This is something that's been on my mind recently, and I wonder if it's just the environment I'm in or if the problem is more pervasive.
When I started working in firms after high school, CAD was just starting to be accepted by architects as something other than a passing fad. My primary qualification at that point was simply knowing how to move the mouse around the screen for architects who "had to get on CAD". I was fortunate to work with people over the next few years who were professional drafters and either made the switch to CAD, or stayed on in a kind of advisory capacity, sketching details and critiquing drawings. From them I learned not only how to draw in the graphic communication sense, but also the basics of how a CD set is put together and how to detail a building. I learned to take pride in what my drawings look like, and how to communicate effectively through them.
When I look around my office these days, there is no one like that anymore. The drafters are interns who have yet to be promoted out of that position, and as such they don't have the knowledge or the skill to produce a clear and accurate detail, much less a full package. I feel like an essential layer of knowledge and instruction has been lost. The only ones in the office with any depth of experience are too busy or not in the office enough to be a real resource, so who can the interns learn from? I suspect that many just put the time in, intentionally not learning much or doing very well so they don't get tasked with doing more of it. Or maybe they feel it is beneath them to draft details. Maybe interns always felt that way and there's no one left to pick up the slack anymore.
I don't mean to slam interns here, I'm barely out of that category myself. But I wonder if this profession hasn't done itself a great disservice by eliminating the draftsman (or draughtsman as they always insisted) as a profession unto itself.
My first job with a firm was '91, then I went to college off and on, gradually drifted into architecture and graduated in 2000. Been in it full time since than so depending on how you classify it I havn't been an intern in the technical sense for 5 years or so. But in the grand scheme of things I recognize I've still got a lot to learn.
NOT A CHANCE! GO BACK TO SEPIAS...AND NASTY FLUIDS WHICH STINK LIKE HELLL... I"M SURE MY LIFE SPAN HAS BEEN REDUCED BECAUSE OF THE FUMES i HAVE DIGESTED IN THE PRINT ROOMS OF MULTIPLE FIRMS....MAYBE i SHOULD SUE!
perhaps. i look at it this way; pre-cast panel construction, with thin brick veneer, is replacing good old masonry construction, and by extension masons. being a mason is not seen as a worthy trade anymore, 60 year old brick masons cannot do the work forever. expediency is replacing craft, and drafting by hand is a craft.
This was the lament of the Vice President of Operations at my first real gig. He had missed the drafter and went on how they had been phased out. That was in 1994. Since then I have not seen any real drafters since. I think that there still is a need for someone who is an architectural technologist.
My big worry is Revit. Interns with the point and click nature are really dangerous. I wonder if the young principals schooled on AutoCAD will be phased out by the Revit people
I agree it's a craft. But more than being a excellent draftsman, those people knew how to put a building together because all they did was tell others how to do it. And while I lament the loss of the craft, the loss of knowlege is equally disturbing.
dcs-arch,
We're on Revit, which is where this started. On the one hand it's even more important to understand how a building goes together as you build the model, but at the same time that tool is eliminating even the CAD operator from the equation. It's getting hard to find people with both the time and the knowledge to sit down and red-line a sheet.
Follows is a re-post of a comment I made on a thread yesterday:
Romanticized Drafting:
I miss drafting. Really. I was so good at it. I managed to get my second and third jobs as a draftsman at two of the few architecture firms left in San Francisco (or maybe on the planet?) that still did hand drawing. I've been back to visit one of them, and they've joined the 21st century.
AutoCAD, you're such a soulless beast.
***
Drawing and technical drafting still equals visual thinking to me. I wonder sometimes if digitally produced architecture is carefully considered/thought through... That's another rant.
We work on smaller projects. We have talked about Revit for years. Since revit 3. We demoed it and I was aghast. I feel that it is important for our interns to draw the section piece by piece. Then project the lines to develop the elevations. Only until you master the section can you begin to design. It takes some time. But when you are in the field you know exactly where each piece of the building is.
i would like a program that was voice and retina respondant. for example, if i say --4" brick veneer w/ 2" airspace on 5/8" osb sheathing on 2x6 studs @ 16" o/c --it would just happen. that way i can drink coffee and eat at the same time.
I was in line at the coffee shop yesterday behind a guy who was wearing what looked like an oversized calulator with a cord that ran up and plugged into his skull. My first thought was if I could harness that for production work.
i forgot the building wrap. but the computer would light up when i did something like that. may have to post some handdrafting.
Jul 30, 07 11:45 pm ·
·
The first working drawing set I ever drew (in 1984) was ink on mylar. Ironically, and because the budget allowed it, I redrew the same set of working drawings on CAD (also in 1984). Great transition exercise. Then in 1985 (I suggested and) produced a set of CAD working drawings at 11 x 17 via electrostatic printer (precursor to laser printing). Duplicate sets were made via photocopy.
I still sometimes wonder if architects are really as modern as they think they are.
I learned CAD on the job, not in school. That was over ten years ago. The office that I did the bulk of my internship did schematic design and design development by hand, then construction docs. in the computer. Now, I'm finding myself doing as much as possible by hand, mostly because I tend to think things through and am open to more possibilities that way(instead of copying and pasting something I've already done). It's all residential work, so it's not like I'm drafting the same floorplan over and over again. I think I get more respect from a builder when I hand them a set drawn with a pencil, and have been told from the engineer that I work with that sets drawn well by hand suggest a level of experience and have (in his experience) an easier time getting a permit. I haven't had any problems getting permits with CAD, so I don't know if that is true or not...
I think the danger of CAD lies with ease in which you can copy and paste everything (and repeat). After awhile, all the buildings start to look the same because it's easier to do what's been done before when the client is breathing down your neck.
I worked at a university planning office and saw loads of construction sets---all done on the computer, and was shocked at the lack of line weights, and the tendency to repeat information just 'cause. I've always crammed as much info as possible onto a 24 x 36 sheet, and some of those sheets would have very little new info on them. I think I had a former boss that drilled it into my head to use as little paper as possible to convey it, and don't repeat a thing....But the university archive....ink on linen for the university's buildings that were built in the early 1900's---those drawings were truly a work of art, all consistently beautiful, and the size of the sets minimal in comparison.
