In 2001 I started learning and briefly using Architectural Desktop. Our firms experiment sort of degenerated into using it only for tags and schedules. I suspect this is true at other firms. Then I worked somewhere using Archicad, and again no modeling seemed to really be done except in the very early stages of conceptual design, where it really wasnt any better than knowing 3d Acad or max or whatever your proficient at to model.
So after 5 years has parametric modeling just not caught on? Is it an empty promise of increased efficiency? Will there ever be a day when you can get more than a couple people at a firm to actualy become proficient at it before they quit and go somewhere else?
Most firms I have worked for have just started to switch from CAD to Building Information Model technology, and they are still using it as a simplistic drafting tool.
For instance, using ADT {as it is meant to be used} implies a lot more organization and/or insight of the whole project than the average cad monkey.
BIM is fandamntastic! I'm using Revit now, and I have been for about 6 months. Its wonderful, especially if you've been using AutoCAD for your whole life. Plus, this BIMing community is really great too (check out www.revitcity.com for more info)
Next month, I am planning on teaching myself ArchiCAD to decide which program is the best fit for me (I'll keep you guys posted) but seriously, Architectural Desktop is a joke (sorry ADTers, but its true)
So is there still truth to the rumor that Autodesk is still trying to push architects into Revit and tha ACAD as we know it will be for the machine trades?
I recently heard that Autodesk was planning on stopping production of ArchDesktop with 3 and replace it with Revit, but then descided that they could draw out the process by slowly making ArchDesktop more like Revit, which would make them more money. Not sure how much truth there is to it though...
Revit is going to take over... eventually (i hope)... Well you can buy Revit as a package already with autocad, who knows maybe eventually they will merge with autocad, or autocad son't even exist anymore and it will just be "Autodesk 5.0" and any and all advantageous drafting capabilities that autocad had will be integrated into Revit's drafting views...
There was a recent quote for a Autodesk exec where he said that he 'didn't think Desktop was going anywhere and that people have been very happy with it - it could even outlive Revit'.
That surprised me. I assume it's due to the lackluster community support - can't be cheap to develop two programs like that.
The office I work in has an entire team of specialist modelers who use Microstation.Don't confuse them with visualisation experts. They focus on geometry and parametric modeling. Currently they are experimenting with the newly bought 3D-printers which are good fun... I would like to learn how to do the parametric modeling but all the people who did, end up specialising in it and not doing any 'real' architectural work anymore... Do we as architects need to understand the basic concept behind parametric modeling and leave it to the experts or does it need to become one of the many extra skills we need to master?
hi PB,
i agree that those of us who work in advanced modelling and parametrics tend to be seen in offices as some branch of tech support, like the SMG.
Jim Glymph from Gehry said in a conference that there is a division of what he calls architects, and technicians, which is fundamentally how gehry and partners and gehry tech are organized.
I think its a narrow view, but a relevant one in their NCARB world.
The next gen, and there's quite a few of us, even on this forum, who will not have to paraphrase kool keywords, nor 'pass' the work from the 'design team' to the 'script kid' in the backroom.
The engineering firms already have this concept well in control - AGU for example
From my experiance with parametric modeling, if you master the programs, you can do a whole lot without a lot of "support" staff. As the programs work out the bugs it will be even better.
Autodesk is the reason parametric modeling "after 5 years...is an empty promise of increased efficiency?" Word on the street is that Microstation will soon incorporate the awesome Generative Components modeling module/plug-in in alpha/beta testing now -- surely closer to the true 3D potential of parametrics that anything by Autodesk.
Bothands..the guys here in the office have been using generative components for a while ( they are writing tools for it) Based on my very limited knowledge of parametric modeling this program seems very usefull. Soon we will be getting some introduction classes in GC, something I'm looking forward to as I'm trying to get into basic parametric modeling. I started with 3d-max and autocad but being forced into Microstation I have to say I'm starting to really like this software...it can do most things you need. 2d-3d, rendering and scripting/programming.
Next step is for the 3d-printers to become cheap so we can start playing around with it...
generative components is a CLASSIC architecture software response. Why just build on what other industries have been doing for years? No, lets invent a whole new program to do what max/maya/rhino/catia can do with about 10 lines of script so architects can feel a little special.
I partially agree - thats why its still faster for me at least to use one for 2d and another for 3d if your proficient - but theres something sexy about the idea of parametric modeling. I'd love to get into revit.
