topic Re: I'm worried about using ArchiCAD in Licensing

I'm worried about using ArchiCAD

Anonymous — Thu, 25 May 2023 16:09:31 GMT

Hi,

So I'm on a student forum and a member on there has asked about ArchiCAD training... I said that I used ArchiCAD etc. and that I really think it's efficient.

A different (3rd year student) said that he would not recommend using ArchiCAD because it's not used by many Architects...

I already knew that AutoCAD is much more widely used but I've never really thought of it in detail:

Say in 3rd year, I contact Architect firms for work placement (as required) and it turns out that all the ones in my area only use AutoCAD, what would I do?

I briefly know how to use AutoCAD, but no way near as good as fellow students (who actually got lower grades than me). Surely as an employer, they will look at the experience and knowledge each student has to decide wether or not to employ them.

Should I use my spare time (2 months) to learn AutoCAD more, even though I know I will not use it for University, but just for the purpose of preparing myself for work placement?

AutoCAD can't be that complicated can it? I mean it's only really 2D lines? I know how to take a section of a building manually as ArchiCAD draws it for you, so there's no problem with the knowledge of how sections/plans or elevations work, it's just how the software implements them.

Why don't many people use ArchiCAD?

Thank you very much for your views on this.

Re: I'm worried about using ArchiCAD

Anonymous — Wed, 30 Jun 2010 19:41:33 GMT

Apparantley, Microstation, revit and Vectorworks are required my more employers in the UK, with ArchiCAD at the bottom (information taken from job posts online)

I will look at Vectorworks as it works on Mac and looks very similar to ArchiCAD. The one thing I've not seen in any other application is the fact that it's Building software. This means that only ArciCAD uses technical and generic names for components i.e wall, roof window etc. This may not seem that supeiroir, but it's go to better than just working with the 'line' tool. Plus with these feature in ArchiCAD, you learn about wall thicknesses etc.a s well as wall fills window materials... I'm not sure Vectorworks does this.

I value any opinions...

Thank You

Re: I'm worried about using ArchiCAD

Anonymous — Wed, 30 Jun 2010 20:47:59 GMT

Interesting question!

Generally, in the UK AutoCAD is probably the most common 2d architectural drawing tool that architects use, so your friend is right : more architects will be using AutoCAD than ArchiCAD.

Mind you, if we were talking about full 3d BIM software (which in my opinion is the future) I'd guess that there were similar numbers using ArchiCAD compared to Autodesks Revit at the moment, and these numbers will keep increasing as time goes on, as this way of working offers many benefits over 2d drawing especially with complex schemes.

Bearing all that in mind, I'd say it would still be a wise decision to get some practice with AutoCAD exactly for the reasons you mention. You don't want to limit your employment possibilities. It is so fundamentally different to ArchiCAD it would be a pain trying to learn it whilst at the same time attempting to produce professional work from it. It wouldn't do any harm to learn a bit about Revit & Vectorworks either, but you wont have enough time to learn any more than the basics!

The question about the depth of knowledge you need to be productive is a little difficult to answer. I have seen many CVs from students who claim to 'know' AutoCAD, Sketchup, Revit, Vectorworks, Microstation and ArchiCAD, but I know full well there is a massive difference between being able to open the program and draw a few lines, and actually knowing all the techniques to be productive in a professional environment. In actual terms it takes months to become really comfortable in a program, (and maybe years to master an extra complex program like ArchiCAD or Revit!). A lot of it is knowing the best technique to use in a particular situation - and none of the programs work in quite the same way!

Once you had a bit of practice on your own, I'd always advise trying to get a professional user to show you around the software and point out where you're going wrong. You'll learn a lot more in a shorter time!

Good luck with whatever you decide!

Re: I'm worried about using ArchiCAD

Anonymous — Wed, 30 Jun 2010 21:34:32 GMT

Peter wrote:

Once you had a bit of practice on your own, I'd always advise trying to get a professional user to show you around the software and point out where you're going wrong. You'll learn a lot more in a shorter time!

Good luck with whatever you decide!

