Anti-SketchUp! Snobbery [or Ignorance?]
-
Twice now in the last month I have run into new clients who, once they saw proposals by my firm were partially done in SU had less than enthusiastic responses. Not that the work was under par, no, they were pleased with the design ideas, it was more that the work was done with that "shareware software" their kids were playing with at school.
I explained SU Pro was a powerful application that was easy to learn, but difficult to master, but I still had a strong feeling SU had lost the dazzle it had even a few months ago. My only guess is that it is indeed now so popular everyone sees it as old hat.
Has anyone else had experiences similar to this recently?
P: Cyberdactyl
-
I've had a few clients who were aware fo the program... one that dared to ask for the file... and I'm sure he had quite a few issues getting around in the model and turning on and off certain views... he asked a few times for help. which I gave... so maybe the first thing to tell such clients is "shareware huh?" let's see you do it... or you could take the polite route and tell them it gives you the oppurtunity after all these years to share your model with novice users so that they can peruse the model inside and out... otherwise they would be stuck in the payware of several years back where the software costs thousands and the clients could niether afford, navigate, or operate.
-
Hi Cyber, Kris. I have had this problem too, once I lost a client because of it - his loss, as I work faster and cheaper with SU. So now I don't mention the software I use, I have found this is the only way to avoid the stigma. If I hired a contractor I wouldn't ask him what brand of screwdriver he uses. At the end of the day it is in the skill of the person holding the screwdriver (or in this case driving the software). The cost and prestige of the brand is in my view irrelevant.
There are some really bad strictly AutoCAD / 3D Studio modellers and visualisers out there, I've worked with some. Their work is dull and unimaginitive because it is limited by their pinnacle on the steep software learning curve. I've only ever managed to convert two purists like this to SU. But I know other purists that ring me up from time to time because they cannot manage a project in ACAD or 3DS, so I model it for them in SU and export in whatever format they want. I did a model before breakfast one day for an architect friend of mine, she was amazed, she thought it would take a week. She is still strictly AutoCAD though. Go figure.
My workflow involves a few different programs, most aren't industry standard as now I work for myself and can't afford it, but in the past I predominantly used Architectural Desktop, AutoCAD and 3DS. The cheaper alternatives are just as good for my level of work. I use ProgeCAD for drafting. I do wish I could master a rendering app but my clients don't expect it, I don't think they'd pay more for it.
I only know one person who uses really high end stuff like Maya and Soft Image XSI, he is an animator with long project times.
-
I had some same experiences even with architect students who seemed to despised SU for it was free and easy to learn (they only use archicad or something like that) but then when it came to modelling some more difficult stuff they got stuck for they weren't really mastering the program and then came back to me to help them out.
I don't know wether they are doing anything in SU ever since but that was a nice lesson to them. I did what they hadn't been able to accomplish for about two weeks in an afternoon.
-
I wonder what would happen if Autocad were to be given away free? would it mean that people would be turn their noses up at autocad designs? I don't understand why this is. If you wrote a bestselling book, does anyone ask what paper it was written on or what word processor was used? Personally (and I'm only a hobbiest) its the results that count not the journey.
Colin
-
On my part it is not a very big deal though - I also started as a "hobbyist" with the free version though upgraded ever since to pro (and when downloading pro and having to fill in those details, I still keep putting in "hobbyist"
)When I work for money, people cannot really complain for I mostly do archaeological reconstructions and there are very few architects/3d designers knowing much about archaeology as well as very few archaeologists knowing much about 3d programs so "my market" is pretty safe
This Gothic project though was finished in 3D max, could hardly have been accomplished there since the guy who finally rendered it knows nothing about my town and its medieval past.From here on it does not matter what program I use...
-
**IMO....
At the time of the Sketchup release I was a 3D Max junkie and I still am to this day but what I seen was all these people who spent numerous hours perfecting modeling and rendered illustrations in costly software watched SU rise to the occasion and add a simplistic plus cheaper approach to what they suffered through for years.
Cant really put my finger on clients snubbing at SU other than they have become spoiled by the works of costly software and the quality they produced. SU is still in its infant stages but my prediction is the incorporation of realtime renderings and walkthroughs using SU in the future will put a end SU haters and they will be riding that SU bandwagon.**
-
Scott,
Why are you whispering?
Just kidding
-
I'm still trying to shoe horn SU into my projects. No-one asks for computer visuals of their project yet in Landscape Design.
I'll get you back Jackson, Let get 'em
-
@unknownuser said:
Scott,
Why are you whispering?
SHHHHHH....they might find me. :econf:
wow...didn't think it would be that small. I was bored during lunch so I was messin with things again. Hye what does this button do.....uh o.... I gatta go.
Just kidding
-
Jackson! Good to hear some good Scottish swearing on this subject!
-
My clients only see the finished jpeg or the occassional animation, and it's always been positive. I have, interestingly enough, gotten a "snobbish vibe" from architecture students when discussing the programs they use. Very few use SU.
-
I don't have this problem with any of my clients. Most of them are so wrapped up in the eye candy they don't care where it comes from. They are even more impressed when I show them how I save them money by generating the working drawings from the SU model.