I'm sure there's alot of people out there that learned how to design and pull a set together on the computer only, without any lead at all---and they'd probably say that CAD is just making life alot easier for us, and hand drafting is a dinosaur. To them I say whatever works for you. When I do use CAD, I try using it as I learned to draft...like a pencil with a whole lotta bells and whistles. About a month ago, a recent engineering grad asked me, "don't you erase alot?" I thought about all the trash I go through and really it's no different than screwing with plotters, line weights, scaling different viewports---it's just already printed out. Just run the copies, and scan into the computer.
frit, that is my point; inherent in the idea that craft is better than the expediency of cad, is the principal that it takes a bit more knowledge to be a craftsman - more training, better appreciation for material and assemblage, etc - than it takes to be an autocad producer. perhaps i am wrong...
probably half of the reason that i got into architecture in the first place was my love for drawing. now that i don't draw anymore, half of the job that i loved has been replaced with paperwork. the other half is still there, i think. under one of these stacks of paper.
Frit...do we work at the same office?
Probably not, but it seems that most of us who come from the same time...mid-80's to early 90's have a different perspective on things. Having transitioned between hand drafting and CAD...and now Revit. In my case, I grew up in/around my dad's office and construction sites.
"I learned to take pride in what my drawings look like, and how to communicate effectively through them"
It's not only the interns...we have people in the office who have 5-7 years exp. who have absolutely no clue how a building comes together. Zoom in-Zoom out...copy past this and that. And to those who say that you can't put together a great CD set that tells the story within budget is full of Horse shit...it can be done...I do it all the time. Unfortunately the way it's been working out and in the direction I am going:
"The only ones in the office with any depth of experience are too busy or not in the office enough to be a real resource"
I end up comming in over the weekends and stay late to re-arrange the crap my team puts together. Sure 90% of the info is all there, but as many times as I sit down and explain HOW and WHY, it still doesn't sink in. There is no concept of lineweights, shading (hatching) and how it all "tells the story"...and when I say this, I wish I had a camera to capture their cross-eyed look of "what story"
I try to show by example...it's very rewarding when my latest CD set (small interiors project) is the "office Standard" by which all other CD sets are to be based off. Additionally, it has become part of many of our marketing material for potential clients wanting to see our product start to finish.
It goes beyond "drafting" but basic spatial visuallization (3D). Yes, Revit, Viz, Sketchup can show space, but where does one determine how high, wide the space is...has to come from within...
I find it virtually impossible to design in CAD. Let me clarify, during the schematic/concept design phase it is virtually impossible to design. (interiors example)-you have no idea how many times I've seen young designers take a program and extract from it "boxes" to the size shown on the program and try to space plan from it...zoom in...zoom out....copy another 10x12 box here, another there...and this goes on for a week!!! Not on my projects! the problem is when I sit down and sketch 5 options in 30 minutes, they complain that "I don't have an opportunity to learn...or to design". You know what, learn how to solve the problem quickly (in whichever manner you please) and then come talk to me.
Sure I "design" in CAD...but that comes at the very end when I am trying to put the "building together" in the details (even during SD/DD). It's much easier to offset this line 3/4" this way, and that way 1.5" etc...
Having said all this (in my own special pieced together way) I was once an intern...and slow...and didn't know what to do. However the differences I see now (with some) is that there is no drive to learn...to understand...no pride. They come in and they get paid...and the bitch and moan about how they are overworked and underpaid. I looked up to my senior colleagues, I asked questions, I still strive to put together a great set of CD's that the GC will sit and stare at in AWE! Sure I see some glimmer of Hope in Revit with putting the CD's together, but that still does not solve the problems with the new generation.
It was all downhill once we stopped scratching lines in the dirt with a stick. Pencil & paper technology was the first step toward the abyss and CAD is the next level of hell.
The abacus killed mathematics.
The hammer killed masonry.
Video killed the radio star.
It is not cad (or the pencil - for nostalgia buffs) that makes crappy, ugly drawings - it's the drafsperson. It is possible for things to be well drafted and created with cad tools.
(Sorry fo the rant - I'm a little touchy on this subject - the principal here also believes a pencil makes you a "real architect.")
The computer is not at all a tool, it is just something they want you to belive. It is not anymore now it has been made into an automat.
Revit decide the Lego looks and you can not make anything new only chose between a number of options and put that together.
How it is build , how the structure work, is none of your concern ; now try being innovative with that.
Now if you develob some new Decor then that is more important than develobing other way's of building a structure --- already Decor come in many variaty , but you better check if Revit allow this, as if it don't then forget about it, as "this is how we build a house" --- and the skills, the ability to use the programs flexible, the programing leading to new visions forget it, there are no use for creativity with an autmat. The computer is not a tool it's an accounting book.
right on, 207moak. has it occurred to anyone that there may also be an art to cad as well? how you manage xrefs? how to understand that when you put a line on a certain layer it will have a particular lineweight when printed? how to make drawings accessible to an entire team? many of the same old rules apply that applied to a hand drafted set, but now there are different means to the same ends. moaning the end of drafting just makes you sound like a nostalgic luddite.
Didn't Sartre say "hell is other people"? Your principal might need an ego check.
The questioning of CAD on this thread is not that it makes you any less of a "real" architect, just that it can be used thoughtlessly. Drawing forces you to slow down and consider things somewhat more carefully and economically (in the sense of management, not money). AutoCAD is certainly a wonderful tool, but there's more to the magic of design than commands and shortcuts and mouse clicking.
One of the main reasons I left graduate school at Columbia was because there was a huge disconnect between what students were designing and an understanding of the physicality/reality of architecture. At the end of the day, most students had created beautiful images, but not beautiful buildings. I blame the school's outright codependence on digital production to be at fault.
I think it's important to get your hands dirty as an architect, especially since as a creative profession, we generally don't build our own projects.
I'm actually "moaning" the loss of the drafter as a position in modern architectural practice, regardless of the tool they might use. I agree with squaresquared's comments above, but what I originally wrote was more about the lack of resources for someone new to the profession to learn from.
I agree that paper and the computer have their roles to play and that the creativity is not in the tool, but in the designer (who may or may not be a tool.)
So, I propose we retitle this thread.
