Looking for an objective opinion as to how well Archicad does construction documents

[Anonymous]

I'm looking for a long term software solution that does the best job with making construction documents. I've been playing with Sketchup and Rhino but feel that the process for turning the model into condocs is clunky.

Other contending software that I'm looking at are:

Revit
Chief Architect
Softplan

If anyone has experience with any of those for condocs please let me know your thoughts.

Thanks.

[Steve Jepson]

Jackreese108
From reading a few of your posts, I suspect that you may not really understand what Construction Documents even are. Have you ever made working drawings for a building? Or is this just something you would like to start doing, and this is why you want to choose a CAD program carefully, making sure it can do what you imagine you would want to do with it.

This is important to understand if we are to give you any useful advice. And what kind of buildings would you want to make plans for? Will you have any need to collaborate with others... that sort of thing.

Whatever the case may be, you are in the right place. There are ArchiCAD users here at every skill level and construction experience, making plans for every kind of building large or small. And plenty of them that will enjoy helping you along the way from where ever you are at now.

[Steve Jepson]

poco2013 wrote:

Steve wrote:
I think this is a matter of skill with the program not it's functionality.

Everyone is entitled but I disagree (mostly) that it's a matter of skill here. More a matter of familiarity and experience with the programs. Or the degree of training required in comparison. The view posted can be done with a few clicks in residential programs with a complete listing and summaries of all elements without resorting to objects and/or property programing, and without too much training - not impressed if that was you point as i am aware of the effort & time to produce the same in Archicad vs other programs. Same with Kitchens. It's not a matter of "can it be done" but the effort.

I strongly suggest that the poster obtain a demo of Archicad and make the direct comparisons himself.

I think Jackreese108 would need many hours of training for each of those program demos to even know how to compare them. I could be wrong, but I think he is just beginning to explore what making Construction Documents is all about.
I am not posting the picture to impress anyone, I am posting a picture I had quick access to as an example for Jackreese108, to show him that ArchiCAD has the potential to be as good as any program for making framing models, framing plans, framing diagrams, schedules...

"without resorting to objects and/or property programing, and without too much training" ??
The model shown is entirely regular ArchiCAD elements. Columns, beams, roofs, slabs, walls, complex profiles, standard library parts, a little SEO, not even any accessory tools. And it is unique enough in so many ways that there is no "residential program" that can do what I am doing with ArchiCAD in "a couple of clicks" . This isn't all being done primarily for the sake of a materials list either, as it would be with some of the other programs. It's being modeled for more uses than I care to list. Things that are not even possible in programs like CA and SP which are not BIM software.
".... i am aware of the effort & time to produce the same in ArchiCad vs other programs...."
Are you? Or are you just unaware of how to do it better in ArchiCAD ?
"Same with Kitchens. It's not a matter of "can it be done" but the effort."
The effort for who? You, Me, Jack...?
For all I know, you are just not aware that ArchiCAD can do things very well witch you think other programs can do better.
And how would Jack know that? He doesn't. It's all subjective opinion if one program is better for someone than for someone else.
For myself I still choose ArchiCAD and I am free to use any program I want. In two or three years time I am sure I could be very good at using any of them.
For someone just starting out, I would recommend Revit. I don't like using Revit at all, but by the time they have 10 years experience with Revit it is likely to be a better choice than ArchiCAD. I base that very sad opinion on what I think Revit is becoming vs what I think ArchiCAD is becoming.
In ten years, I don't plan to care anymore.

[Anonymous]

Steve wrote:
Jackreese108
From reading a few of your posts, I suspect that you may not really understand what Construction Documents even are.

I know exactly what they are, I do occasionally need to refer to them for my work. Yet, I have never created them and so in that sense I am new to this. I suspect you are making your assumption because of my particular definition of quality when content is the most important aspect. Having all the necessary details in the docs is the priority I realize. But that aspect is a matter of my "capturing" that data in the layout phase and does not have much to do with the software as it will present what I give it, but how it is presented is a matter of the software. Maybe I am missing something here.

Steve wrote:
And what kind of buildings would you want to make plans for? Will you have any need to collaborate with others... that sort of thing.

As I mentioned I do residential building, and have no need for collaboration.

Steve wrote:
Whatever the case may be, you are in the right place. There are ArchiCAD users here at every skill level and construction experience, making plans for every kind of building large or small. And plenty of them that will enjoy helping you along the way from where ever you are at now.

Thanks very much Steve, I appreciate your encouragement and support.

Jack

[poco2013]

Steve wrote:
For all I know, you are just not aware that ArchiCAD can do things very well witch you think other programs can do better.
And how would Jack know that? He doesn't. It's all subjective opinion if one program is better for someone than for someone else.

Good Advice!!
Which the poster will find out if he cares to actually demo the software. But I also agree that a 30 day Demo is insufficient to get a feel of a program's productivity. Best path is to spend several weeks viewing training materials and perhaps Youtube videos before starting the demo period. i would also suggest that you just don't select the videos randomly but try to target them to the type of projects and specific work you just completed. As in, how would I do the same thing in: Also it would be worth while to enroll in some of the training classes offered for the 'final cut' software considered. Rather expensive to do, but worth it in the long run. Finally -- just take a project, as the one displayed, and work it in the demos to find out how you would do the same in each.

IOW: That's why all of us are suggesting "you look before---": Talk mainly to those who have actually completed the same type projects in both sets of software. Forums are not a good place to do this as you will only see mostly bias. Good Luck!!

