Template for AC 21

[Anonymous]

I created a great template file in our office that we've been using for quite a few years now. My question is; is there a point where I should start from scratch and create a new one? I've always migrated the template from the last version of ArchiCAD. Creating a new one from scratch is quite time consuming (though I know it pays off).

If starting from scratch, how much do I have to recreate? Can I bring in building materials, pen sets, composites, etc? I understand that starting over can remove potential bugs in the software... just wondering what is ok to migrate over and what might create problems.

[Steve Jepson]

Nathan wrote:

Steve wrote:

Link wrote:
...
If you're not using a dedicated template you're doing it wrong! :winkI:

Cheers,
Link.

Templates are great for beginners, for people who have little or no imagination for how to use ArchiCAD more efficiently, and people who are constrained by the need for strict and static standardization. All of which are legitimate reasons to use a dedicated Template. None of those things apply to me.

If you are not assembling new projects with pre-modeled assemblies from completed projects - you are doing it wrong.

Steve I am late to the party but am very passionate about BIM workflows and the use of ARCHICAD. Firstly before I start critiquing you on your views I want to understand where you are coming from. If you are a sole practitioner then feel free to stand by your views and keep doing what you are doing. I personally think your process is flawed in going from project to project but hey once again I don't know the type of work that you do. It may be cookie cutter stuff where you keep doing the same stuff over and over again. I suggest you watch your attribute mess you are creating and the library mess also.
Moving onto templates. I must be the biggest beginner here right now because I have once of the most complex templates used in practice globally. So I feel you have no idea of the needs for a well thought out template to control good quality output from over 50 staff. Now you talk as if when a template is created in one release it is frozen. No it isn't if there is something great that has been created on a project then you copy that across into the master template for the practice. Done once and then available for reuse. Pretty simple stuff really. Take your approach and you have excess information in the file that is not going to be 100% reused on the next project. Templates are useful for beginners to experts, maybe Rob Jackson is a beginner as well. Might pass on the message to him for you as well.

Cheers

Nathan

Why do you think my system must be flawed? I don't think you know anything about it do you? It is flawed because you can't imagine working without a Template? Perhaps you would like to hear about how and why I do that before passing judgment about it, or assume you are qualified to critique my work.

You use a Template because you need to control the office standards of of 50 users with it. That is perfectly reasonable.

I am a one man show. I rarely collaborate with more than just a structural engineer, and truss manufactures during production of construction documents. My projects are typically 3 to 5 thousand sqft. Sometimes I will make plans for 4 or 5 different houses that comprise a 20 house subdivision or something like that. I work on projects from the San Juans of Washington State to Georgia and lot of places between. Occasionally I work with an interior designer. I do some remodeling plans if I can't find any better work. I typically send plans out in various file formats to subcontractors with verifiable material lists for cost estimating, unless I am the one building the house. I have developed office standards over the last 30 years that I like and they are easy to maintain. You have no reason to assume that my attributes or libraries are a mess. I don't know why you would think that.

When the project is finished, it is no different than any other project of it's kind except for it's notably high standard of professional quality, exceptional usefulness, its technically beauty, they are always internally very well organized. They are optimised and ready to archive as a .pla or I could save them as a .tpl if I had any use for that.

I don't need to start from the beginning with a one-size-fits-all over bloated Template that tries to contain every conceivable thing a person might use someday. I prefer to let the Template(if it can be called that) evolve as I work. I am working with completed projects which are a kind of Template I suppose. This seems perfectly rational and efficient to me. I have multiple instances of similar completed projects open and I am taking pre-modeled assemblies from them to use in the assembly of a new project.
I use two or three monitors and may also be using multiple instances of some other program like AutoCAD.

Why is everyone so appalled at the idea of not using some sort of over Template? I don't need that.

For those of you who can't imagine working without a Template, have you ever tried to do what I am talking about? I like to use something similar to Clear Template 19 as the start of a new project and build that up as I work into exactly what I need. Nothing extra, nothing missing. Just a super clean and efficient project file. I use one good pen set and one Work Environment everything.

Any questions about how I do it? Ask me can I can demonstrate how I do it without a Template. Don't just assume that it is impossible to work efficiently without a Template.

