Does anyone use sketchup for construction documents? If so, how is it going? Do you know of firms that use it for sketchup. If so, can you name some. Thank you!
Non Sequitur - you sound like a complete douchebag.
Feb 9, 20 5:34 am ·
·
Araya CAD
@architexture you can totally use sketchup now a days for construction documentation. With the incredible amount of awesome 3rd party extensions as part of the extension warehouse in sketchup, sketchup is incredibly powerful. Sketchup is perfectly precise, if you know how to actually use the program, just like any other program. The 3d warehouse is unmatched with an amazing amount of options, details, etc and a lot more people now a days are starting to realize the true power of sketchup. I've noticed there are a lot of people on this forum who like to talk trash or maybe their just young punks. If you don't have any constructive and assertive feedback to give, best keep your mouth shut internet trolls. Sketchup is a wicked program now a days.
I will also say @NonSequitur that you also don't have a clue about what you're talking about. There are a ton of people making CD's with sketchup and layout.
I have only made CD's on AutoCAD and Revit never sketch-up I have doodled in sketch-up, made a few designs but never construction documents. I have seen videos on the subject here are some in-depth scenes of using sketch-up for such matters.
Imagining how this could work gives me a headache.
Sketchup models are so slow for anything that isn't very simple. And the workflow is basically start over when anything substantial changes. Usually they're not created with much precision - and doing so for anything non-orthogonal is pretty hard.
I guess if you're doing kitchen renovations or a tool shed it would be fine. In my experience it's use is limited to study models and quick modeling to provide perspective views. It wouldn't be so good for anything which requires a team to document, nor anything that is likely to change as the design is developed. The modeler needs to be careful too - wouldn't trust it to most of my coworkers.
Most offices use a fraction of sketchup's capability. I am using revit, but if my choices were typical 2d acad or sketchup, I'd use sketchup / layout for many projects. No, you won't document a 50M project in skp. But the program is plenty "precise" enough to do a lot more than tool sheds.
Tint, I've known people who prepared floor plans using only photoshop... not that different from paint.
Saint, I use (grudgingly) all of sketchup, plus a wheelbarrow full of 3rd party plugins & Ruby scripts and I cannot imagine why someone would want to produce CDs out of it. I'm trying to strong-arm my office away from it completely. The Revit, 3DsMax, Showcase wedge is firmly inserted and the crack is getting wider every day.
Non Seq -- I'm a fan of Revit as well. Any program has its ups and downs.
To your question -- why someone would want to produce CDs out of it ? -- well, it really depends. Producing CD's from SKP has a lot of compelling appeal. For many offices, they build an SKP model, and then essentially start over with CAD docs, so the basic idea of just continuing forward uninterrupted does hold some logic. Also, the program is about 500 bucks -- a tiny fraction of the Autodesk Suite. And, there is a simplcity factor -- something that makes even more sense after you've clicked through 72 Revit dialog boxes to adjust seven controls over a particular wood grain.
Again, I can't imagine the new bazillion SF airport terminal documented in SKP -- but I'm sure I could knock out a school addition.
Sketchup Layout has improved, and viewports update, decent doc tools, etc etc. , it's really pretty cool -- not sure what midlander is talking about when saying "nor anything that is likely to change as the design is developed'. Changes aren't a big problem.
NonSeq -- you're using "all of Sketchup" -- I'd be interested to see what you do in sketchup, although this forum isn't much for show and tell.
Our office tried a kind of pilot for SketchUp + Layout on a small custom hung-ceiling element (we were the architects of record for the whole thing, this was just a small part). It seemed to be alright for something that small in scale, but I believe the general consensus was that it took too long and would not be viable on anything much bigger than that. The guy who executed that portion was our top SU guy in the office; other than him I think maybe 2 other people in the office could have even come close to executing it. It included extensive Ruby plugins. Personally I would not even consider SU for construction docs. Since that time (maybe 2 years ago) I've moved myself steadily away from SU and toward Rhino; the precision is significantly better and the software handles larger models much better. No breakdowns either. I'll be curious once I graduate to start seeing if I can setup page layouts relatively easy with it.
Saint, I consider my use of SU full because I've pimped a version of 7-pro with enough 3rd party goodies to the point where I can model meshes and splines with ease for example... not that I would given the choice but sometimes that's not up to me. I've not liked the layout option of the newer versions but I can see the appeal since it's lack of financial investment will make many oversee it's draw-backs.