That's exactly what I want to do. I would love to go into a Architects Office and see how they work. I don't think that anyone would want to employ a student who won't necessarily be able to offer their anything to the company due to lack of experience. (unless it's unpaid, do Architects do/want the hassle of a non-professional taking up their office space?)

A friend from Uni, in my group is at an Architects office in the UK (Cambridge) and she says that she doesn't like it (well her Facebook status is " Can't wait for my holiday", "Don't want to go to work tomorrow" "It's being a long day" etc.) and she is just producing 3D models in sketchup but she went to the same practice when she was in school (16 years old) for work experience (compulsory), so they asked her to come back when she studies Architecture...

I read a lot into software and there are far to many competitors to choose one application, this can only be determined by the employer. On this forum, the threads like 'AutoCAd vs ArchiCAD' always bring up a debate as to which is better and more often the ArchiCAD supporters will say that people who use AutoCAD will be 'bored and not really motived' since it's just 2D.

I think that Vectorworks had an advantage here because it's very similar to ArchiCAD (BIM) and works in the same way i.e based on a building model is where the documentation is produced. I feel that AutoCAD it too time consuming to draw each section and elevation individually, then have to create a 3D model, not to mention the time it takes to update each drawing if you add an extra window etc.

Have you used Vectorworks? Does it have the built in library like ArchiCAD ? Can I download external library parts ? Does it function as a building modeller of more of a free-form modeller and animation? Are the tools labelled as line.polyine etc. or do they use real world components like Wall and Roof?

I'm not asking you to answers these questions, but these are fundamentally, things I need to look at. I have to address the issues that in the UK, most Architects will be using AutoCAD, or at least more Architects will be using Microstation or Vectorworks over ArchiCAD (for some reason, I don't know why)

Next Summer, I'm going to try and get placement in an Architects office as this summer I need to learn more software and work as much as possible (in retailing, hate the job!) I actually worry about what's going to happen at year 3 if I only know ArchiCAD and C4D, but the Practice wants me to use AutoDESK only products. I guess I can just say "I used ArchiCAD, what do you use" and them turn it down because I don't know the software.

Being a student is very stressful. The professors expect us to produce professional work from day one, they couldn't care less that we haven't used the software before. I don't know how so many Architecture Students (or students in general) can go out 3-4 times a week and not bother to learn more. I'm certainly not a clone of the 'typical' student. I spend ALL my time and money on equipment, materials and books for the course and worry too much about my future - but that's the way I am! I want to be a successful Architect and achieve higher grades, but I deserve it... you'll never see me in a club! (I'm not being big-headed or anything here)

I guess that once your in a company you like working for, you can settle for which ever software they use.As I'm not employed or have not graduated, I can't simply decide that I like ArchiCAD because the interface is intuitive or that I don't like AutoDESK products because they won't work on my Mac ( although rumour has it, AutoCAD is coming to the Mac this year)

Re: I'm worried about using ArchiCAD

Anonymous — Thu, 01 Jul 2010 21:01:17 GMT

Any drawing software is a only tool for manufacturing buildings and architecture. Once you are able to master one, you will be able to master them all, because you will have the mindset to do so.
Plurality is a good thing on your curriculum vitae. While you are studying, it is best learn a few tools.
Once you can prove your ability to master a tool, any employer will hire you. But there is nothing wrong with a strong preference for ArchiCAD.

Re: I'm worried about using ArchiCAD

Anonymous — Thu, 01 Jul 2010 21:11:35 GMT

Master wrote:
Any drawing software is a only tool for manufacturing buildings and architecture. Once you are able to master one, you will be able to master them all, because you will have the mindset to do so.
Plurality is a good thing on your curriculum vitae. While you are studying, it is best learn a few tools.
Once you can prove your ability to master a tool, any employer will hire you. But there is nothing wrong with a strong preference for ArchiCAD.

That's what I wanted to hear.

