I have a 4th edition gs (1940s) that covers everything in the earlier ones (but the vehicles are newer) and a 1st ed. landscape gs. don't worry about what is missing or not - get what fits you budget. If you need to rely on the gs to figure out a detail, then be ready for tons of change orders....
I've found the new one great from a detailing and systems perspective, but lacking basic information and organization that the last one had.
For instance, the earlier AGS organized information by material, which was much better than the current one. The new one organizes it by system (such as substructure, wall, roof.) In theory, this is good, but in practice I find it a nuisance. If you're designing a wood roof, for instance, you have to wade through all of the info on steel, masonry, and concrete in order to find wood info.
The flip side is that the new AGS deals with updated materials and modern construction systems.
farwest, does the new one do better in the CAD section? The older one was very basic on that. And.. are the details the same or have they been updated?
Jun 12, 09 5:07 pm ·
·
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.
Architectural Graphic Standards - New vs. Old
Who has used both the new 11th edition and the older 10th edition Graphic Standards?
I read several reviews that stated the new book, designed by Bruce Mau, is great to look at but is missing significant information. Is that true?
I have a 4th edition gs (1940s) that covers everything in the earlier ones (but the vehicles are newer) and a 1st ed. landscape gs. don't worry about what is missing or not - get what fits you budget. If you need to rely on the gs to figure out a detail, then be ready for tons of change orders....
I almost think you need both.
I've found the new one great from a detailing and systems perspective, but lacking basic information and organization that the last one had.
For instance, the earlier AGS organized information by material, which was much better than the current one. The new one organizes it by system (such as substructure, wall, roof.) In theory, this is good, but in practice I find it a nuisance. If you're designing a wood roof, for instance, you have to wade through all of the info on steel, masonry, and concrete in order to find wood info.
The flip side is that the new AGS deals with updated materials and modern construction systems.
treekiller - that's old school!
farwest, does the new one do better in the CAD section? The older one was very basic on that. And.. are the details the same or have they been updated?
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.