Personally, SU is problematic with the level of detail I am accustom to and would never consider it, even if the job fits within the software's already restricted capacity.
I used it once for that. More just the elevations. Basically, it was a semi-elliptical false façade (think freestanding billboard in front of a square building), evenly spaced control joints and patterns, with a sloped base and topcap. Straight elevatations didn't work. I hate autocad's 3d and don't use Revit. So I modeled it and the tube steel truss in sketchup and dimensioned it in a series of views.
Often, I'll do massing studies using sketchup. So they will some times end up in the final set on something like the cover to show various angles to help elevations and the rest of the set make more sense.
architexture, depends on the school's projects and the quality of the program.
Most students come out knowing enough CAD, Revit and/or Rhino to convince an employer they can draft at an entry-level. Everyone claims they are 10 out of 10 in X software, non-of-them are, maybe level 2 or 3 on average when leaving school, but at least they have a foundation to build on.
Sketchup literally takes 20min to master so if someone comes in with only SU skills looking to work in an office, they will not get very far. Aim higher if you want to be competitive.
Maybe I don't need to see your SKP work after all... :-)
Dec 11, 14 3:17 pm ·
·
big cheese
SketchUp takes 20 minutes to produce poorly organized models with ineffective grouping,scenes, and layer management. If people would treat SketchUp with the same precision as the do Revit or AutoCAD, then it would be just as accurate. But if you move walls freely and off axis then it is problematic. But that's not the result of a bad software.
Most students come out knowing enough CAD, Revit and/or Rhino to convince an employer they can draft at an entry-level. Everyone claims they are 10 out of 10 in X software, non-of-them are, maybe level 2 or 3 on average when leaving school, but at least they have a foundation to build on.
This is why I roll my eyes whenever I see people giving themselves ratings based on their skill level.
If you're going to give some quantifiable thing, use years experience with the program. It's also a little suspect if you don't have professional experience, because you do different things. I have used AutoCAD for quite a few years in school, but I didn't do much with sheets or coordination, so I'm really good at some things, and awful at others.
I also think this always comes back to being able to use a program vs. being able to create the content. I don't even mean good design. You can be a pro at how to use 3ds max, know the program inside and out, but that doesn't mean you can make attractive renderings. I know a bunch of people that this applies to.
Long time reader and crawler of the forums here, this came up and decided to drop in. I have completely switched over to SU for construction documents. We are mainly a Residential firm and have designed all of our projects in SU for about 4 years now. Our CD's consist of about 40-50 pages in documents and usually gets down fairly quickly compared to Acad or Rev. Since then over 50 projects have been completed successfully. It can be done, just need to know how to make it all work seamlessly.
40-50 pages is a little excessive for residential projects. The problem must be su since it's not as precise as you want it to be, therefore requiring more drawings.
"40-50 pages is a little excessive for residential projects. The problem must be su since it's not as precise as you want it to be, therefore requiring more drawings."
Hmm -- not sure if you're serious. Sketchup is accurate to .001"
"40-50 pages is a little excessive for residential projects. The problem must be su since it's not as precise as you want it to be, therefore requiring more drawings."
toosaturated, that's incorrect. Typically when we do details it consists of 10-13 pages, the rest is sections, interior detailing, and so on. I am not sure whether or not to take your comment serious but our contractors, subcontractors, building departments are loving them. Easy to read and understand.
10-13 pages of detailing? Holy shit, what scale are you drawing these details? And what size sheets are you using? It's prob my fault, but I assume we're talking about arch d. Usually 3-4 pages of details are enough. Most of the details I worked on are typical details with a few that are unique. We try to eliminate any redundancy. Like if we have a section that's already showing an interior elev of a room, we do not show it as another interior elevation.
i would not use SU either based on what ive seen in the office. But I hadnt heard about Ruby plugins. who knows, maybe it works. We model in Rhino cuz Im comfortable with it and the accuracy isnt a problem. drafting is still in ACAD. I dont see that ever changing, unless we switch to REVIT or other BIM soft.