I looked on RIBA today (UK ArchitectureBody, and standard for education of Architects) and they had around 25 jobs across the UK. 3 of those jobs were for ArchiCAD and Mac Computers! (My dream come true)

What else I've realised is that the University doesn't bring students down to earth, or rather the tutors are not dealing or implementing reality. The reality is that not all Architecture Practices produce ' Colourful' elevations and fancy 3D renderings (which is what I want to do and to me, is the future) In reality I've heard that a young Architect makes door schedules and does not make design decisions, despite the 7 years of training.

Making design decisions isn't really what I expected - why should I make these decisions when the boss has been working their for 20 year's and has more experience... Also what Uni doesn't teach students is basic construction. We have not been taught exactly how a building is made, how it works etc. which is probably why Architects (or at least young Architects) are under paid and exploited... Don't get me wrong, Uni is great, I love it but I know that what happens in there probably won't happen in the real world. There exsuce is that the building isn't going to be built, or Uni is for 'creativity' the job deals with reality.

Re: I'm worried about using ArchiCAD

Fez1974 — Sat, 03 Jul 2010 23:06:18 GMT

Hi NStocks,
I remember that name, I think I gave you a few hours training on Archicad a while back so I'm please you are still pasionate about it.
I've been on and off archicad for the last 4 years due to the economy. I had to revert back to my native microstation for 18months because thats all the jobs that were on offer after I was made redundant in 08. I'm now back into an archicad environment.
The point is, you need as many strings to your bow as possible, (especially at this current time) and unfortunately firms want students to hit the ground running and employ them on the basis of CAD experience rather than architectural flare. I learnt microstation in '95 but discovered revit in '03 and purchased a copy. Unfortunately no architects in birmingham really used it and I gave up on it and still have the box collecting dust. In '07 I found a firm using archicad and joined them purely on the basis that I wanted to get into an office using BIM and I learnt it in a couple of months but luckily I got the job on the basis of experience, you don't have that at the moment and you need it.
On another point; most architects will never move to BIM and stick to 2D. I suggest you get some knowledge of Autocad and Microstation to help you get a job, then after a few months take in your educational copy of Archicad and do some free work in it to show your boss and convince him to purchase a copy, which is expensive to be honest. Companies need to be profitable at the end of the day and alot of current 2D staff don't like moving up to new versions, let alone learning different software, or god forbid learning BIM. So training is expensive but the loss of productivity is a massive loss too. I know staff leave companies due to a change in software, albeit in the dizzy heights of the boom years in 05/06.
I don't use, in fact I refuse to learn Autocad but I can help you with microstation if necessary.
regards
mark

Re: I'm worried about using ArchiCAD

Dwight — Sun, 04 Jul 2010 18:49:17 GMT

NStocks wrote:
We have not been taught exactly how a building is made, how it works etc. which is probably why Architects (or at least young Architects) are under paid and exploited

Despite seven years of 'training', you will enter a firm UNABLE TO DO ANYTHING REAL. They gift you a salary and let you hang around to refine your craft and learn how buildings really get created, not paying your own way with billables for two years or so, in the hope that you'll eventually make a cultural contribution or marry a rich politician's daughter and bring in some work.

Want to learn building technology? Go to technical school. Work in construction [for a real eye-opener]. You'll be able to assist architects in their work as they gaily wave their arms in the air to describe what you are to produce. [see my avatar].

Accept the following:

1: What you just got is an "education", not training. You don't need to know "exactly" how a building is made because you don't need to know that. "Sort of" is close enough. What you are expected to know as a young architect is how to interpret ideas in a cultural context, bringing the memory of the wonderful spaces you've seen in photos and visited in person - to enrich the world. AND door schedules.

2: The subtleties and realities of architectural practice are learned through apprenticeship, like any decent profession. Even men's clothiers need to learn the correct degree of flattery to keep commissions flowing. I recently bought a fine jacket on the way to a funeral. The guy hung the threads upon me and said "You could be a model for this brand of jacket, it fits so well." I am sure he overheard that from some old guy. [Remember to never say that to someone with a dowager's hump]

3: It is harder now to develop architecturally with BIM applications since the level of architectural knowledge needed to productively work is greater than ever. Because views are integrated in a model, you can't have a monkey drawing a plan all alone anymore. This is, in part, why interns get the schedules. It exposes them to the team process while reducing the impact of an error. Do schedules with gratitude and learn finishes, flame spread and hardware while you do them. Can you say "astragal"?

