alien, sure I agree CAD may have more intelligence built into it than a mayline ruler... But this is true of all technology. The intelligence embedded in tools advances all the time. A word processor has more intelligence than a typewriter, than pen and paper, etc. Unfortunately, a man who fishes in a river with a spear cannot hope to compete with the fisherman who uses a net in the river... One could argue that spear fishing has qualities that a net does not, but the spear fisherman had better learn to use the net as well, so that he has both at his disposal to respond to the technology at hand.
Technology comes with the age. If we as architects feel that we are relinquishing control to computer programmers, maybe that is because of the inability of many architects to advance with the times, to learn something new... I've met architects who design software as well as buildings... Why not learn to customize your own tool... Lack of control only happens if we refuse to understand the nature of the beast... It is a lack of expertise, a lack of bredth in knowledge that leads to a loss of control.
of course it's more than a tool, consider the keyboard and the pen, who ever wrote "CU L8TR ;)" using a fountain pen?
if the major offering of CAD is speed, it is not catch free. CAD makes everything into a line, i rarely stop to think what any of my lines are when i have to CAD quickly, instead i know that these lines have to be shifted 1m to the left and rotated 90 degrees etc. deliberation is lost, i used to think that drawing was like speaking, or writing, if you couldn't write it down or draw it then it doesn't exist, but with CAD you can draw it and it still won't appear.
whether a drawing actually becomes a representation of something is a separate matter, to do with line weights etc. but the actual process of working out the content of your representation (ie your design) is completely lost in CAD. i can't think in CAD, i can think with it, when the computer drawing becomes a representation and i go over it in pencil, but i cannot use it to replace the process of working out spaces, when a line has to mean something other than a line. and i think the reason why drawing with a pencil is more helpful is because my hand can actually only reach a certain amount of space, and my wrist can actually only turn a certain degree, and these limitations tell me to think about what moving from one space to another is like. Whereas in CAD i might end up 457093450.0850479823m from where i am and the only thing i can counter that with is "50m", rather than "a big room with a small window onto the road".
i agree with hdem's sentiment and remain profoundly skeptical of CAD as the harbinger of our new aggressive utopias, architecture can barely save itself, let alone the world. what beggars belief is the architect's idea that our whole world can be improved with the selfsame intelligence that our best scientist's are trying to coax a decent conversation out of.
True something like autocad is dumb lines... But there I was actually thinking of where CAD is headed... Intelligent objects, parametric modelling... For example autodesk revit: a modelled wall is not just a wall, it has a material, it reads in section and in plan with proper notation, adjusts, all drawings automatically adjust when you move one thing or when you change scale, the level of detail changes... All functions are object oriented...
But thats only the surface, because with parametric drafting / modelling software, you are empowered to design your own programmed components... customized wall components where you can program how they operate, whether they are hosted on a floor, or embedded on a wall, etc... How its proportions are functions of one another, or are parameters that you can specify when you drop it into your model or whatever...
If AutoCAD is like Microsoft Word, Revit is like Microsoft Excel... This is where CAD is headed... Drafting is going to become part drawing, part 3D modelling, and part programming...
Nobody says that CAD makes the world a better place... But, it certainly lets the architect be more productive and prolific in work... Could an accountant refuse to use any form of computer database and insisted on recording everything in book in our age today...
I think one of the most interesting things to look at is how CAD and Revit change the profession. It seems to be the case that with most advances in technology, a shift in the structure of job sectors in our economy follows. When CAD came out, suddenly it was realized that less drafters were required to complete a project because drafters could draft quicker and more efficiently. Suddenly there was a need for CAD drafters to replace slow imperfect pencil drafters, and I bet you saw a contraction in the amount of busy work people hired by the firm. Now, the movement is toward Revit. Whereas before you needed maybe 4 or 5 people to do the tedious construction drawings in CAD, now only 1 is required to complete a Revit model which can be sectioned and produce all the construction documents without overlapping errors much quicker.
This seems to be making the profession more competitive. I, a new graduate, have found that many firms which are not growing seem to be still looking for Revit modelers. I bet the firms which are more successful will start using Revit, because of its ability to cut down on their costs. Some firms will be forced to charge more because they are not using Revit and therefore have to hire more people. Others will bid lower and recieve more work while paying decent wages because they require less people to get the job done.