@toosaturated, I understand that desire, but the trades the contractor use take their estimates from the sets they get. If a chunk is missing from interior elevations because you have it covered somewhere else seems a good way to create unnecessary problems. Redundancy is essential to construction. I am in Japan though. Perhaps it is not necessary elsewhere to work that way?
toosaturated, I never scale details so they usually come up Not To Scale. I'm using Arch D. We usually work on homes that are anywhere from 1,000 to 20,000 square feet of total space. The last one we turned in was 14,000 square feet. That took 48 pages in a set of Cd's. I'll have to agree with Galloway, while i try and reduce redundancy, i never truly try and eliminate it.
I've done that Saint... Think of a detail that looks more like the assembly details in the Ching books showing how things layer over each other for something like a cap flash. Dimensions aren't important when the detail is about proper watershed and assembly. Or if you aren't familiar with Ching, take a Lego instruction kit as the example.
Just from my experience, most people don't use SketchUp well in firms. The model is organized sloppy and then people blame the software for bad end results. You get out of it what you put it in. The software is all about customization and efficient workflow through Ruby scripts, something no other 3d software is doing at all. Each firm has the ability to maximize time efficiency and customization if they develop their own workflow.
I started in a new firm that was still using AutoCAD for every single model, elevation, plan, door schedule, etc. They haven't switched to Revit because of price, learning curve or other reasons. SketchUp would clearly be a good solution and when keyboard shortcuts are applied and Ruby scripts are added and custom templates are made on Layout, moderate sized buildings can be finished in days, not weeks or months. That's a big time saver and I don't believe any other construction document solution can be customized to achieve the efficiency of SketchUp and Layout because everyone treats the software like a kids toy.
Just seems a bit annoying to think our profession could be making so much more money and less time spent in CD phase and less profits going back to Autodesk.
I think there is a bigger issue with sketchup. It's slow. And when I mean slow, I am not talking about RAM slow, I am talking about the ability to quickly snap a dimension string or annotate.
As a principal of a firm now, I realize that one of the most lacking things in Architecture School is the idea of budgets as it relates to time. Not accusatory, but this just seems to fit the bill of this discussion.
In school, you are presented an assignment with a date that it is due. If it takes you 9,000 hours to get there, so long as it's completed on time no problem.
A big missing component in many programs is the concept that each task is budgeted by hours. Meaning your due date may not be for a week, but that doesn't mean you have 40 hours available to complete a 2 hour assignment.
So back to sketchup. We use sketchup alot in our office, but usually just for developing renderings as part of a deliverable package. Sketchup is crazy slow for production especially the more precise you are trying to be. Then add the detail required for CDs and I don't think anybody can perform those tasks as fast as an experienced Acad user.
the basic problem in my experience is that sketchup lacks the explicit control of snaps like rhino or dimensional control of elements like revit. there might be plug ins to fix that (i have no idea) but because it's excellent at doing fast study models, that's how it's used, and models with any complexity quickly become a mess of misaligned surfaces. and again, it can't control non-linear geometries at all, which is a significant limitation for large or specialized projects.
i actually love using it otherwise. the interface is intuitive and the methods of organizing groups and components is ideal for propagating elements to study unclear ideas quickly.
this strength at quickly modeling a messy idea is the same thing that makes it weak at defining things down to an adequate level of precision and detail for construction documents.
worked at a firm that used sketch up to DD's. Blow your brains out slow going from sketch up to layout and then the designer wanted to final in InDesign. And then all that effort and you needed to then remodel or redraft into CAD or REVIT. Oh and then of course non-existent detail library. Actually this was every firm I worked at....BUT if someone wanted to do CDs, I'd just laugh.
Mar 5, 20 8:30 pm ·
·
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.
Sketchup For Construction Documents
Does anyone use sketchup for construction documents? If so, how is it going? Do you know of firms that use it for sketchup. If so, can you name some. Thank you!
I would not stand in the same room as someone who even thought about asking a question even remotely aligned to construction documents and sketchup.
Man You are really open to new ideas and change
Non Sequitur - you sound like a complete douchebag.
@architexture you can totally use sketchup now a days for construction documentation. With the incredible amount of awesome 3rd party extensions as part of the extension warehouse in sketchup, sketchup is incredibly powerful. Sketchup is perfectly precise, if you know how to actually use the program, just like any other program. The 3d warehouse is unmatched with an amazing amount of options, details, etc and a lot more people now a days are starting to realize the true power of sketchup. I've noticed there are a lot of people on this forum who like to talk trash or maybe their just young punks. If you don't have any constructive and assertive feedback to give, best keep your mouth shut internet trolls. Sketchup is a wicked program now a days.