Parametric Modeling
In 2001 I started learning and briefly using Architectural Desktop. Our firms experiment sort of degenerated into using it only for tags and schedules. I suspect this is true at other firms. Then I worked somewhere using Archicad, and again no modeling seemed to really be done except in the very early stages of conceptual design, where it really wasnt any better than knowing 3d Acad or max or whatever your proficient at to model.
So after 5 years has parametric modeling just not caught on? Is it an empty promise of increased efficiency? Will there ever be a day when you can get more than a couple people at a firm to actualy become proficient at it before they quit and go somewhere else?
Most firms I have worked for have just started to switch from CAD to Building Information Model technology, and they are still using it as a simplistic drafting tool.
For instance, using ADT {as it is meant to be used} implies a lot more organization and/or insight of the whole project than the average cad monkey.
BIM is fandamntastic! I'm using Revit now, and I have been for about 6 months. Its wonderful, especially if you've been using AutoCAD for your whole life. Plus, this BIMing community is really great too (check out www.revitcity.com for more info)
Next month, I am planning on teaching myself ArchiCAD to decide which program is the best fit for me (I'll keep you guys posted) but seriously, Architectural Desktop is a joke (sorry ADTers, but its true)
So is there still truth to the rumor that Autodesk is still trying to push architects into Revit and tha ACAD as we know it will be for the machine trades?
I recently heard that Autodesk was planning on stopping production of ArchDesktop with 3 and replace it with Revit, but then descided that they could draw out the process by slowly making ArchDesktop more like Revit, which would make them more money. Not sure how much truth there is to it though...
Revit is going to take over... eventually (i hope)... Well you can buy Revit as a package already with autocad, who knows maybe eventually they will merge with autocad, or autocad son't even exist anymore and it will just be "Autodesk 5.0" and any and all advantageous drafting capabilities that autocad had will be integrated into Revit's drafting views...
There was a recent quote for a Autodesk exec where he said that he 'didn't think Desktop was going anywhere and that people have been very happy with it - it could even outlive Revit'.
That surprised me. I assume it's due to the lackluster community support - can't be cheap to develop two programs like that.
Maybe it will just merge, that would make sense.
The office I work in has an entire team of specialist modelers who use Microstation.Don't confuse them with visualisation experts. They focus on geometry and parametric modeling. Currently they are experimenting with the newly bought 3D-printers which are good fun... I would like to learn how to do the parametric modeling but all the people who did, end up specialising in it and not doing any 'real' architectural work anymore... Do we as architects need to understand the basic concept behind parametric modeling and leave it to the experts or does it need to become one of the many extra skills we need to master?
hi PB,
i agree that those of us who work in advanced modelling and parametrics tend to be seen in offices as some branch of tech support, like the SMG.
Jim Glymph from Gehry said in a conference that there is a division of what he calls architects, and technicians, which is fundamentally how gehry and partners and gehry tech are organized.
I think its a narrow view, but a relevant one in their NCARB world.
The next gen, and there's quite a few of us, even on this forum, who will not have to paraphrase kool keywords, nor 'pass' the work from the 'design team' to the 'script kid' in the backroom.
The engineering firms already have this concept well in control - AGU for example
From my experiance with parametric modeling, if you master the programs, you can do a whole lot without a lot of "support" staff. As the programs work out the bugs it will be even better.
Autodesk is the reason parametric modeling "after 5 years...is an empty promise of increased efficiency?" Word on the street is that Microstation will soon incorporate the awesome Generative Components modeling module/plug-in in alpha/beta testing now -- surely closer to the true 3D potential of parametrics that anything by Autodesk.
Bothands..the guys here in the office have been using generative components for a while ( they are writing tools for it) Based on my very limited knowledge of parametric modeling this program seems very usefull. Soon we will be getting some introduction classes in GC, something I'm looking forward to as I'm trying to get into basic parametric modeling. I started with 3d-max and autocad but being forced into Microstation I have to say I'm starting to really like this software...it can do most things you need. 2d-3d, rendering and scripting/programming.
Next step is for the 3d-printers to become cheap so we can start playing around with it...
not quite classed as a printer - stereolithography rapid prototyping machine, the perfect partner to all your parametric neeeds
link
generative components is a CLASSIC architecture software response. Why just build on what other industries have been doing for years? No, lets invent a whole new program to do what max/maya/rhino/catia can do with about 10 lines of script so architects can feel a little special.
I partially agree - thats why its still faster for me at least to use one for 2d and another for 3d if your proficient - but theres something sexy about the idea of parametric modeling. I'd love to get into revit.
what we need to go back to modernist principals. A machine to make machines for living in.
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.