How can anyone possibly use layout
-
@bmike said:
and then sonder shows up and makes me feel inadequate...
very nice work. an inspiration, for me, if / as / when i continue to move from complex frames / construction to more whole house...
Hardly Mike: I admire your work very much. In fact, I recently got my Structural Engineer to do two recent projects entirely in SU/LO. He is sold. Initially I referred him to your projects as an example. That first impression got him started......thanks for that!
We are now on our third project together where every drawing in the CD set is done in SU/LO. He even got into a little rendering!
-
Good idea Mike... Let the Battle Begin.
-
Nick,
Nice to see that picture of your project. Beautiful shot. I've seen a number of Tahoe style houses and it is great to see one done so well... with real architecture not just excess.
Peter
-
Here is a link to the typical engineering we do 2D/3D. Don't click the link if you are on a slow connection, its about 6 Mb.
http://fillieverhoeven.nl/downloads_files/005bos.pdfModels in SU, rendered some in Maxwell and all 2D work done in Vectorworks.
These drawings are for the building permit application. Not all of the application drawings are included.On the second page you see a list of the drawings. Apart from the graphical appereance its also a worksheet (like Excell) were you fill in the details. With one mouseclick you can update as many sheets for sheetnumbers, dates names etc.
In the Netherlands we are used to provide for very detailed drawings in almost every stage of the process. If at any stage we can't really continue to work in Layout, we have to convert to a more suited application. Imagine the work involved. So either we can fully do the work in Layout or we rather export the models to Vectorworks as early as possible.
To Mike:
I don't know what you mean to say with:-
How does one get that into 2d construction documents?
-
Rhino for Mac is not available neither is VisualARQ. Rhino has a beta Mac version that I was told about was not to be taken seriously yet.
Regretfully, my still perfectly in order Macpro's 8-cores with the terrabytes of memory, bought just before 2008 are no longer supported by Apple above OSX 10.6.8. So I can't really tryout Layout 2013 other than on my slightly newer Macbook. A lesson learned, never buy any expensive stuff from Apple. I am expecting the newest Macpro's just anounced will last no longer than 4 or 5 years before they can't run the latest OSX graphic change over.
Revit will never really be our thing either. I just do not like the whole circus around it and the fear Autodesk is trying to put upon us disbelievers with their BIM-stories and pricing policies.
Francois
-
-
Francois,
That's some nice work... I don't speak Greek, but I take it that it all works. Love the Thatch details. Don't see anything that can't be done with SU/LO... maybe those detail markers are automatic? Notes automatic? Beautifully simple and detailed set of drawings though.
-
@ frv Very nice work you put out there.
I have a Mac Pro 2006 with Lion 10.7.5 and runs great with SU 2013 no reason why you can't either. The reason older Macs can't go to 10.8 or more is the newer Mt Lion and now Mavericks start in in 64 bit mode and older Macs use a 64 bit Kernel that enables 64 bit programs to operate on older Macs but your right about Apple wanting People to ditch the older machines. BTW I saw the new Mac Pro coming out later this year http://www.apple.com/mac-pro/
What a stunning computer
-
@frv said:
On the second page you see a list of the drawings. Apart from the graphical appereance its also a worksheet (like Excell) were you fill in the details. With one mouseclick you can update as many sheets for sheetnumbers, dates names etc.
Francois
I think that's the sticking point. I don't see anything in these drawings that couldn't be done in LO - but at what expense of time and effort? I'm looking at Rhino / VisualArq / Grasshopper because my drawings are becoming more and more data centric in a way that I don't see LO handling very well. It's rare that I get to put out a sheet that doesn't have at least a couple of tables and charts - very often referencing information that will be revised and updated as the project progresses. Revising every sheet individually would be a massive time sink in LO and the meager improvements that Trimble introduced in this new version don't give me a lot of hope going forward.
I work in SketchUp every day but it is, by it's very nature, kind of a one level modeler. I'm starting a project for one of my clients that involves many, many sizes of essentially identical objects. I'm planning on doing a crash course in Grasshopper with the hope that I'll be able to automate the process somewhat - draw one object and then use Grasshopper to alter the overall size as new versions are requested. And input data in such a manner that all linked drawings in the series will also be updated.
Nonetheless, great looking work in this thread from all participants. Exactly what a thread should be - a learning, eye opening and, yes, a somewhat intimidating, experience.
-
Rhino, VisualARQ and grasshopper have a little of a learning curve as well as I understand. But some architects whom I regard highly in terms of interest in CAD have taken this road.
Vectorworks is also interesting but to work in 3D in Vectorworks is like going decades back in time. For 3D I have written off Vectorworks completely. But in 2D it can not be beat by anything else. It has gotten expensive though.
The new Macpro looks great. Will cost a lot I think, most likely well over 4 or 5000 euro. Maybe with the new Macpro Layout 2013 will be a more fun experience.