I will also say @NonSequitur that you also don't have a clue about what you're talking about. There are a ton of people making CD's with sketchup and layout.
I have only made CD's on AutoCAD and Revit never sketch-up I have doodled in sketch-up, made a few designs but never construction documents. I have seen videos on the subject here are some in-depth scenes of using sketch-up for such matters.
Here's a guy for ya!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JnHrdUCenzs
Here's a process for ya enjoy!
It is in parts this is part 1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z3xUOAicq-Y&list=PL-bndkJaV8A41vyW2gJp93wOKznTCa0yC
Imagining how this could work gives me a headache.
Sketchup models are so slow for anything that isn't very simple. And the workflow is basically start over when anything substantial changes. Usually they're not created with much precision - and doing so for anything non-orthogonal is pretty hard.
I guess if you're doing kitchen renovations or a tool shed it would be fine. In my experience it's use is limited to study models and quick modeling to provide perspective views. It wouldn't be so good for anything which requires a team to document, nor anything that is likely to change as the design is developed. The modeler needs to be careful too - wouldn't trust it to most of my coworkers.
Most offices use a fraction of sketchup's capability. I am using revit, but if my choices were typical 2d acad or sketchup, I'd use sketchup / layout for many projects. No, you won't document a 50M project in skp. But the program is plenty "precise" enough to do a lot more than tool sheds.
I prefer the program Paint. Ha ha just kidding. I have a friend who does CD'S in skp and it looks like a good way to torture yourself to me.
Tint, I've known people who prepared floor plans using only photoshop... not that different from paint.
Saint, I use (grudgingly) all of sketchup, plus a wheelbarrow full of 3rd party plugins & Ruby scripts and I cannot imagine why someone would want to produce CDs out of it. I'm trying to strong-arm my office away from it completely. The Revit, 3DsMax, Showcase wedge is firmly inserted and the crack is getting wider every day.
Non Seq -- I'm a fan of Revit as well. Any program has its ups and downs.
To your question -- why someone would want to produce CDs out of it ? -- well, it really depends. Producing CD's from SKP has a lot of compelling appeal. For many offices, they build an SKP model, and then essentially start over with CAD docs, so the basic idea of just continuing forward uninterrupted does hold some logic. Also, the program is about 500 bucks -- a tiny fraction of the Autodesk Suite. And, there is a simplcity factor -- something that makes even more sense after you've clicked through 72 Revit dialog boxes to adjust seven controls over a particular wood grain.
Again, I can't imagine the new bazillion SF airport terminal documented in SKP -- but I'm sure I could knock out a school addition.
Sketchup Layout has improved, and viewports update, decent doc tools, etc etc. , it's really pretty cool -- not sure what midlander is talking about when saying "nor anything that is likely to change as the design is developed'. Changes aren't a big problem.
NonSeq -- you're using "all of Sketchup" -- I'd be interested to see what you do in sketchup, although this forum isn't much for show and tell.
Our office tried a kind of pilot for SketchUp + Layout on a small custom hung-ceiling element (we were the architects of record for the whole thing, this was just a small part). It seemed to be alright for something that small in scale, but I believe the general consensus was that it took too long and would not be viable on anything much bigger than that. The guy who executed that portion was our top SU guy in the office; other than him I think maybe 2 other people in the office could have even come close to executing it. It included extensive Ruby plugins. Personally I would not even consider SU for construction docs. Since that time (maybe 2 years ago) I've moved myself steadily away from SU and toward Rhino; the precision is significantly better and the software handles larger models much better. No breakdowns either. I'll be curious once I graduate to start seeing if I can setup page layouts relatively easy with it.
Saint, I consider my use of SU full because I've pimped a version of 7-pro with enough 3rd party goodies to the point where I can model meshes and splines with ease for example... not that I would given the choice but sometimes that's not up to me. I've not liked the layout option of the newer versions but I can see the appeal since it's lack of financial investment will make many oversee it's draw-backs.
Personally, SU is problematic with the level of detail I am accustom to and would never consider it, even if the job fits within the software's already restricted capacity.
This is all really helpful. For young people you see coming out of school, what programs do they know best?