[Nathan Hildebrandt]

Steve I stand by my comment mate. Just read my response properly. As a sole practitioner do what you want to do it doesn't effect anyone else. Just don't try and force a sole practitioner workflow at others that have differing needs to yours. Everyone is entitled to an opinion. And I made that comment at the start of my post. You fit the bill for being everything a template based practice isn't so keep doing what you are doing.

Have a good weekend.

Cheers

Nathan

[Anonymous]

Steve wrote:
There is no need to "sett up" a new project. You open a similar project or two if needed, and let the new one evolve as you assemble it, mostly via copy and pasting pre-modeled building ststems that are simply placed and adjusted for the new configurations to make new buildings. There are unorthodox "Workflows" that are exponentially more efficient than the start with a Template idea. There is one Template I do like to use on occasion. It's called the Clear Template think it can be found in a search on this forum.

Steve, I hate to be adding to the pile of comments that seem to be burying you in this attitude, but I feel comments like this are dangerous on an open forum. Others have alluded to or flat out stated that this attitude of dismissing templates is dangerous and unhelpful if others adopt it.

If you have unorthodox "Workflows" that are the basis for your efficiency, you need to bake those into a TEMPLATE! To say you don't need a template because you have workflows that circumnavigate the need for a standard starting point, you are essentially making a circular argument against yourself. Starting with a "Similar Project" as suggested in another of your comments on this thread is equally perplexing. Why not bake in every project type you may need into your template, then remove the unnecessary ones.

There are two attitudes towards templates (three if you count the "I don't need one" position); first is the additive template. That is that templates should be very minimal and you will add what you need as the project progresses. There are commenters already posted in this thread that have great examples of flexible, versatile, easy to use minimalist templates. If you feel you don't need a template, try one of theirs out. You can integrate your own custom workflows into it, save as a new template and call it your own. The other attitude is the subtractive template, that you bake everything in you could ever conceive needing and you pull out the unnecessary or redundant parts at the start of the project and as the project develops.

Both these methods will yield better, more accurate, more consistent results than digging into an old "similar" project and deleting and rebuilding. This is inconceivably tedious, unless you are ok with bringing in modeling/documenting/file errors into every project you ever work on. You may feel like you aren't reinventing the wheel, and maybe your not. But by using a high quality template, that wheel is already mounted to a formula one race car. One method is stone aged, the other is sleek, cool, clean, and fast.

Again, I am sorry for the rant. And to everyone else, I'm sorry if it just turns out I'm feeding trolls

[Anonymous]

Steve wrote:

They are good for beginners, those lacking in imagination, and those who need to comply with strict office standards. Those are objective facts are they not?

And like I said - these are all legitimate reasons to use a Template. Also an objective fact. Right?

Last comment, then I'm not even checking this thread any more.
A template is not for those lacking imagination. A template does not drive or direct the design. It simply standardizes graphic output. A high quality template with good favorites, good schedules, good attributes, and good library content, will make the design process easier, more fluid, more dynamic, and more creative. You won't be stuck trouble shooting past project's errors, you'll be trouble shooting design issues, which is what a creative and imaginative process should be doing.
A good template is definitely essential for beginners, but if a seasoned user can not conceive of a need for a quality template, maybe the template builder lacks imagination.

[Richard Morrison]

I'll probably take a little heat, but I am not unsympathetic to Steve's viewpoint. "Lacking in imagination" is a little inflammatory, maybe, but I think people are using the term "template" in different ways. Certainly a beginner needs a template, or they are working very inefficiently. But at the other extreme, starting a new project in a blank (no details, walls, etc.) template seems very inefficient to me. If you have 80% or more of a similar project already done, why would you throw all that away just to make sure the new project has the absolute latest layer set?

I _think_ what Steve is saying is that the last project is the latest template for that type of project. Delete some walls, save with a .tpl extension (or not), and you've got a very valid and continually evolving "template." I don't think anyone is suggesting being disorganized or just letting layers or attributes happen a different way each time.

[Brett Brown]

patmay81 wrote:
Both these methods will yield better, more accurate, more consistent results than digging into an old "similar" project and deleting and rebuilding. This is inconceivably tedious, unless you are ok with bringing in modeling/documenting/file errors into every project you ever work on. You may feel like you aren't reinventing the wheel, and maybe your not. But by using a high quality template, that wheel is already mounted to a formula one race car. One method is stone aged, the other is sleek, cool, clean, and fast.