"Are thoughtless, image focused designers ruining this profession with wahtever tool they choose to express their hollow ideas."
i don't think that person is lost at all, frit, except in firms where that person's importance has not been recognized. sure, i feel that person is impt because that person is me!
i still sketch out most details in pencil on trace, i just happen to do it over a 8.5x11 print of a cad drawing that's been blocked out in autocad or revit.
i still get prints of full sets to do my checks and coordination and, yes, i still mark them up in red and green pen. (red is for changes that show up on drwgs; green is for notes to the drafter.)
i still invite the design/drafting team to consultant meetings so that they know what i'm talking about when i make coordination changes to accommodate the consultants' needs.
i still sit with the person who will be drafting and go over all of the changes, giving them the context and reason so that they can think through related issues on other drawings and i don't have to chase it all down myself, thereby giving them the chance to take some initiative and learn how the set is inter-related.
this is not a function of cad, no cad, revit or other. it's an institutional decision within the firm and the team management.
207moak - That was exactly what I was going to post. In the end, AutoCAD and BIM are just tools.
Technically no one should be limited by their own tools, but it doens't always seem to work that way.
I've learned hand drafting in school, but haven't used it at all for work. Hand drawings for me have always been about ideas and relationships rather than aesthetically pleasing works on their own.
ahh, yes the age old divide. experience vs. inexperience, craft vs. expediency. drafting vs. CAD vs. .......
dsc points out one issue i feel a need to discuss for a short amount of time. he points out that he has a series of layers named dsc-015, etc., etc. this is inherently an obscure logic. if he were to change those names to, say, elv_wt1, elv_wt2, etc. he would suddenly be expanding the usage of his office's pen table instead of just making an expedient means for his drafting.
a little futureboy CAD history:
1992 first first year class at PSU to be given tutorials on computer usage
1993 one of first second year classes to have a paperless studio
1993 created short animation of project
1992-1997 do most drafting for school by hand, with 3d modeling as a design exercise on the side.
1994-1997 work in office that only does hand drafting. typical drawing set is only 20 sheets.
1998 while working for Meier, charged with finding a way to mimic craft of hand-drafted drawings in CAD
2001-2005 CAD manager and main 3D visualizer on a string of projects at Polshek
2006 worked on developing BIM system as a backend for a design to fabrication system for a mass customizable building system
so a few things that i've learned:
1. anything using the computer is only as useful as the logic given as to how it will be used
2. you need to keep layer naming simple, generic, and straightforward. 3d and 2d require different level naming protocols. as do plans and elevations/sections/details.
3. a well developed, logical, and consistent pen table is everyone's best friend
4. pantone is an amazing thing and should be utilized anytime color is involved (you can get pantone to RGB or CMYK information in illustrator), this can also aid in calibrating different printers, but expect some color shift....you'll never get them perfect.
5. the tendency to draw too much is fuelled by the design process. draw a lot, but then reduce down to the essential details. this was true in hand drawing, and it's still true in CAD drawing....it's just that for some reason people have forgotten it and instead think that every little drawing they've ever done should make it into the set. editing is an architect's best friend
6. BIM is a great extension to CAD, but understand that it is still a drawing technique and not a building technique. Therefore, it is inherently a diagrammatic act....just as CAD should be...and hand drafting was. diagrams simplify down to the fundamentals of what is happening and why (not how). how is a slightly separate exercise that is referenced by the diagram.
i'm just putting this out there because i do think that CAD is a bad thing for this profession in that it is typically employed as an expedient means and done so without logic or rigour...which in this profession always means its debasement.
but it is not inherently evil....it's the typical gun argument. guns don't kill people, people do. CAD doesn't kill architecture, architects unthinkingly using CAD do.
isn't this really all about communication and thought processes ... what works for one maybe doesn't work for another. I think it's more important to think about the process and the result, rather than about the tool.
as I see the issue, too many students come out of school thinking the only way to work out their ideas is on the computer ... which is a very narrow tool, at best. it can be laborious and slow and imprecise, yet it still gives the false impression that it's quick and easy and accurate. imho, computers are best for documenting and refining ideas first developed in some other medium.
having been at this for a while, one thing I have learned is that really good design ideas rarely come, or get developed, from a single person sitting at a computer. more often they come from group interaction, standing around a layout table. and, most often of all, they come when several people are seated at a table in a restaurant or kitchen, drawing stuff with a felt-tip on soggy napkins. neither of those environments are hospitable for a computer.
One of the big problems with right now is those people who have mastered the art of detailing, and can tell the story in a set of prints as compact and effective as possible are also the same ones who make the best architects, and by the time they hit their 30's they want more and they go out to get more. You cant expect these people to be your beutiful draftsmen forever. Hell, maybe the educational barrier are keeping out the real draftsmen. Whos gonna pay 30k a yr to get a 40K job with little benefit. You could do house portraits for hobby and be a plumber.
Great book out kinda relative to this subject - Prelude to the Modern; the chicago architecture club
its about this club of draftsmen who were the geometers and problem solvers of the Burnhams, and Jennys and Sullivans. They had their own club of behind the scenes folks who solved problems with the simple art of looking. Thats whats missing. You dont fancy degree to Look closely.
I rarely use paper anymore. For some reason, prob years of the cpu, its like my right arm even though I type with the left. The free flow of sketching on a cpu and by hand are the exact same once your brain is accustomed. So its to each there own - plus the cpu just lets me do whatever I want however I want to - go straight into massing while doing plans or prelim takeoffs etc - ironicaly its when the planning is 75-80% sketched on cpu that the trace paper comes out for fine tunning - just my way
Not being able to comment on the "old days" I don't think the art is being lost solely due to the computer. Having worked on several renovation projects I've seen numerous old CD's from the 50's and earlier that were all hand drawn. Some are works of art, some not.
Regardless of quality, no contractor today would bid, let alone build, a large project from 10-20 sheets. We cannot trust a contractor to know his craft anymore. Thus our CD sets keep getting larger and larger and larger. Any productivity increases from the advent of CAD has been soaked up with more redundancy to hold the contractor's hand...and hope you don't get sued.
Exactly. It's not that you can't become technically proficient in CAD (I didn't intend to raise the "CAD sucks" argument), it's that eventually those doing the drafting move on up the ladder and are replaced by somone new. So you keep starting over in terms of the experience level. This situation is, in my opinion, an unintended consequence of the CAD software.