I used it once for that. More just the elevations. Basically, it was a semi-elliptical false façade (think freestanding billboard in front of a square building), evenly spaced control joints and patterns, with a sloped base and topcap. Straight elevatations didn't work. I hate autocad's 3d and don't use Revit. So I modeled it and the tube steel truss in sketchup and dimensioned it in a series of views.
Often, I'll do massing studies using sketchup. So they will some times end up in the final set on something like the cover to show various angles to help elevations and the rest of the set make more sense.
architexture, depends on the school's projects and the quality of the program.
Most students come out knowing enough CAD, Revit and/or Rhino to convince an employer they can draft at an entry-level. Everyone claims they are 10 out of 10 in X software, non-of-them are, maybe level 2 or 3 on average when leaving school, but at least they have a foundation to build on.
Sketchup literally takes 20min to master so if someone comes in with only SU skills looking to work in an office, they will not get very far. Aim higher if you want to be competitive.
"Sketchup literally takes 20min to master..."
Maybe I don't need to see your SKP work after all... :-)
SketchUp takes 20 minutes to produce poorly organized models with ineffective grouping,scenes, and layer management. If people would treat SketchUp with the same precision as the do Revit or AutoCAD, then it would be just as accurate. But if you move walls freely and off axis then it is problematic. But that's not the result of a bad software.
^Ha... but I get your point. Perhaps I should have clarified that SU takes 20mins to master if you already are familiar with 3D modelling.
I've been using SketchUp professionally for more than 10 years... and it's the 2nd last architecture related software on my CV... right about FormZ.
sketch-up with layout:
as dr. octagon would say, "your style is toy, kid, like hasbro"
Most students come out knowing enough CAD, Revit and/or Rhino to convince an employer they can draft at an entry-level. Everyone claims they are 10 out of 10 in X software, non-of-them are, maybe level 2 or 3 on average when leaving school, but at least they have a foundation to build on.
This is why I roll my eyes whenever I see people giving themselves ratings based on their skill level.
If you're going to give some quantifiable thing, use years experience with the program. It's also a little suspect if you don't have professional experience, because you do different things. I have used AutoCAD for quite a few years in school, but I didn't do much with sheets or coordination, so I'm really good at some things, and awful at others.
I also think this always comes back to being able to use a program vs. being able to create the content. I don't even mean good design. You can be a pro at how to use 3ds max, know the program inside and out, but that doesn't mean you can make attractive renderings. I know a bunch of people that this applies to.
Long time reader and crawler of the forums here, this came up and decided to drop in. I have completely switched over to SU for construction documents. We are mainly a Residential firm and have designed all of our projects in SU for about 4 years now. Our CD's consist of about 40-50 pages in documents and usually gets down fairly quickly compared to Acad or Rev. Since then over 50 projects have been completed successfully. It can be done, just need to know how to make it all work seamlessly.
This is all really helpful. For young people you see coming out of school, what programs do they know best?
Lots of schools cover Revit, Rhino, and/or CAD of some sort. The Adobe suite is pretty standard as well.
Secondary modellers include 3dsMax and Maya. Many use a combination of programs depending on what the ultimate goal is
40-50 pages is a little excessive for residential projects. The problem must be su since it's not as precise as you want it to be, therefore requiring more drawings.
It can be done, just need to know how to make it all work seamlessly.
greatscape, this is the missing piece that would be helpful to know...
Greatescape -- any examples you'd care to post?
"40-50 pages is a little excessive for residential projects. The problem must be su since it's not as precise as you want it to be, therefore requiring more drawings."
Hmm -- not sure if you're serious. Sketchup is accurate to .001"
"40-50 pages is a little excessive for residential projects. The problem must be su since it's not as precise as you want it to be, therefore requiring more drawings."
toosaturated, that's incorrect. Typically when we do details it consists of 10-13 pages, the rest is sections, interior detailing, and so on. I am not sure whether or not to take your comment serious but our contractors, subcontractors, building departments are loving them. Easy to read and understand.
10-13 pages of detailing? Holy shit, what scale are you drawing these details? And what size sheets are you using? It's prob my fault, but I assume we're talking about arch d. Usually 3-4 pages of details are enough. Most of the details I worked on are typical details with a few that are unique. We try to eliminate any redundancy. Like if we have a section that's already showing an interior elev of a room, we do not show it as another interior elevation.
i would not use SU either based on what ive seen in the office. But I hadnt heard about Ruby plugins. who knows, maybe it works. We model in Rhino cuz Im comfortable with it and the accuracy isnt a problem. drafting is still in ACAD. I dont see that ever changing, unless we switch to REVIT or other BIM soft.
