other direction of dropping lines that are really there based on the doubling up effect in certain cases is a good idea.

We do get requests a lot for making the outline of the building, windows and other items heavier. I'm not entirely sure we can do that automatically and get it right 100% of the time. I will give it some thought though.

Chief is not focused primarily on 2D drawing, although when it gets down to features when I have this discussion with people it usually boils down to not being aware of the full depth of features available to manipulate 2D in Chief. It is very rare that someone comes up with something that we can't do quickly in 2D.

Most of the time what it boils down to is that we do it differently than other CAD programs.