3A: Producing architecture requires the juggling of many balls at once, and once you have finished your meeting with the bosses and washed your hands, it is time to consider all facets of the work - something you can't do weighed down by the dreary realities of flashing and optimal beam sizes that afflict the guys who know exactly how to assemble buildings.

4: If you think computer skills are going to help you or that 3D renderings are the future of design, get thee to a nunnery animation school. Managing, not producing work is the route to progress.

5: Making progress in a firm means being able to anticipate what is needed in a project and providing it to facilitate team decisions. Do this well and soon they'll trust you with bigger decisions and teach you how to wave your arms with authority while directing stooges. The best thing I ever did was to identify a huge error in a project in which I was planning the hard landscape. The bossman had sketched a bike path going under a transit guideway with five feet of clearance. This, after six weeks of layout by a prior worker. Duh.

6: While you think you know something, you need to approach firms with the attitude that you are starting out and need to learn. A spectrum of software skills only shows that you are adaptable and a good learner.

7: When they ask you to learn a new software, do it on your own time and READ the manual. You should hide your bad attitude to learning as expressed on this forum by reading manuals and doing the training.

Re: I'm worried about using ArchiCAD

Fez1974 — Sun, 04 Jul 2010 22:24:45 GMT

Just picking up on what Dwight had replied to your comment of not knowing how buildings go together. Many universities in England will only teach design and not construction. They want architects to design without the influence of construction limitations. I have employed many young architects who don't know the size of a brick, building terminology or a clue of building regulations. Leaving university at the age of 25, in debt, and very green is tough and it will take you a few years to get to grips with it all. Hence employers asking for a few years experience post graduation. That is why I chose the technician route and something I don't regret, albeit had 9 years education of my own, but part-time. I think you should consider doing your post-grad (part 2) part-time as you will get alot of experience in the office.
Finally, most architects probably spend less than 10% of their time designing. I'm sure a few will disagree with that statement but I even worked with an architect who admitted he'd never designed one single building in all of his career.

Re: I'm worried about using ArchiCAD

Dwight — Sun, 04 Jul 2010 23:16:49 GMT

The reason for all of this construction vagueness is that no one ever masters all building types in detail. AND it is a waste of time to engage students in this time-consuming and soul-destroying process. Things change rapidly in our profession since new software, methods and materials emerge daily - why dwell on archaic specifics [Archicad included]?

As a career progresses, one gets a feel for the design constraints of wood frame, low masonry, concrete or steel high-rise, but technology specialists are the ones who apply details - this is NOT an architect's area of skill, but falls to the proprietary structural detailer, or glazing detailer, or whatever.

The architect's job is to provide PLAUSIBLE design work to the construction document team. For instance, I once gathered a group of junior and intermediate designers together to explain that water does not flow uphill, you idiots! You need no detailing skill to understand drainage paths from a structure. Common sense, not detailed knowledge, is vital in design.

Another for instance: we were doing the design development of a sports club expansion when it came to light that the design partner had put the tennis courts beyond the property line. I re-figured the plan to get everything in. He said "I don't think that they will go for this since I promised them sunnier tennis courts." Then he went back to drinking and chasing snatch. [An obscure form of cricket practiced in Canada with balls, a 'bat' and a 'wicket.']

And you NEVER know how badly a building is assembled until you see your boss cave in to a bad framing practice [cantilevered balcony joists] during a meeting with the construction manager instead of a secure practice guaranteeing constant envelope maintenance [independent balcony structure] after you have convinced him that this is the only way to avoid a lawsuit later. AND he had dandruff!

And, besides, you NEVER know how a building is created and assembled until you've been through the actual process several times, from concept to field services. You might resent the lack of practical preparation school provides, but they are trying to expand your mind with superior ability and perception that may take years to emerge.