@toosaturated, I understand that desire, but the trades the contractor use take their estimates from the sets they get. If a chunk is missing from interior elevations because you have it covered somewhere else seems a good way to create unnecessary problems. Redundancy is essential to construction. I am in Japan though. Perhaps it is not necessary elsewhere to work that way?
toosaturated, I never scale details so they usually come up Not To Scale. I'm using Arch D. We usually work on homes that are anywhere from 1,000 to 20,000 square feet of total space. The last one we turned in was 14,000 square feet. That took 48 pages in a set of Cd's. I'll have to agree with Galloway, while i try and reduce redundancy, i never truly try and eliminate it.
"...... I never scale details so they usually come up Not To Scale."
?
I've done that Saint... Think of a detail that looks more like the assembly details in the Ching books showing how things layer over each other for something like a cap flash. Dimensions aren't important when the detail is about proper watershed and assembly. Or if you aren't familiar with Ching, take a Lego instruction kit as the example.
^ Everyone does that when appropriate. My question refers to the statement I quoted: "I never scale details".
Just from my experience, most people don't use SketchUp well in firms. The model is organized sloppy and then people blame the software for bad end results. You get out of it what you put it in. The software is all about customization and efficient workflow through Ruby scripts, something no other 3d software is doing at all. Each firm has the ability to maximize time efficiency and customization if they develop their own workflow. I started in a new firm that was still using AutoCAD for every single model, elevation, plan, door schedule, etc. They haven't switched to Revit because of price, learning curve or other reasons. SketchUp would clearly be a good solution and when keyboard shortcuts are applied and Ruby scripts are added and custom templates are made on Layout, moderate sized buildings can be finished in days, not weeks or months. That's a big time saver and I don't believe any other construction document solution can be customized to achieve the efficiency of SketchUp and Layout because everyone treats the software like a kids toy. Just seems a bit annoying to think our profession could be making so much more money and less time spent in CD phase and less profits going back to Autodesk.
sketchup is great for front end design, but few understand the underlying rules of planar and solid geometry to avoid making a mess
you must understand coplanarity, and making vertices match up - I see way too many intersection lines that don't match-up, non coplanar faces
I think there is a bigger issue with sketchup. It's slow. And when I mean slow, I am not talking about RAM slow, I am talking about the ability to quickly snap a dimension string or annotate.
As a principal of a firm now, I realize that one of the most lacking things in Architecture School is the idea of budgets as it relates to time. Not accusatory, but this just seems to fit the bill of this discussion.
In school, you are presented an assignment with a date that it is due. If it takes you 9,000 hours to get there, so long as it's completed on time no problem.
A big missing component in many programs is the concept that each task is budgeted by hours. Meaning your due date may not be for a week, but that doesn't mean you have 40 hours available to complete a 2 hour assignment.
So back to sketchup. We use sketchup alot in our office, but usually just for developing renderings as part of a deliverable package. Sketchup is crazy slow for production especially the more precise you are trying to be. Then add the detail required for CDs and I don't think anybody can perform those tasks as fast as an experienced Acad user.
Just my opinion. Profitability. It's a business.
the basic problem in my experience is that sketchup lacks the explicit control of snaps like rhino or dimensional control of elements like revit. there might be plug ins to fix that (i have no idea) but because it's excellent at doing fast study models, that's how it's used, and models with any complexity quickly become a mess of misaligned surfaces. and again, it can't control non-linear geometries at all, which is a significant limitation for large or specialized projects.
i actually love using it otherwise. the interface is intuitive and the methods of organizing groups and components is ideal for propagating elements to study unclear ideas quickly.
this strength at quickly modeling a messy idea is the same thing that makes it weak at defining things down to an adequate level of precision and detail for construction documents.
worked at a firm that used sketch up to DD's. Blow your brains out slow going from sketch up to layout and then the designer wanted to final in InDesign. And then all that effort and you needed to then remodel or redraft into CAD or REVIT. Oh and then of course non-existent detail library. Actually this was every firm I worked at....BUT if someone wanted to do CDs, I'd just laugh.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.