Sketchup/Layout for serious CAD is a new direction. One that Google stated was not interested in. We've been frustrated by Google for years. Sketchup should have developed in direct competition of course without hesitation. But it did not.
Now Trimble stears the boat I am hoping for change. I feel the change but am not yet convinced it will come soon enough. At some point you have to let go since other packages are getting so far ahead you might not catch up anymore.
tx for the compliments on the drawings. We love the work we do and its nice it shows in our work.Krisidious, we also don't read Greek, wish we did because some architects here go there to retire.
Francois -
hey guys,
nice discussion.
I was looking to this topic really closely after i so Nicks videos.
And i did meet few problems.
The biggest one is absence of fields (autocad reference) and thus inability make my drawings smart. page numbering, automatic component information extraction like length, area, name ... just stuff i use in autocad.- fog tool - i had problems to make the models consistently fade away. i just ended up with little but, still notable differences and it didn't look just right. I would need precise control over of fog distance parameters.
- My research included Archicad, Vectorvorks, allplan, revit, revit LT, Inventor LT.
And i closely looked at revit lt and vectorvorks. But still decided to stay at auto cad LT with referencing Layout exports be it raster or vector ones. And another one is copletlz based on illustrator, photoshop and indesign.
I am really disappointed in layout from the beginning. There are some statements about that that made me like wow really ? I believe they are from basecamp 2008
There will be no dimensions.
There will be no gradients.
that is not what we wanted (sad after showing some construction documents)So this a reason why is not even close to sketch up.
I believe that program if should be used by more professionals should be done completely different and or previous mentioned statement cannot be state during any part of its development. -
DOD3R, you have to keep in mind that although the annotations and 2D graphic functionality of Layout is very bad it still is far ahead of just 2D drafting since you work with a 3D model.
But at our office, working on projects with hundreds of sheets, Layout is not yet fully effective. Others feel it is though. So its worth taking another look at Layout 2013. But Layout lacks a lot of maintance that was negelected over the Google years. I really wonder if you would like to deal with it and if it will save any time over any given project as it is now.
Francois -
@frv said:
To Mike:
I don't know what you mean to say with:- How does one get that into 2d construction documents?
Francois
The link I visited shows quite a bit of modeling tools, but I'd like to see tools equivalent to LayOut or Paperspace in AutoCAD. Does VisualArq have such tools? Or are you then bringing that model into another package to do detail sheets, elevations, etc... ?
-
HI Mike,
from what I understand it does.
http://www.visualarq.com/info/why-use-visualarq/But have a look at the video's they provide, all. They seem to have covered a lot of tools to get serious drawings on paper based on active 3D geometry.
Look also at Youtube. Especially Grasshopper looks very interesting.
But to be honest, I am no expert on Rhino, VisualARQ or Grasshopper. I am just looking around shopping for the best tools. Thats how I found Sketchup, Vectorworks, Maxwell and so on. I believe there are no applications you will use for ever. They all follow a certain pattern were you see a lot of development at the start that later stalls when the usergroup gets too big and the pioneers move over to the next frontier.
Francois -
VisualArq and Grasshopper are plugins to Rhino.
Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2
-
Wow nice set of drawings there Francois!!
I can see where you are coming from now with the limitations of Layout for producing such docs. Still a ways off unless you have time up your sleeve!
Setting up notes for one would itself be a killer.
-
My problem with traditional CAD systems is the output. You just cannot simply get the same level of graphic output as easily as you can with the SU / LO process.
-
@unknownuser said:
My problem with traditional CAD systems is the output. You just cannot simply get the same level of graphic output as easily as you can with the SU / LO process.
those are really nice sonder.
might have to start working in color...
i really wish LO would allow for transparent type (haven't been able to do it on my mac, unless i'm missing something...).
and i guess i need to start assembling scrapbooks of data - little detail files that i can paste into new drawings that are rendered / exploded in LO, for use elsewhere.
-
@unknownuser said:
My problem with traditional CAD systems is the output. You just cannot simply get the same level of graphic output as easily as you can with the SU / LO process.
Impressive drawing. But I need to produce the same kind of drawings with associative dimensions (not just tags and text) so I'm looking to Rhino. As I'm learning Rhino I have found one feature that LO has that Rhino doesn't - vector and vector/raster hybrid. Rhino can't do a perspective drawing in vector - in other words the only output option in perspective with dimensions (and textures) is raster.
-
I can't take credit for the drawing - only teaching my Structural Engineer how to do it. He and the contractor's are loving these drawings. He ventures onto this site occasionally but hasn't posted his work.
BTW, Associative dimensions are in LO. Not sure why folks thing they are not.
-
I was going to ask what they were considering associative... They seemed quasi associative already both in SketchUp and Layout. When I move lines dims move with them and change measurement.
-
@unknownuser said:
BTW, Associative dimensions are in LO. Not sure why folks thing they are not.
I must be doing something wrong then. If I dimension something in LO and then have to alter the model in SketchUp, the dimensions don't update in LO when I update the reference.
Advertisement