This is a ridiculous thing to say, Templates are "inconceivably tedious" for sure, and from my point of view, templates are stone aged and Steve's method is sleek, cool, clean, and FAST. Especially for the solo partictioner. My 2 cent's worth.

[Steve Jepson]

Richard wrote:
I'll probably take a little heat, but I am not unsympathetic to Steve's viewpoint. "Lacking in imagination" is a little inflammatory, maybe, but I think people are using the term "template" in different ways. Certainly a beginner needs a template, or they are working very inefficiently. But at the other extreme, starting a new project in a blank (no details, walls, etc.) template seems very inefficient to me. If you have 80% or more of a similar project already done, why would you throw all that away just to make sure the new project has the absolute latest layer set?

I _think_ what Steve is saying is that the last project is the latest template for that type of project. Delete some walls, save with a .tpl extension (or not), and you've got a very valid and continually evolving "template." I don't think anyone is suggesting being disorganized or just letting layers or attributes happen a different way each time.

What's inflammatory is saying "if your not using a Template - your doing is wrong". And this is the quotation from the person who sells Templates.

I will stand by the the idea that you are lacking in imagination if you can not comprehend how to reproduce a similar project to ones you have already completed without using a one-size-fits-all dedicated over bloated Template- made by someone who has no idea about what you already have to work with.

I find it faster, more efficient, and a more rational way to assemble a new project.

The completed project is by it's very nature a better Template than any other because no matter what you started with, when the project is completed, what you have is the perfect Template for that unique project. It should have nothing more, and nothing less than exactly what it needs. Especially in terms of what things you might use in a Template to start with.

You need to use a Template if you can't imagine how you can work without one.

You need to use a Template if you don't have any similar completed projects to use as a resource for constructing new ones.

You need to use a Template if you must maintain strict office standards and workflows.

That is how many of you 90%? I have no idea.

What I do know is that I don't need to use any dedicated one-size-fits-all over bloated Template made by someone else.

There is another way, it is very easy to do, and has many advantages, and I like to work this way.

For starters, the value of the Template dissipates quickly when you develop enough skill with ArchiCAD to produce what you might put into a Template on the fly. The template is really not saving you as much time after a while as it did the first time you used ArchiCAD. Some people can use the Attributes manager with cat like reflex. Others are not even allowed to touch it. Ever!
The Template also becomes less and less useful as the project develops until at some point it - perhaps not even too far into it - you are not even using anything that was in the Template. They have their purpose and usefulness. But their usefulness does have it's limits.

Consider the completed project that is similar to the new one you need to make. By similar I do not mean only a building that is similar in form, function, materials, structural and mechanical systems, I mean in terms of the ArchiCAD file structure and content too.

All would agree I am sure that there is an enormous amount of content in that project that could save a great deal of time if you could re-use it. Or if you can re-use it 10 times, or 100 times, or even 1000 times. Those projects are extremely valuable - if - you can find a way to reuse what is in them again. If tapping into that gets is not compatible with the Template paradigm you are using - get rid of it. You don't need it that bad.

Now consider what it would take to generate a Template out a similar completed project. Not much at all. Perhaps only a matter of minuets.

After you have optimized it for archiving - flushed out anything you don't need in the file (if you haven't been keeping it perfectly clean for the start) and save it as a .tpl and you are almost done. Now use the Attributes manager to strip out anything you know you wont want, or add some things you know you will want. Now in 3D, show all, select all, and delete. That should take care of 90% or more of the content you would not want in a Template. I the perfect ArchiCAD model, there is very little 2D content to get rid of. Then go story by story, show all select all, delete.
This is how you make a Template that will be most similar to the completed project that has developed it. And this should probably not take five or ten minutes to complete.

Now that you have an optimised Template for the new similar project, what value is it? What is there in that Template that is worth even that little effort? Not much at all. And what is there, could be added as you work, as you need it, and without missing a beat.

Now for the important things you can do working without a Template but are not compatible with the paradigm of the Template.

You have an empty file stripped down clean and ready as a place to assemble the new similar project on the center screen. Other instances of similar completed projects on the screens right and left. Here we go. No Template- and for very good reasons.

For the sake of illustration, there is an image file, perhaps a cell phone picture of a floor plan sketch that has been stretched to scale +/-. The outline is traced with a line and we are underway. The entire group of exterior walls are copied from one project and pasted into the empty file.