My first real job, a small gut and renovation, was all drawn by hand. It was awesome. The thought process is so different. I hate CAD, I hate moving things 1/8" this way and that when the sheathing that was assumed 1/2" thick during DD suddenly becomes 5/8" during CD's. CAD is sometimes too accurate for it's own good. CAD is good in that it takes parts and adds them up, and remembers a lot of stuff for you, but you have to continuously update all that throughout. And when it is so easy to produce produce produce, you now get that much more information in which to edit when new input comes along. Now that 1/8" effects the roof plan, the RCP, the door details, the elevations, whereas in a hand drawing you'd (artfully) erase and recraft a few dimensions and notes and voila.
Anyone notice how when the contractor becomes more efficient, it is at the expense of us? For example, when the contractor wants to use metal studs to save costs and you designed it with wood studs, you have to update all your drawings and data to reflect that? Again, an 1/8" of an inch here and there and everywhere through all 20-40 pages of your CD's. Why is that OK? More than once I have sat for days doing nothing but making changes like this.
On the architectural technician. We had them at my last job. I loved them. They did drafting and didn't really aspire to design, they were among the architect's greatest fans because although they knew how to put a building together and a set of CD's, they didn't know how to design it, and working with architects they saw the value the architect brought to the project.
being at work I am going to come back and really comment on it, but:
A. you can f your drawings way worse in CAD than you ever could hand drafting
B. Like reading great literature, drafting is romantic to think about, not to do.
C. Learned both AutoCAD 10 & hand drafting in high school. Drafting was definitely more fun, even though I was better at the computer.
D. Fell in love, and really learned how to describe my buildings using 3D software (first DataCad, then ArchiCad). I had a hard time finding the right section hand drafting it.
E. People who only learned CAD cannot set up a sheet, much less a set of drawings. Sure its a gross generalization, but I haven't met the exception that proves the rule yet.
F. Sketch initial plan, model quickly in CAD. Sketch on top of printout. Refine Cad. Cad has pretty much replaced my hardlines. Still hand sketch pretty much every detail.
G. If you want to really complain about the Cad-connected downfall of the profession, look no further than Sketch-up. Talk about removing any required knowledge of how a building goes together, but allowing it to look "sexy" anyways.
I agree with all of you...
I'm all for using all available tools to design (whether it's a pencil, or the latest 3d software or milling machine).
The people I've learned from all use(d) a mixed method for designing, and produce amazing drawings in AutoCad, and Revit. The issue here is the new generation of Architects-Interns-Designers who don't have the sensibility or care to understand the beauty of good design (from begining to end)
Sure, it's very different if you are working for mr.developers' whore doing strip malls, or designing a $600/sf private bank on Park Ave. I can see how a young person can fall into the "architecture sucks" trap. I've worked (shit, I'm working on one right now) on projects which are a little dissapointing for many reasons, but I pick myself and the team up and try to do our best. I'm not going to gain anything by bitching about it.
the hand drafting x cad issue is almost not relevant when it comes to the profession today. Designers still can hand draft, sketch, hand render if they feels it's part of their process, or desired presentation technique. Almost every technical architect i know, has adapted to CAd, and some older guys can achieve beautiful looking drawings using old drafting techniques and adapting them to cad.
the 2d cad x BIM issue is now at hand. In my area, quite a few firms are shifting to full BIM in Arch. Desktop while a few shifting straight into Revit. Some firms, are remaining with 2d cad production drawings, following the belief that it's merely production tool for drafting. My problem with BIM is that it begins to pass along some architectural intellectual property to the computer software. Adding to that fear, is how architecture generally turns what are potentially very positive tools for a better more efficient and thorough process into a Fee-cutting measure, short-selling itself again and again.
I would rename the thread: Could BIM kill this profession?
maybe we could start an offshoot thread with examples...actual drawings/images? someone on here could learn from it...even the older ones...
Of course being subjective, it should be made clear that we are not critiquing the "design" but seeing process.
wtf? if you are drafting you are designing. everything is design. even if its just laying out a page. if somebody ie principal draws some goofy sketchup model and you start working on it guess what you are designing it because they havent figured anything out about it. designing is more than what it looks like kids.
wtf? if you are drafting you are designing. everything is design. even if its just laying out a page. if somebody ie principal draws some goofy sketchup model and you start working on it guess what you are designing it because they havent figured anything out about it. designing is more than what it looks like kids.
simples - "My problem with BIM is that it begins to pass along some architectural intellectual property to the computer software. Adding to that fear, is how architecture generally turns what are potentially very positive tools for a better more efficient and thorough process into a Fee-cutting measure, short-selling itself again and again."
That is a very insightful comment. Futureboy's comment about it being similar to "the gun argument" goes along the same lines. BIM as a tool is great - but it leaves a lot of room for mis-use and exploitation. That is the danger of the accessibility of software and our work being able to be digitized. Some fields took advantage of it - such as music being able to created, digitized, altered, copied and sold easily (although that is in the process of backfiring on them). Other fields protect their expertise with hardware and ultimately their dependence on the hand - medical field with extremely expensive and exclusive rights to equipment with dependence on the surgeon's hands. I was a skeptic of BIM, but once I started using it I'm convinced this is what architects will eventually all use. Still, there is a lot of progress to be made... (more to follow)
"The issue here is the new generation of Architects-Interns-Designers who don't have the sensibility or care to understand the beauty of good design (from begining to end)"
that's utterly ridiculous to pretend that there is a "new generation" of architects who just don't get it. please. after rereading this thread, the issues here have little to do with CAD v. drafting. it has everything to do with a generational gap that it seems many on this thread are having a hard time reconciling.
I think CAD shuld kill the profesion, ---- take over and Deliver a new architecture, new building core at a third the cost, something carrying it's own gurantie so nothing will break, something that work with computers Gee shuldn't that be better then pens and drawing tables.
A Cabin at a third the cost --- for me jettison architecture if you have to look elsewhere to find something at a real price.
there is...(nothing personal)
That's not to say that this "new" generation is good for nothing...just there seems to be something missing. Without getting into too much detail...It seems that 1 out of every 10 persons I interview are worth hiring. Sure the fact that I'm in S.FL doesn't help (vs NYC, LA, BOS, and other large metro areas) but that is a fact.
Is CAD killing this profession?
This is something that's been on my mind recently, and I wonder if it's just the environment I'm in or if the problem is more pervasive.
When I started working in firms after high school, CAD was just starting to be accepted by architects as something other than a passing fad. My primary qualification at that point was simply knowing how to move the mouse around the screen for architects who "had to get on CAD". I was fortunate to work with people over the next few years who were professional drafters and either made the switch to CAD, or stayed on in a kind of advisory capacity, sketching details and critiquing drawings. From them I learned not only how to draw in the graphic communication sense, but also the basics of how a CD set is put together and how to detail a building. I learned to take pride in what my drawings look like, and how to communicate effectively through them.