A good 'for instance' here is LEED - energy and environmental design. We studied these issues in the 1970's, but it wasn't until there was a political program to promote, celebrate and award builders who spent extra capital that clients paid attention to the new ideas. It only took 25 years to happen.

Building is stupid. You'll get the basics within one year by studying drawings and whining to your betters. Just like posting on Archicad TALk instead of reading the manuals. It will probably come as a heartbreak to discover the difficulty, unreliability and outrageous costs of creating those saggy,swoopy losenges you made in design school, back when your architectural mind was embryonic, too. But water flows down hill no matter what the software says.

Re: I'm worried about using ArchiCAD

TMA_80 — Mon, 05 Jul 2010 10:16:08 GMT

this is really an intresting discussion ... (aside from the software part)

I'm interested to know who is teaching at the university are they practitioners or theoreticians ?

( eventhough both of them complete each other )

Re: I'm worried about using ArchiCAD

Anonymous — Thu, 15 Jul 2010 18:49:29 GMT

It's nice to see this thread still has views on the 'concerns' I pointed out...

Dwight: You mention a few time about reading the manuals which had me a little confused. Manuals are great for understanding how something works but the main reason I joined this forums is because I simply don't have time to find the exact part of the manual that may or may not answer my question. Because I started Uni only 10 months ago, we were expected to do a lot or work right from day one (not that this is a bad thing), so I panicked, admittedly. I saw a problem that was; not been able to use some software so rather than guessing what the tool was, I came on this forum to ask professionals what tool I needed to get the problem done, a direct approach. If my deadline had not been so short then yes, I would have read the manual.

Yourself and fez1974 have both put my mind at ease about the construction side of studying Architecture. I visited a student forum (generic, not architectural) asking about what other student get taught at University. 2 of the members said that University is degrading the Architecture/construction industry because they are simply not teaching us what a foundation is or how wide a flight of stairs need to be etc. They were too focused on making 'unique' building rather than creating a building that 'worked' That night I couldn't stop thinking "What on earth am I going to do in 1-2 years when I complete part 1 / get a intern and not know the basic of a building). Luckily for me I already studied 'construction' (2-years Diploma) prior to going to University so I know some of the basics which have sure enough helped me out (along with the Metric handbook)

I now understand why my tutor keeps telling me "Not to worry about construction" and that I need to focus on problem solving and design decisions. But to me, partly why there was problems, at least in my project was because the design didn't comply with building reg's etc. Again, I was told to ignore this.... My 2nd project was half way though and we were to focus on 'Environmental factors ' on a given site such as wind direction,heat, climate etc. I came out with flying colours. I studied these factors and altered my design accordingly by adding elements such as shading devices, along with Autodesk EcoTECT analysis, my building was one of the best design because it was shaded correctly and didn't overheat in the summer (this project was buildable, habitable design, not to make a building look free-form')

I've decided to 'stay' with ArchiCAD for now, instead of learning vectorworks (and I already know the basics of AutoCAD). I've looked at Microstation, which is what my tutor uses but I've yet to try it out. Over the summer (or this week) I'm looking at C4D and Maxwell to help me with rendering which in essence is what design is about; how your concept is presented (plus the Uni is big on presentation)

I know I have a very long way to go before I can even think about myself as being an Architect, but that's why I'm committed to study and not to waste my time in clubs every night which is what 90% of the students do.I'm taking ALL advice given to me on board and I'm going to read manuals, in particular how to create complex profile as this is something I really want to do.

Just out of curiosity, when you was a student, what was running through your mind? Did you just follow what the tutors told you or did you think to yourself, I have no idea why they are teaching me this... Vague I know, teaching methods change all the time, apparently for the better...

Re: I'm worried about using ArchiCAD

Erika Epstein — Fri, 16 Jul 2010 03:44:26 GMT

Don't. Pick tools that will help you do they job you envision doing.

What to teach in school, this is an ongoing debate in our profession, I think the more successful programs keep students focused on design and theory the first few years. Later when students are more comfortable with designing they have them coordinate their designs with the other trades and evaluations as you describe:structural, mechanical, detailing, energy evaluation etc.