They are stretched like a rubber band to fit the new perimeter, doors and windows are relocated re-sized... so on and so on. Whole structural systems like floor the floor joists and subfloor are pasted into the project and re-arranged. You get the idea. And with everything you paste, import... you also include the wall tags, labels, symbols, objects, zones, markers, Stairs assemblies, roofs, fascia, gutters, landscape mesh, slabs, posts, ceilings, schedules...all of which need some adjustment for the new conditions, but also bring into the new project layers and other critical data - automatically!

Thy is not more need to hunt down a certain wall type or anything from a Favorites menu - you get what you want and what ever else is around it from the the pre-modeled ( and configured) assemblies in the completed projects.

Someone rightly pointed out what a disaster working like that would be with a Template. Exactly!

There are many many things a one man show can do with ArchiCAD that are not feasible with any other kind of work flow.

Templates are for exactly who I said they are for, and if you think they are for me too, make your case. As I said, I am open to being educated about the use of Templates. And some of might benefit from by being educated about the reasons not to use a Template.

[Steve Jepson]

Nathan wrote:
Steve I stand by my comment mate. Just read my response properly. As a sole practitioner do what you want to do it doesn't effect anyone else. Just don't try and force a sole practitioner workflow at others that have differing needs to yours. Everyone is entitled to an opinion. And I made that comment at the start of my post. You fit the bill for being everything a template based practice isn't so keep doing what you are doing.

Have a good weekend.

Cheers

Nathan

Your comment did not go unnoticed or unappreciated. It is difficult to respond to all the attacks at the same time. And impossible to address every misrepresentation.

[Eduardo Rolon]

Steve J:

Original Question:

I created a great template file in our office that we've been using for quite a few years now. My question is; is there a point where I should start from scratch and create a new one?

Your answer…

I have never understood the value of a Template. And others can't imagine working without one. Every time you finish a project you have created another Template haven't you? And these are the source for assembling other projects are they not?

Then I gave my answer and you told me I was wrong in my workflow since I don't follow yours

There is no need to "sett up" a new project. You open a similar project or two if needed, and let the new one evolve as you assemble it, mostly via copy and pasting pre-modeled building ststems that are simply placed and adjusted for the new configurations to make new buildings.…

Then you went "personal" though with an emoji at the end

Templates are great for beginners, for people who have little or no imagination for how to use ArchiCAD more efficiently, and people who are constrained by the need for strict and static standardization. All of which are legitimate reasons to use a dedicated Template. None of those things apply to me.

If you are not assembling new projects with pre-modeled assemblies from completed projects - you are doing it wrong. Wink

Then Richard gave a good overview

I'll probably take a little heat, but I am not unsympathetic to Steve's viewpoint. "Lacking in imagination" is a little inflammatory, maybe, but I think people are using the term "template" in different ways. Certainly a beginner needs a template, or they are working very inefficiently. But at the other extreme, starting a new project in a blank (no details, walls, etc.) template seems very inefficient to me. If you have 80% or more of a similar project already done, why would you throw all that away just to make sure the new project has the absolute latest layer set?

I _think_ what Steve is saying is that the last project is the latest template for that type of project. Delete some walls, save with a .tpl extension (or not), and you've got a very valid and continually evolving "template." I don't think anyone is suggesting being disorganized or just letting layers or attributes happen a different way each time.

So did Nathan

Steve I stand by my comment mate. Just read my response properly. As a sole practitioner do what you want to do it doesn't effect anyone else. Just don't try and force a sole practitioner workflow at others that have differing needs to yours. Everyone is entitled to an opinion. And I made that comment at the start of my post. You fit the bill for being everything a template based practice isn't so keep doing what you are doing.

Then Brett went with "my workflow" is perfect so no need for template argument for the 'Solo" practitioner

This is a ridiculous thing to say, Templates are "inconceivably tedious" for sure, and from my point of view, templates are stone aged and Steve's method is sleek, cool, clean, and FAST. Especially for the solo partictioner. My 2 cent's worth.

Then you went personal again

…I will stand by the the idea that you are lacking in imagination if you can not comprehend how to reproduce a similar project to ones you have already completed without using a one-size-fits-all dedicated over bloated Template- made by someone who has no idea about what you already have to work with.
…

and then you went with a kind of "my way is the better way:

What I do know is that I don't need to use any dedicated one-size-fits-all over bloated Template made by someone else.