When I look around my office these days, there is no one like that anymore. The drafters are interns who have yet to be promoted out of that position, and as such they don't have the knowledge or the skill to produce a clear and accurate detail, much less a full package. I feel like an essential layer of knowledge and instruction has been lost. The only ones in the office with any depth of experience are too busy or not in the office enough to be a real resource, so who can the interns learn from? I suspect that many just put the time in, intentionally not learning much or doing very well so they don't get tasked with doing more of it. Or maybe they feel it is beneath them to draft details. Maybe interns always felt that way and there's no one left to pick up the slack anymore.
I don't mean to slam interns here, I'm barely out of that category myself. But I wonder if this profession hasn't done itself a great disservice by eliminating the draftsman (or draughtsman as they always insisted) as a profession unto itself.
you've been an intern for 10 years?
i've been working in and out of architecture firms (and using cad) since '98 and none of them saw it as a passing fade...
My first job with a firm was '91, then I went to college off and on, gradually drifted into architecture and graduated in 2000. Been in it full time since than so depending on how you classify it I havn't been an intern in the technical sense for 5 years or so. But in the grand scheme of things I recognize I've still got a lot to learn.
carpel tunnel isn't a fatal condition... but the toxic materials in the computer might if it catches fire.
NOT A CHANCE! GO BACK TO SEPIAS...AND NASTY FLUIDS WHICH STINK LIKE HELLL... I"M SURE MY LIFE SPAN HAS BEEN REDUCED BECAUSE OF THE FUMES i HAVE DIGESTED IN THE PRINT ROOMS OF MULTIPLE FIRMS....MAYBE i SHOULD SUE!
perhaps. i look at it this way; pre-cast panel construction, with thin brick veneer, is replacing good old masonry construction, and by extension masons. being a mason is not seen as a worthy trade anymore, 60 year old brick masons cannot do the work forever. expediency is replacing craft, and drafting by hand is a craft.
but without cad there would be no sexy blob architecture
This was the lament of the Vice President of Operations at my first real gig. He had missed the drafter and went on how they had been phased out. That was in 1994. Since then I have not seen any real drafters since. I think that there still is a need for someone who is an architectural technologist.
My big worry is Revit. Interns with the point and click nature are really dangerous. I wonder if the young principals schooled on AutoCAD will be phased out by the Revit people
Beta,
I agree it's a craft. But more than being a excellent draftsman, those people knew how to put a building together because all they did was tell others how to do it. And while I lament the loss of the craft, the loss of knowlege is equally disturbing.
dcs-arch,
We're on Revit, which is where this started. On the one hand it's even more important to understand how a building goes together as you build the model, but at the same time that tool is eliminating even the CAD operator from the equation. It's getting hard to find people with both the time and the knowledge to sit down and red-line a sheet.
Follows is a re-post of a comment I made on a thread yesterday:
Romanticized Drafting:
I miss drafting. Really. I was so good at it. I managed to get my second and third jobs as a draftsman at two of the few architecture firms left in San Francisco (or maybe on the planet?) that still did hand drawing. I've been back to visit one of them, and they've joined the 21st century.
AutoCAD, you're such a soulless beast.
***
Drawing and technical drafting still equals visual thinking to me. I wonder sometimes if digitally produced architecture is carefully considered/thought through... That's another rant.
We work on smaller projects. We have talked about Revit for years. Since revit 3. We demoed it and I was aghast. I feel that it is important for our interns to draw the section piece by piece. Then project the lines to develop the elevations. Only until you master the section can you begin to design. It takes some time. But when you are in the field you know exactly where each piece of the building is.
i would like a program that was voice and retina respondant. for example, if i say --4" brick veneer w/ 2" airspace on 5/8" osb sheathing on 2x6 studs @ 16" o/c --it would just happen. that way i can drink coffee and eat at the same time.
I was in line at the coffee shop yesterday behind a guy who was wearing what looked like an oversized calulator with a cord that ran up and plugged into his skull. My first thought was if I could harness that for production work.
nice reenactment vado
Our interns wonder why we have DSC005, DSC010, DSC015, and DSC020 layers.
Oddly enough the colors match my korinor pens that I keep in my Art Bin.
Go figure
i forgot the building wrap. but the computer would light up when i did something like that. may have to post some handdrafting.
The first working drawing set I ever drew (in 1984) was ink on mylar. Ironically, and because the budget allowed it, I redrew the same set of working drawings on CAD (also in 1984). Great transition exercise. Then in 1985 (I suggested and) produced a set of CAD working drawings at 11 x 17 via electrostatic printer (precursor to laser printing). Duplicate sets were made via photocopy.
I still sometimes wonder if architects are really as modern as they think they are.
I learned CAD on the job, not in school. That was over ten years ago. The office that I did the bulk of my internship did schematic design and design development by hand, then construction docs. in the computer. Now, I'm finding myself doing as much as possible by hand, mostly because I tend to think things through and am open to more possibilities that way(instead of copying and pasting something I've already done). It's all residential work, so it's not like I'm drafting the same floorplan over and over again. I think I get more respect from a builder when I hand them a set drawn with a pencil, and have been told from the engineer that I work with that sets drawn well by hand suggest a level of experience and have (in his experience) an easier time getting a permit. I haven't had any problems getting permits with CAD, so I don't know if that is true or not...
I think the danger of CAD lies with ease in which you can copy and paste everything (and repeat). After awhile, all the buildings start to look the same because it's easier to do what's been done before when the client is breathing down your neck.
I worked at a university planning office and saw loads of construction sets---all done on the computer, and was shocked at the lack of line weights, and the tendency to repeat information just 'cause. I've always crammed as much info as possible onto a 24 x 36 sheet, and some of those sheets would have very little new info on them. I think I had a former boss that drilled it into my head to use as little paper as possible to convey it, and don't repeat a thing....But the university archive....ink on linen for the university's buildings that were built in the early 1900's---those drawings were truly a work of art, all consistently beautiful, and the size of the sets minimal in comparison.