Its inevitable, it seems. Prices dictate the market, and the market is moving toward BIM modeling. I just wish the BIM modeling market was more competitive, it seems autodesk is starting to take advantage of the fact that their tools are so valuable.
while software has made some firms more efficient, I don't think that the change to our profession/industry ends there. I don't think we'll necessarily see a significant contraction in our industry. Rather, we may be changing the scope (eek!) of our work. Similar to the Web 2.0 explosion, BIM is changing the way building data is being authored and managed. Instead of a whole bunch of individual sets of drawings/buildings, we are moving towards generating a linked database/virtual simulation of our entire built environment. These new tools allow us to embed as much information as we could possibly want in these models. Now that's all pie in the sky big BIM picture crap, but I mean some idiot thought it was worthwhile to stitch together all the satellite photography, phonebooks, and interweb databases, then drive around and take pictures through all the streets to create a level of the virtual earth.
Yes CAD is just a tool. A pencil is a tool, Start with the pencil & proceed to CAD. The CAD of today (I use ArchiCAD) actually builds the building as a virtual D model. I use the CAD program to help understand the 3 dimensionality of the design. From there the CAD tool produces all of the plans, section & elevations needed to convey to the contractor how the building is made, the materials it is made from & the details that are used to put it all together. Yes CAD is just a tool, however it is the most useful tool I have after my pencil.
I don't think the phrase 'cad is just a tool' is a valid response. When speaking in terms of architectural thought, production, and culture, it's very easy to define anything as 'just' a tool, or 'more' than a tool.
For example:
"a mayline and rapidograft is more than just a tool because I feel more connected to the scale of the project and the like the sense of materiality with physical movement and tactile sensory perception."
likewise,
"cadcam is more than just a tool because they allow many many calculations to be done far quicker than I could do them manually. This allows me to economically generate both more interations and different forms than I could previously, which has fundamentally changed the way I think about architecture."
Therefore, if in terms of architectural production they're both tools, or not tools, or more than tools. The real question to ask is not 'what is it' but rather 'what can it do and what can it not do'?
Is CAD just a tool?
alien, sure I agree CAD may have more intelligence built into it than a mayline ruler... But this is true of all technology. The intelligence embedded in tools advances all the time. A word processor has more intelligence than a typewriter, than pen and paper, etc. Unfortunately, a man who fishes in a river with a spear cannot hope to compete with the fisherman who uses a net in the river... One could argue that spear fishing has qualities that a net does not, but the spear fisherman had better learn to use the net as well, so that he has both at his disposal to respond to the technology at hand.
Technology comes with the age. If we as architects feel that we are relinquishing control to computer programmers, maybe that is because of the inability of many architects to advance with the times, to learn something new... I've met architects who design software as well as buildings... Why not learn to customize your own tool... Lack of control only happens if we refuse to understand the nature of the beast... It is a lack of expertise, a lack of bredth in knowledge that leads to a loss of control.
of course it's more than a tool, consider the keyboard and the pen, who ever wrote "CU L8TR ;)" using a fountain pen?
if the major offering of CAD is speed, it is not catch free. CAD makes everything into a line, i rarely stop to think what any of my lines are when i have to CAD quickly, instead i know that these lines have to be shifted 1m to the left and rotated 90 degrees etc. deliberation is lost, i used to think that drawing was like speaking, or writing, if you couldn't write it down or draw it then it doesn't exist, but with CAD you can draw it and it still won't appear.
whether a drawing actually becomes a representation of something is a separate matter, to do with line weights etc. but the actual process of working out the content of your representation (ie your design) is completely lost in CAD. i can't think in CAD, i can think with it, when the computer drawing becomes a representation and i go over it in pencil, but i cannot use it to replace the process of working out spaces, when a line has to mean something other than a line. and i think the reason why drawing with a pencil is more helpful is because my hand can actually only reach a certain amount of space, and my wrist can actually only turn a certain degree, and these limitations tell me to think about what moving from one space to another is like. Whereas in CAD i might end up 457093450.0850479823m from where i am and the only thing i can counter that with is "50m", rather than "a big room with a small window onto the road".
i agree with hdem's sentiment and remain profoundly skeptical of CAD as the harbinger of our new aggressive utopias, architecture can barely save itself, let alone the world. what beggars belief is the architect's idea that our whole world can be improved with the selfsame intelligence that our best scientist's are trying to coax a decent conversation out of.
a toast to the righteous fist of archinect. hear, hear.
