ArchiCAD is such a pain after AutoCAD!

[Anonymous]

I have only been using ArchiCAD for a few months after using AUtoCAd for ten years and so far I am finding it far worse than AutoCAD, I have to say.

Why anyone would actually choose to use this program over AutoCAD is beyond me especially as drawing 3d architecture is just plain ridiculous IMO!!

I mean does anyone here actually draw architecture in 3d? Because I find the 3d library so limiting in terms of my design wishes. What do I do if I want a certain glass staircase or somethign else that isnt in the library? Surely not design a new 3d model of it!?

And how can you draw a site using different levels, manholes, car spaces, drives etc all at different levels in 3d?

This whole fascination with 3d in architectrure really loses me - I just dont see the point in it and it definitely limits your design ability to waht is in the software.

Give me AutoCAD anytime!!

Anyone with any argument for using it? Please only respond if you are someone who isnt just doing houses or venacular buildings but 'proper' architecture!

Nats

[Rakela Raul]

Perhaps if many people here had used drawing boards as architects they might agree.

im from that era and wouldnt go back to that....
btw, liking the quick image generation in archicad is just the beginning, after this stage you will realize that the plans production in ac is much more powerful than you see it now and the image production will not be the main thing of ac for you anymore.... you are on the rt track !!!

[TomWaltz]

nats wrote:
Personally I would prefer to go back to drawing boards they were far more pleasant to use than CAD anyway! I dont think that makes me a dinosaur. Perhaps if many people here had used drawing boards as architects they might agree.

I drafted manually and I don't agree. I enjoyed it at the time but would not go back to it.

[Anonymous]

nats wrote:

Philippe wrote:
Just kidding but you sounds pretty snobbish.

??Why is stating that a firm does churches to be considered snobbish?

Nats

No, no.
On the other hand, your requirement to get exclusively answers of people making "proper" architecture sounded snobbish

[Anonymous]

And by the way, come on to carefully hatch manually a church's massive structure (or a castle as I did a looooong time ago). It is so interesting.

[Anonymous]

I also come from the hand-drafting generation. I chose to embrace CAD in the 80's and I am a cheerleader for BIM now. You would never have been able to tell me this right out of school, but I really enjoy understanding how the pieces fit. It makes me a better architect, it allows me to have intelligent conversations with contractors who by the way I have learned a great amount from and because of that capability, I can use ArchiCAD with a reasonable level of efficiency.

Given the choice between believing the timeline given by Autodesk and Graphisoft or the "wisdom" of Nat's insight, I choose A and GS.

It might just be that Nats is one of those unfortunate few who are too entrenched in the glory of their former skill set that they dig in their heels, refuse to give adequate effort and will silently slip away, buried under the onrush of the 21st century.

Too bad Nats. You never get a second chance to make a first impression.

[Rakela Raul]

You never get a second chance to make a first impression.

wow !!!!!

[James Murray]

gbley wrote:
it allows me to have intelligent conversations with contractors who by the way I have learned a great amount from and because of that capability

I strongly second this. Not that you couldn't find out how things were built before. But it's axiomatic that when you're asking 'how do I do this in AC', you need to ask first, 'how do they do it in real life?'* And you need to find out. AC (BIM, whatever) lets you use this knowledge in from design development onward, and it gives a lot of leverage IMO.

*Hint: They don't draw a line. And not that AC perfectly reflects reality, but that is where you start.

[SeaGeoff]

As someone who has spent more time as a tradesperson and on a job site than in an office, and who's architecture skills have all been acquired through apprenticeship, I come at this from the other direction but arrive at the same conclusion. I never embraced 2D CAD. Instead I always looked to the computer to help me explore design and illuminate construction, first as a furniture maker using VectorWorks and now as an architect using ArchiCAD. And while I admire hand drafting skill I think the line-by-line approach has for many been a distraction that pulls one away from the art of building and toward the art of draughting where line weights and poches are indulged beyond any measure of necessity or reason. I often encounter skeptics who look for ways to denigrate products with lofty aspirations like ArchiCAD. Invariably they end up criticizing ArchiCAD based on their rigid notions of what architectural product should be. And due to the generational nature of technology and the pedantic nature of the profession such individuals are often found in positions of authority. I have had the distinct pleasure of working under two very talented architects, both trained in the pre-CAD era, whose stubborn obsession with the "Cult of the Drawing" has made the full implementation of model based design impossible. Unfortunately it is under just such a misconception that I currently labor. So my message to the skeptic(s) here: free your mind, and bless your lucky stars that you are so fortunate as to work for a firm forward thinking enough to embrace ArchiCAD and the progressive design process that goes with it.

[Thomas Holm]

James wrote:
I strongly second this. Not that you couldn't find out how things were built before. But it's axiomatic that when you're asking 'how do I do this in AC', you need to ask first, 'how do they do it in real life?'* And you need to find out. AC (BIM, whatever) lets you use this knowledge in from design development onward, and it gives a lot of leverage IMO.

Agreed. To illustrate, I just finished the structure of this house:

[andrewzarb]

nats wrote:
Ive just been trying to create a window with sloping jambs which has different angled jambs on both sidesNats

I'm obviously not an architect! But I could make that window in less than ten minutes without a script. Given a little more time I could make that window with a script which could be used over and over and be re-sized with all edges sloping at any angle. But that's not the point.

The point is that when you learned to draw you had to learn how to use a pencil or pen in a particular way, the relationship of the nib to your straight edge, rolling your pencil so you don't get a flat spot etc. Then you went to Autocad and had to learn the tools which replaced your straight edge your french curves and so on. Now you've moved to ArchiCAD (perhaps involuntarily) and you post a message that says "ArchiCAD is such a pain after AutoCAD!".

We're here to help, we like ArchiCAD and we like others to be able to enjoy it too. If you ned help say "Help." Don't tell us that ArchiCAD is rubbish and tell us that the notion that we might actually do what you think is going to be impossible for another ten years is ridiculous.

If you want to say that ArchiCAD is crap you're in the wrong forum, we won't believ you, go to the Autocad forum, they'll believe you.

If you want to know how to make a funky window that apperas automatically in all your plans elevations and sections without a script you can ask me nicely.