I'm sure there's alot of people out there that learned how to design and pull a set together on the computer only, without any lead at all---and they'd probably say that CAD is just making life alot easier for us, and hand drafting is a dinosaur. To them I say whatever works for you. When I do use CAD, I try using it as I learned to draft...like a pencil with a whole lotta bells and whistles. About a month ago, a recent engineering grad asked me, "don't you erase alot?" I thought about all the trash I go through and really it's no different than screwing with plotters, line weights, scaling different viewports---it's just already printed out. Just run the copies, and scan into the computer.
frit, that is my point; inherent in the idea that craft is better than the expediency of cad, is the principal that it takes a bit more knowledge to be a craftsman - more training, better appreciation for material and assemblage, etc - than it takes to be an autocad producer. perhaps i am wrong...
probably half of the reason that i got into architecture in the first place was my love for drawing. now that i don't draw anymore, half of the job that i loved has been replaced with paperwork. the other half is still there, i think. under one of these stacks of paper.
Do your projects end up looking anything like this, Steven?
i have that project copyrighted, squaredsquared. where did you get that image?!
*sigh*
Frit...do we work at the same office?
Probably not, but it seems that most of us who come from the same time...mid-80's to early 90's have a different perspective on things. Having transitioned between hand drafting and CAD...and now Revit. In my case, I grew up in/around my dad's office and construction sites.
"I learned to take pride in what my drawings look like, and how to communicate effectively through them"
It's not only the interns...we have people in the office who have 5-7 years exp. who have absolutely no clue how a building comes together. Zoom in-Zoom out...copy past this and that. And to those who say that you can't put together a great CD set that tells the story within budget is full of Horse shit...it can be done...I do it all the time. Unfortunately the way it's been working out and in the direction I am going:
"The only ones in the office with any depth of experience are too busy or not in the office enough to be a real resource"
I end up comming in over the weekends and stay late to re-arrange the crap my team puts together. Sure 90% of the info is all there, but as many times as I sit down and explain HOW and WHY, it still doesn't sink in. There is no concept of lineweights, shading (hatching) and how it all "tells the story"...and when I say this, I wish I had a camera to capture their cross-eyed look of "what story"
I try to show by example...it's very rewarding when my latest CD set (small interiors project) is the "office Standard" by which all other CD sets are to be based off. Additionally, it has become part of many of our marketing material for potential clients wanting to see our product start to finish.
It goes beyond "drafting" but basic spatial visuallization (3D). Yes, Revit, Viz, Sketchup can show space, but where does one determine how high, wide the space is...has to come from within...
I find it virtually impossible to design in CAD. Let me clarify, during the schematic/concept design phase it is virtually impossible to design. (interiors example)-you have no idea how many times I've seen young designers take a program and extract from it "boxes" to the size shown on the program and try to space plan from it...zoom in...zoom out....copy another 10x12 box here, another there...and this goes on for a week!!! Not on my projects! the problem is when I sit down and sketch 5 options in 30 minutes, they complain that "I don't have an opportunity to learn...or to design". You know what, learn how to solve the problem quickly (in whichever manner you please) and then come talk to me.
Sure I "design" in CAD...but that comes at the very end when I am trying to put the "building together" in the details (even during SD/DD). It's much easier to offset this line 3/4" this way, and that way 1.5" etc...
Having said all this (in my own special pieced together way) I was once an intern...and slow...and didn't know what to do. However the differences I see now (with some) is that there is no drive to learn...to understand...no pride. They come in and they get paid...and the bitch and moan about how they are overworked and underpaid. I looked up to my senior colleagues, I asked questions, I still strive to put together a great set of CD's that the GC will sit and stare at in AWE! Sure I see some glimmer of Hope in Revit with putting the CD's together, but that still does not solve the problems with the new generation.
It was all downhill once we stopped scratching lines in the dirt with a stick. Pencil & paper technology was the first step toward the abyss and CAD is the next level of hell.
The abacus killed mathematics.
The hammer killed masonry.
Video killed the radio star.
It is not cad (or the pencil - for nostalgia buffs) that makes crappy, ugly drawings - it's the drafsperson. It is possible for things to be well drafted and created with cad tools.
(Sorry fo the rant - I'm a little touchy on this subject - the principal here also believes a pencil makes you a "real architect.")
The computer is not at all a tool, it is just something they want you to belive. It is not anymore now it has been made into an automat.
Revit decide the Lego looks and you can not make anything new only chose between a number of options and put that together.
How it is build , how the structure work, is none of your concern ; now try being innovative with that.
Now if you develob some new Decor then that is more important than develobing other way's of building a structure --- already Decor come in many variaty , but you better check if Revit allow this, as if it don't then forget about it, as "this is how we build a house" --- and the skills, the ability to use the programs flexible, the programing leading to new visions forget it, there are no use for creativity with an autmat. The computer is not a tool it's an accounting book.
right on, 207moak. has it occurred to anyone that there may also be an art to cad as well? how you manage xrefs? how to understand that when you put a line on a certain layer it will have a particular lineweight when printed? how to make drawings accessible to an entire team? many of the same old rules apply that applied to a hand drafted set, but now there are different means to the same ends. moaning the end of drafting just makes you sound like a nostalgic luddite.
207moak,
Didn't Sartre say "hell is other people"? Your principal might need an ego check.
The questioning of CAD on this thread is not that it makes you any less of a "real" architect, just that it can be used thoughtlessly. Drawing forces you to slow down and consider things somewhat more carefully and economically (in the sense of management, not money). AutoCAD is certainly a wonderful tool, but there's more to the magic of design than commands and shortcuts and mouse clicking.
One of the main reasons I left graduate school at Columbia was because there was a huge disconnect between what students were designing and an understanding of the physicality/reality of architecture. At the end of the day, most students had created beautiful images, but not beautiful buildings. I blame the school's outright codependence on digital production to be at fault.
I think it's important to get your hands dirty as an architect, especially since as a creative profession, we generally don't build our own projects.
the eraser is the architects best friend.- mckim, mead or white. i can't remember which.
I'm actually "moaning" the loss of the drafter as a position in modern architectural practice, regardless of the tool they might use. I agree with squaresquared's comments above, but what I originally wrote was more about the lack of resources for someone new to the profession to learn from.
I agree that paper and the computer have their roles to play and that the creativity is not in the tool, but in the designer (who may or may not be a tool.)
So, I propose we retitle this thread.