True something like autocad is dumb lines... But there I was actually thinking of where CAD is headed... Intelligent objects, parametric modelling... For example autodesk revit: a modelled wall is not just a wall, it has a material, it reads in section and in plan with proper notation, adjusts, all drawings automatically adjust when you move one thing or when you change scale, the level of detail changes... All functions are object oriented...
But thats only the surface, because with parametric drafting / modelling software, you are empowered to design your own programmed components... customized wall components where you can program how they operate, whether they are hosted on a floor, or embedded on a wall, etc... How its proportions are functions of one another, or are parameters that you can specify when you drop it into your model or whatever...
If AutoCAD is like Microsoft Word, Revit is like Microsoft Excel... This is where CAD is headed... Drafting is going to become part drawing, part 3D modelling, and part programming...
Nobody says that CAD makes the world a better place... But, it certainly lets the architect be more productive and prolific in work... Could an accountant refuse to use any form of computer database and insisted on recording everything in book in our age today...
I think one of the most interesting things to look at is how CAD and Revit change the profession. It seems to be the case that with most advances in technology, a shift in the structure of job sectors in our economy follows. When CAD came out, suddenly it was realized that less drafters were required to complete a project because drafters could draft quicker and more efficiently. Suddenly there was a need for CAD drafters to replace slow imperfect pencil drafters, and I bet you saw a contraction in the amount of busy work people hired by the firm. Now, the movement is toward Revit. Whereas before you needed maybe 4 or 5 people to do the tedious construction drawings in CAD, now only 1 is required to complete a Revit model which can be sectioned and produce all the construction documents without overlapping errors much quicker.
This seems to be making the profession more competitive. I, a new graduate, have found that many firms which are not growing seem to be still looking for Revit modelers. I bet the firms which are more successful will start using Revit, because of its ability to cut down on their costs. Some firms will be forced to charge more because they are not using Revit and therefore have to hire more people. Others will bid lower and recieve more work while paying decent wages because they require less people to get the job done.
Its inevitable, it seems. Prices dictate the market, and the market is moving toward BIM modeling. I just wish the BIM modeling market was more competitive, it seems autodesk is starting to take advantage of the fact that their tools are so valuable.
Wonder if yalo is still out there?
whoah diggin deep... but appropriate resurface.
while software has made some firms more efficient, I don't think that the change to our profession/industry ends there. I don't think we'll necessarily see a significant contraction in our industry. Rather, we may be changing the scope (eek!) of our work. Similar to the Web 2.0 explosion, BIM is changing the way building data is being authored and managed. Instead of a whole bunch of individual sets of drawings/buildings, we are moving towards generating a linked database/virtual simulation of our entire built environment. These new tools allow us to embed as much information as we could possibly want in these models. Now that's all pie in the sky big BIM picture crap, but I mean some idiot thought it was worthwhile to stitch together all the satellite photography, phonebooks, and interweb databases, then drive around and take pictures through all the streets to create a level of the virtual earth.
Yes CAD is just a tool. A pencil is a tool, Start with the pencil & proceed to CAD. The CAD of today (I use ArchiCAD) actually builds the building as a virtual D model. I use the CAD program to help understand the 3 dimensionality of the design. From there the CAD tool produces all of the plans, section & elevations needed to convey to the contractor how the building is made, the materials it is made from & the details that are used to put it all together. Yes CAD is just a tool, however it is the most useful tool I have after my pencil.
I don't think the phrase 'cad is just a tool' is a valid response. When speaking in terms of architectural thought, production, and culture, it's very easy to define anything as 'just' a tool, or 'more' than a tool.
For example:
"a mayline and rapidograft is more than just a tool because I feel more connected to the scale of the project and the like the sense of materiality with physical movement and tactile sensory perception."
likewise,
"cadcam is more than just a tool because they allow many many calculations to be done far quicker than I could do them manually. This allows me to economically generate both more interations and different forms than I could previously, which has fundamentally changed the way I think about architecture."
Therefore, if in terms of architectural production they're both tools, or not tools, or more than tools. The real question to ask is not 'what is it' but rather 'what can it do and what can it not do'?
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.