Using programs like Archicad where successful modeling follows how it is built requires you to think about how the building is goes together sooner than when we hand-drafted and worked in 2D and had all those poched areas that no one questioned and covered a multitude of sins and ignorance.

As to your original question, AC is as someone said, just a tool. You pick your tools so you can work smart to meet your goals. What do you want to be doing as an architect? How do you want to be practicing architecture in 5 , 10 or 25 years?

How you actually produce a building you will learn more on the job but the school should expose you to enough of the principles of the whole building and process that you won't be lost as Dwight was when he cantilevered his balconies

What kind of Architect you want to be?

One of the best pieces of advice I received was to spend a summer working in a small office. I saw and worked on all aspects of many projects. Back then small offices tended to equate to smaller projects. Now, with Archicad and the like small firms can compete for large projects.

Another summer I worked for a firm of over a hundred. Very different work and work experience. Large projects you work on for a long time. Seemed like forever. Some like the sameness for years; but not me. This is sounding like Goldilocks and the three bears. I then worked in medium sized firms and loved the variety of project types and sizes. For me this was right.

Get as many types of experiences as you can.

Take advantage of everything you can at school that you won't get once working. School should give you a foundation in the profession, but if they focus too much or too early on nuts and bolts of building then you won't be able to freely learn design basics.

And have fun.

Re: I'm worried about using ArchiCAD

Anonymous — Fri, 16 Jul 2010 14:07:23 GMT

I can't really say what type of Architect I want to be because I don't know. I don't know how a residential architect would work vs. a architect who take on schools, hotels and larger project.

Like many have said, I need to get work experience. I know this. This summer I will be spending my time reviewing last years works and altering it (as suggested by tutors) to prepare me for a work experience, so I can show them what I have done so far.I also need to earn money to pay for next year's costs which is quite a lot considering the loans I've already got... I'm not sure what kind of money I will be on next summer if I get a job or even where I will get a job. My town is fairly small (and dull) but I haven't a clue which software they use (I'm guessing AutoCAD). Again, I'm not trained I'm educated so if I don't know everything about AutoCAD for example, they will show me. I'd rather work for less pay and gain more experience than try to sell myself as a Pro at AutoCAD.

I know myself that I need to be more design-orientated . The year co-ordinated said to everyone in the lecture, some people are good at technical, some at design, some at both so it's down to the individual to pick up on this and work on the area accordingly. I have an idea of what I want to do in the second year in terms of the look of the building but this is far too vague to choose and application for. I don't know what the brief will require, other than 'standard drawings', plans,sections,elevations etc. etc. each project has similar requirements, such as orthographic drawings, technical details, renderings and model making process.

I could see myself dealing with residential Architecture, whichs may include house extensions, which is not what I want, this it too ' AutoCAD related' ,if that makes sense. The reason I say that is because when we had out house extended the Architect was not helpful. Firstly I was the one who said "Put the bathroom there, or the study wouldn't work there", he wasn't at alll engaged in our needs (we think he was pursuaded by our neighbour, who don't like us but also work in planning:? )... I actually ended up drawing the left part of our house! Then the Council wanted use to alter the back of the house because the neighbours didn't like it. Again, the Architect didn't help us on this (us meaning myself and my uneducated family in design) so I ended up drawing a north elevation for the council, so that they could get a brief idea of how double-doors would look...I'm not saying I was better than the Architect but I hear 'stories' that AutoCAD users don't seem engaged as much as BIM uses, for whatever reason. In fact, a colleague is working in a small Architects office in Cambridge. They use AutoCAD and she said she doesn't like it at all, mainly because there is not excitement looking at black lines all day, or because she has to make boxes in Sketchup.

Coming back to what I want to do. Well I want to create 3D renderings and I want to create building that not only function but tell a story (like most do). If you watch Grand Designs you will understand what I mean. I don't however see myself creating skyscrapers or living in Dubai... A Architecture Practice with around 10 employees seems ideal to me, but like you said, the software can control the size of the project.