There is another way, it is very easy to do, and has many advantages, and I like to work this way.…

I disagree with the "value dissipates comment" since that is the way things should work.

Also a template worth is at the start of the project, it is supposed to be less useful as it goes along as the last stages of the project the template helps with the details, since most of the other stuff (Layers, Composites, Schedules, Indexes, Publishers, Translators, Favorites, AutoTexts, Materials) are already changed as necessary as the project moves along. The same can be said of the information you can copy from a previous project. That as the new project moves along there is less need to copy stuff from previous projects

For starters, the value of the Template dissipates quickly when you develop enough skill with ArchiCAD to produce what you might put into a Template on the fly. The template is really not saving you as much time after a while as it did the first time you used ArchiCAD. Some people can use the Attributes manager with cat like reflex. Others are not even allowed to touch it. Ever!
The Template also becomes less and less useful as the project develops until at some point it - perhaps not even too far into it - you are not even using anything that was in the Template. They have their purpose and usefulness. But their usefulness does have it's limits.

.

-----
This is the argument you use against spending time creating a template

…All would agree I am sure that there is an enormous amount of content in that project that could save a great deal of time if you could re-use it. Or if you can re-use it 10 times, or 100 times, or even 1000 times. Those projects are extremely valuable - if - you can find a way to reuse what is in them again. If tapping into that gets is not compatible with the Template paradigm you are using - get rid of it. You don't need it that bad.

Now consider what it would take to generate a Template out a similar completed project. Not much at all. Perhaps only a matter of minuets.

After you have optimized it for archiving - flushed out anything you don't need in the file (if you haven't been keeping it perfectly clean for the start) and save it as a .tpl and you are almost done. Now use the Attributes manager to strip out anything you know you wont want, or add some things you know you will want. Now in 3D, show all, select all, and delete. That should take care of 90% or more of the content you would not want in a Template. I the perfect ArchiCAD model, there is very little 2D content to get rid of. Then go story by story, show all select all, delete.
This is how you make a Template that will be most similar to the completed project that has developed it. And this should probably not take five or ten minutes to complete.

Now that you have an optimised Template for the new similar project, what value is it? What is there in that Template that is worth even that little effort? Not much at all. And what is there, could be added as you work, as you need it, and without missing a beat.

and it is the argument that I could use for spending the time creating templates. All my projects are not the same neither all the projects that I help coordinate so spending the time updating my template helps me save a lot of time, collaborating with other architects, doing tech support, teaching AC, Construction Documents and Design Studios at University

I also have specific templates for specific clients and specific type of projects therefore your workflow creating a dynamic template based on a previous project only fills a part of my architectural production(creating a template for a specific client which wants to build 3 high end jewelry stores) and for all others I have a specific template that I keep working.

In my case having my own templates saves me a ton of time even though I am "mostly" a solo practitioner.

----
Steve,
In my personal conclusion you have a workflow that helps you be productive and that is ok and since you wondered why would people use templates a lot of them answered. I have tried to answer as to why your workflow does not necessarily works for me tough I sometimes need to copy/paste from previous projects.

Maybe we are arguing in circles so I will leave it like this

[Steve Jepson]

Your selective quotations miss the salient points !
And they do not reflect the misconceptions and erroneous assessments you made about what I am doing.
It's the Template fanatic and the Template Salesman that made the audacious, provocative, and inflammatory statement. Not me.

"If you're not using a Template - you're doing it wrong!"
That was injected into the conversation by the Template Salesman.

Actually, I am delighted and amused by that quotation. I was simply turning their words around on them when I said that if your are using a Template you are doing it wrong. I did this simply to reciprocate in kind with an amusing play on words.

I understand the original context in which "If you're not using a Template - you're doing it wrong!" was made. It was made by the Shoegnome who is saying that to illustrate how strongly he feels about the use of Templates. He is not saying that with the intention of being provocatively dogmatic.
He has every right to say that as an illustration of how passionate he is about Templates. And he backs it up by providing one as an example of how useful a Template can be - for free. Link sells Templates! Of course he wants to dispel the notion that there might be some advantage in not using one.
And the rest of you seem to feel that your professional integrity is being impugned if it could be proven that Templates are not always the best way to work in ArchiCAD.

Forget about all of that -- delete the entire conversation and repost the original question if you like.