[felcunha]

Steve wrote:
For someone just starting out, I would recommend Revit. I don't like using Revit at all, but by the time they have 10 years experience with Revit it is likely to be a better choice than ArchiCAD. I base that very sad opinion on what I think Revit is becoming vs what I think ArchiCAD is becoming.
In ten years, I don't plan to care anymore.

Well, not me. I've been using Revit for 4 years before moving to Archicad, and I continue to use it occasionally (and teach it as well). Revit has a lot of qualities but it's (really really) heavy to use and specially to produce and manage construction documents.
For people dealing with architecture more than with structure and MEP, and wanting to be designers and not software experts, I recommend Archicad over Revit. A thousand times.

[Richard Morrison]

Jackreese108 wrote:
I've been looking hard at Chief Architect, downloaded trial and reading forums and tutorials. Here is my sense of CA at this point, and I'm hoping Richard and anyone else with experience can tell me if my assessment is accurate or not. CA is a very fast and easy way to model a relatively simple residential design, and from there it has a streamlined process of creating con docs from that design. But what I'm hearing, and have seen of an actual doc shown on youtube is that the docs do not look good at all, cramped and fuzzy. Maybe CA does not have the 2d toolset to spruce up the docs and improve the layout and readability? Or maybe it is the users lack of deeper knowledge and skill with the software?

The other limitation about CA I'm seeing is that it does not have the flexibility of a Sketchup type modeler. I can build a home in sketchup (fairly quickly) with every stud and sheet of drywall built up. Not that I would need to do that, but I would like to have that functionality. I know I said we do simple construction around here, but I'd like to potentially branch out into more unconventional designs. Does CA have that design flexibility?

The documents that may be appearing "cramped and fuzzy" are certainly not Chief Architect's fault. You have total control over placement, size, lineweights, fonts, etc. Bad-looking construction documents are undoubtedly due to the inexperience of the drafter. There are some sample construction drawings in PDF format on the Chief Architect website in the "Samples Gallery," so you can see for yourself. There is an _okay_ 2D toolset in Chief, although AC's is better. You can certainly create anything you want in Sketchup and simply drag it into Chief Architect, as you sort of can in ArchiCAD, although with AC's morph tool, you don't have to.

The framing model that Steve showed would take about 30 sec's to create in Chief, and you'd get a full list of materials. However, Steve does some of the nicest and most complete residential construction doc's I've ever seen, so maybe you could get him to show you a sample of what an advanced AC user can do.

The artistic qualities that can be achieved in 2D construction docs are probably higher in AC than CA, and even higher in Vectorworks. The time you put into this end can be very self-satisfying for someone who truly appreciates it, but it makes for a very poor business model.

[Anonymous]

Thanks Richard,

I'm going to finish this project with sketchup/layout as I need to get it done and don't have time to learn anything else right now. But when I'm done I'm going to try and do the same project in CA and see how it compares. I like the idea of Archicad and Vectorworks (hate the idea of revit - marketing-centric software) but those programs might be a little overkill for me right now. And checking the price of vectorworks at 3000 (AC is probably similar) that is a bit more than I'm willing to spend at this stage in the game.

[Richard Morrison]

Jackreese108 wrote:
And checking the price of vectorworks at 3000 (AC is probably similar)

A full version of AC will be _significantly_ more. (Think $5000 +) There is a rental option, as well, I believe. ArchiCAD Solo is an option at less cost, but then you won't get the Cinerender engine included. Maybe this information simplifies your choices.

[Karl Ottenstein]

Adding to Richard's post on pricing... ARCHICAD 21 Solo lists for USD 2,995 and 21 Professional (Full) is 5,495. As a solo practitioner, the Solo product is probably sufficient for your described needs - unless you need/want the Cinerender rendering functionality as Richard mentions. Scroll down here for prices for permanent license ... as well as short term rentals. (Your geographic reseller may be different.)
https://bim6x.com/store

Some info on file compatibility between versions is here:
https://helpcenter.graphisoft.com/technotes/licensing/archicad-license-types/

Feature differences:
http://www.graphisoft.com/archicad/solo-edition/

Finally - a 2 year old blog post by Jared Banks gives an experienced user's perspective on Solo (which replaced the more limited START edition). Keep in mind that Solo 21 has more features than are described here:
http://www.shoegnome.com/2016/03/27/archicad-solo-has-limitations-and-thats-great/

[Steve Jepson]

felcunha wrote:

Steve wrote:
For someone just starting out, I would recommend Revit. I don't like using Revit at all, but by the time they have 10 years experience with Revit it is likely to be a better choice than ArchiCAD. I base that very sad opinion on what I think Revit is becoming vs what I think ArchiCAD is becoming.
In ten years, I don't plan to care anymore.

Well, not me. I've been using Revit for 4 years before moving to Archicad, and I continue to use it occasionally (and teach it as well). Revit has a lot of qualities but it's (really really) heavy to use and specially to produce and manage construction documents.
For people dealing with architecture more than with structure and MEP, and wanting to be designers and not software experts, I recommend Archicad over Revit. A thousand times.

ArchiCAD is the better program. Sadly, that is very seldom the most critical factor in selecting a software program to build your career around. I love using ArchiCAD because I just a little one man show and I don't need to collaborate with other BIM software programs. ArchiCAD has everything I need , and then some. But not everyone can work as independently as I do.