"Are thoughtless, image focused designers ruining this profession with wahtever tool they choose to express their hollow ideas."
i don't think that person is lost at all, frit, except in firms where that person's importance has not been recognized. sure, i feel that person is impt because that person is me!
i still sketch out most details in pencil on trace, i just happen to do it over a 8.5x11 print of a cad drawing that's been blocked out in autocad or revit.
i still get prints of full sets to do my checks and coordination and, yes, i still mark them up in red and green pen. (red is for changes that show up on drwgs; green is for notes to the drafter.)
i still invite the design/drafting team to consultant meetings so that they know what i'm talking about when i make coordination changes to accommodate the consultants' needs.
i still sit with the person who will be drafting and go over all of the changes, giving them the context and reason so that they can think through related issues on other drawings and i don't have to chase it all down myself, thereby giving them the chance to take some initiative and learn how the set is inter-related.
this is not a function of cad, no cad, revit or other. it's an institutional decision within the firm and the team management.
207moak - That was exactly what I was going to post. In the end, AutoCAD and BIM are just tools.
Technically no one should be limited by their own tools, but it doens't always seem to work that way.
I've learned hand drafting in school, but haven't used it at all for work. Hand drawings for me have always been about ideas and relationships rather than aesthetically pleasing works on their own.
ahh, yes the age old divide. experience vs. inexperience, craft vs. expediency. drafting vs. CAD vs. .......
dsc points out one issue i feel a need to discuss for a short amount of time. he points out that he has a series of layers named dsc-015, etc., etc. this is inherently an obscure logic. if he were to change those names to, say, elv_wt1, elv_wt2, etc. he would suddenly be expanding the usage of his office's pen table instead of just making an expedient means for his drafting.
a little futureboy CAD history:
1992 first first year class at PSU to be given tutorials on computer usage
1993 one of first second year classes to have a paperless studio
1993 created short animation of project
1992-1997 do most drafting for school by hand, with 3d modeling as a design exercise on the side.
1994-1997 work in office that only does hand drafting. typical drawing set is only 20 sheets.
1998 while working for Meier, charged with finding a way to mimic craft of hand-drafted drawings in CAD
2001-2005 CAD manager and main 3D visualizer on a string of projects at Polshek
2006 worked on developing BIM system as a backend for a design to fabrication system for a mass customizable building system
so a few things that i've learned:
1. anything using the computer is only as useful as the logic given as to how it will be used
2. you need to keep layer naming simple, generic, and straightforward. 3d and 2d require different level naming protocols. as do plans and elevations/sections/details.
3. a well developed, logical, and consistent pen table is everyone's best friend
4. pantone is an amazing thing and should be utilized anytime color is involved (you can get pantone to RGB or CMYK information in illustrator), this can also aid in calibrating different printers, but expect some color shift....you'll never get them perfect.
5. the tendency to draw too much is fuelled by the design process. draw a lot, but then reduce down to the essential details. this was true in hand drawing, and it's still true in CAD drawing....it's just that for some reason people have forgotten it and instead think that every little drawing they've ever done should make it into the set. editing is an architect's best friend
6. BIM is a great extension to CAD, but understand that it is still a drawing technique and not a building technique. Therefore, it is inherently a diagrammatic act....just as CAD should be...and hand drafting was. diagrams simplify down to the fundamentals of what is happening and why (not how). how is a slightly separate exercise that is referenced by the diagram.
i'm just putting this out there because i do think that CAD is a bad thing for this profession in that it is typically employed as an expedient means and done so without logic or rigour...which in this profession always means its debasement.
but it is not inherently evil....it's the typical gun argument. guns don't kill people, people do. CAD doesn't kill architecture, architects unthinkingly using CAD do.
isn't this really all about communication and thought processes ... what works for one maybe doesn't work for another. I think it's more important to think about the process and the result, rather than about the tool.
as I see the issue, too many students come out of school thinking the only way to work out their ideas is on the computer ... which is a very narrow tool, at best. it can be laborious and slow and imprecise, yet it still gives the false impression that it's quick and easy and accurate. imho, computers are best for documenting and refining ideas first developed in some other medium.
having been at this for a while, one thing I have learned is that really good design ideas rarely come, or get developed, from a single person sitting at a computer. more often they come from group interaction, standing around a layout table. and, most often of all, they come when several people are seated at a table in a restaurant or kitchen, drawing stuff with a felt-tip on soggy napkins. neither of those environments are hospitable for a computer.
One of the big problems with right now is those people who have mastered the art of detailing, and can tell the story in a set of prints as compact and effective as possible are also the same ones who make the best architects, and by the time they hit their 30's they want more and they go out to get more. You cant expect these people to be your beutiful draftsmen forever. Hell, maybe the educational barrier are keeping out the real draftsmen. Whos gonna pay 30k a yr to get a 40K job with little benefit. You could do house portraits for hobby and be a plumber.
Great book out kinda relative to this subject - Prelude to the Modern; the chicago architecture club
its about this club of draftsmen who were the geometers and problem solvers of the Burnhams, and Jennys and Sullivans. They had their own club of behind the scenes folks who solved problems with the simple art of looking. Thats whats missing. You dont fancy degree to Look closely.
Quiz -
I rarely use paper anymore. For some reason, prob years of the cpu, its like my right arm even though I type with the left. The free flow of sketching on a cpu and by hand are the exact same once your brain is accustomed. So its to each there own - plus the cpu just lets me do whatever I want however I want to - go straight into massing while doing plans or prelim takeoffs etc - ironicaly its when the planning is 75-80% sketched on cpu that the trace paper comes out for fine tunning - just my way
Not being able to comment on the "old days" I don't think the art is being lost solely due to the computer. Having worked on several renovation projects I've seen numerous old CD's from the 50's and earlier that were all hand drawn. Some are works of art, some not.
Regardless of quality, no contractor today would bid, let alone build, a large project from 10-20 sheets. We cannot trust a contractor to know his craft anymore. Thus our CD sets keep getting larger and larger and larger. Any productivity increases from the advent of CAD has been soaked up with more redundancy to hold the contractor's hand...and hope you don't get sued.
evilplatypus:
Exactly. It's not that you can't become technically proficient in CAD (I didn't intend to raise the "CAD sucks" argument), it's that eventually those doing the drafting move on up the ladder and are replaced by somone new. So you keep starting over in terms of the experience level. This situation is, in my opinion, an unintended consequence of the CAD software.
But with BIM, aren't people higher up on the ladder using more of the software as well?
My first real job, a small gut and renovation, was all drawn by hand. It was awesome. The thought process is so different. I hate CAD, I hate moving things 1/8" this way and that when the sheathing that was assumed 1/2" thick during DD suddenly becomes 5/8" during CD's. CAD is sometimes too accurate for it's own good. CAD is good in that it takes parts and adds them up, and remembers a lot of stuff for you, but you have to continuously update all that throughout. And when it is so easy to produce produce produce, you now get that much more information in which to edit when new input comes along. Now that 1/8" effects the roof plan, the RCP, the door details, the elevations, whereas in a hand drawing you'd (artfully) erase and recraft a few dimensions and notes and voila.
Anyone notice how when the contractor becomes more efficient, it is at the expense of us? For example, when the contractor wants to use metal studs to save costs and you designed it with wood studs, you have to update all your drawings and data to reflect that? Again, an 1/8" of an inch here and there and everywhere through all 20-40 pages of your CD's. Why is that OK? More than once I have sat for days doing nothing but making changes like this.
On the architectural technician. We had them at my last job. I loved them. They did drafting and didn't really aspire to design, they were among the architect's greatest fans because although they knew how to put a building together and a set of CD's, they didn't know how to design it, and working with architects they saw the value the architect brought to the project.
being at work I am going to come back and really comment on it, but:
A. you can f your drawings way worse in CAD than you ever could hand drafting
B. Like reading great literature, drafting is romantic to think about, not to do.
C. Learned both AutoCAD 10 & hand drafting in high school. Drafting was definitely more fun, even though I was better at the computer.
D. Fell in love, and really learned how to describe my buildings using 3D software (first DataCad, then ArchiCad). I had a hard time finding the right section hand drafting it.
E. People who only learned CAD cannot set up a sheet, much less a set of drawings. Sure its a gross generalization, but I haven't met the exception that proves the rule yet.
F. Sketch initial plan, model quickly in CAD. Sketch on top of printout. Refine Cad. Cad has pretty much replaced my hardlines. Still hand sketch pretty much every detail.
G. If you want to really complain about the Cad-connected downfall of the profession, look no further than Sketch-up. Talk about removing any required knowledge of how a building goes together, but allowing it to look "sexy" anyways.
quick, the boss is coming!
I agree with all of you...
I'm all for using all available tools to design (whether it's a pencil, or the latest 3d software or milling machine).
The people I've learned from all use(d) a mixed method for designing, and produce amazing drawings in AutoCad, and Revit. The issue here is the new generation of Architects-Interns-Designers who don't have the sensibility or care to understand the beauty of good design (from begining to end)
Sure, it's very different if you are working for mr.developers' whore doing strip malls, or designing a $600/sf private bank on Park Ave. I can see how a young person can fall into the "architecture sucks" trap. I've worked (shit, I'm working on one right now) on projects which are a little dissapointing for many reasons, but I pick myself and the team up and try to do our best. I'm not going to gain anything by bitching about it.
the hand drafting x cad issue is almost not relevant when it comes to the profession today. Designers still can hand draft, sketch, hand render if they feels it's part of their process, or desired presentation technique. Almost every technical architect i know, has adapted to CAd, and some older guys can achieve beautiful looking drawings using old drafting techniques and adapting them to cad.
the 2d cad x BIM issue is now at hand. In my area, quite a few firms are shifting to full BIM in Arch. Desktop while a few shifting straight into Revit. Some firms, are remaining with 2d cad production drawings, following the belief that it's merely production tool for drafting. My problem with BIM is that it begins to pass along some architectural intellectual property to the computer software. Adding to that fear, is how architecture generally turns what are potentially very positive tools for a better more efficient and thorough process into a Fee-cutting measure, short-selling itself again and again.
I would rename the thread: Could BIM kill this profession?
maybe we could start an offshoot thread with examples...actual drawings/images? someone on here could learn from it...even the older ones...
Of course being subjective, it should be made clear that we are not critiquing the "design" but seeing process.
wtf? if you are drafting you are designing. everything is design. even if its just laying out a page. if somebody ie principal draws some goofy sketchup model and you start working on it guess what you are designing it because they havent figured anything out about it. designing is more than what it looks like kids.
wtf? if you are drafting you are designing. everything is design. even if its just laying out a page. if somebody ie principal draws some goofy sketchup model and you start working on it guess what you are designing it because they havent figured anything out about it. designing is more than what it looks like kids.
simples - "My problem with BIM is that it begins to pass along some architectural intellectual property to the computer software. Adding to that fear, is how architecture generally turns what are potentially very positive tools for a better more efficient and thorough process into a Fee-cutting measure, short-selling itself again and again."
That is a very insightful comment. Futureboy's comment about it being similar to "the gun argument" goes along the same lines. BIM as a tool is great - but it leaves a lot of room for mis-use and exploitation. That is the danger of the accessibility of software and our work being able to be digitized. Some fields took advantage of it - such as music being able to created, digitized, altered, copied and sold easily (although that is in the process of backfiring on them). Other fields protect their expertise with hardware and ultimately their dependence on the hand - medical field with extremely expensive and exclusive rights to equipment with dependence on the surgeon's hands. I was a skeptic of BIM, but once I started using it I'm convinced this is what architects will eventually all use. Still, there is a lot of progress to be made... (more to follow)
"The issue here is the new generation of Architects-Interns-Designers who don't have the sensibility or care to understand the beauty of good design (from begining to end)"
that's utterly ridiculous to pretend that there is a "new generation" of architects who just don't get it. please. after rereading this thread, the issues here have little to do with CAD v. drafting. it has everything to do with a generational gap that it seems many on this thread are having a hard time reconciling.
I think CAD shuld kill the profesion, ---- take over and Deliver a new architecture, new building core at a third the cost, something carrying it's own gurantie so nothing will break, something that work with computers Gee shuldn't that be better then pens and drawing tables.
A Cabin at a third the cost --- for me jettison architecture if you have to look elsewhere to find something at a real price.
there is...(nothing personal)
That's not to say that this "new" generation is good for nothing...just there seems to be something missing. Without getting into too much detail...It seems that 1 out of every 10 persons I interview are worth hiring. Sure the fact that I'm in S.FL doesn't help (vs NYC, LA, BOS, and other large metro areas) but that is a fact.
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.