I have heard complaints by some in academia who bemoan the fact that all the student renderings done in SU look the same. "If I see that man holding those two kids hands again I'm going to flippin' scream!" Like any software, if you use it straight out of the box you will get the same results as everyone else. Take a little time to model a few of your own 2D people, plants, etc. Download or make your own textures. Learn how Styles work. Learn a little Photoshop. Do whatever you can and make the image your own. Entourage and the "feel" of an image go a long way in separating you from the rest of the herd.
SketchUp can really sing if you let it.
-
just to play the devil's advocate---> i think the reason there is such a negative reaction to sketchup as a design tool (especially in architecture schools) is that it is not always taken in moderation with other tricks of the trade- sketch models, trace paper etc etc. Part of sketchup work "all looking the same" is the push-pull-y nature of the product.. you're going to get push-pully looking architecture because its just so easy to work that way! lets face it, gaudi would never have designed such beautiful, true to physics work if he had started with sketchup rather than his upside-down parabolic physical models.
-
@unknownuser said:
Part of sketchup work "all looking the same" is the push-pull-y nature of the product.. you're going to get push-pully looking architecture because its just so easy to work that way!
Mirjman I couldn't disagree more. With all due respect that is a very negative comment. Push-pull achieves the same results as extrude in any program so you are only right about one thing - buildings are usually vertical. You can't really compare students work to what actually get's built in the real world and Gaudi is an extreme opposite. Sketchup hasn't dumbed down architecture. If we we were all working for Frank Gehry then, yes I'd say the limitations of SU might be an issue, but Gehry uses Catia which is normally used for designing aircrafts. I'm pretty sure there won't be a licensed version for under $500!
Anyway I saw this yesterday at an exhibition, part of a proposal for a new marina development in Hull, I recognised the SU people, I wanted to ask the architect if he is predominantly visualising with SU but thought he might not want to admit that in front of the judging panel.
-
Just found this bunch of retarded miserable t***s on face book who've set up their own anti SU group.Good name though.
-
First, regarding the SketchUp Cons list. Doesn't handle curved geometry well is arguable. I produced the first model referenced below in about an hour. The roof in the second model in about the same amount of time. If Gehry were to actually work on a computer (he doesn't, his assistants do) I think he would be a huge SketchUp fan.
http://dws.editme.com/files/SeptOct2007/swirl%20builidng%201.1.jpg
http://dws.editme.com/files/SeptOct2007/Sassafras%20House%20Step%202%20for%20DWS.jpgThis has been a really interesting conversation. As someone who teaches young students to use SketchUp both in large groups (we've had entire middle school grades do projects with SketchUp) and in small CAD/Architecture class, there has been much useful information from you professionals out there using the program in the "real world" that I can share with the kids.
Sometimes I feel people think that if SketchUp is so easy to use it can't be a serious tool. This is - as others have pointed out - like saying paper and pencils are not serious tools because they are easy to use. Having easy to use tools just makes the study and practice of design - of what to produce with those easy to use tools - all the more important.
We recently had two architecture firms present designs for an addition to a building. The first firm used a SketchUp model as part of their presentation. The architect doing the SketchUp presentation was rotating their model around when one of the older trustees in the audience asked him to stop as it was making him feel queezy. This flustered the architect who from that point on had to move really slowly and cautiously around the model. (You don't want to get the trustees upset... they usually end up paying for most of the building.)
The second firm didn't appear to use SketchUp but they did make an old-fashioned 3-D physical model. When they pulled this out and asked everyone to gather around there was a palpable sense of excitement in the room. The oldsters in the room especialy seemed to like it. The architect presenting gently pulled the floors off one by one until just the basement level was left (a big issue in the design was bringing more light into the basement area) and then showed people how they could put their heads down by a window and see just how the new design would look from the inside. He had them in the palm of his hand.
We have a student who wants to study architecture and has produced some wonderful work in SketchUp. I sought him out and told him this story because I thought he should know how much the audience had appreciated the analog model.
I think the moral is that SketchUp is only one tool in the designer's toolkit and over emphasis on that one tool (which SketchUp's power and ease-of-use tends to foster) can be counter productive.
Fred
-
@fbartels said:
I think the moral is that SketchUp is only one tool in the designer's toolkit and over emphasis on that one tool (which SketchUp's power and ease-of-use tends to foster) can be counter productive.
obviously we're all biased here, but lets not be totally one sided. sketchup is not above most of the cons of any computer modeling programs, although they all have a part in a well rounded design process. gehry doesn't design in catia, it is a tool in his design process after crumpled paper and meticulous wood models that are transferred into the computer using a 3d digitizer in order to get the structure to work (whether you agree with that workflow is up to you, right?) its not the tool you use, its how you use it!
-
snob (snŏb)
n.
One who tends to patronize, rebuff, or ignore people regarded as social inferiors and imitate, admire, or seek association with people regarded as social superiors.
One who affects an offensive air of self-satisfied superiority in matters of taste or intellect.Mike
-
@unknownuser said:
its not the tool you use, its how you use it!
Mirjman, IMHO I think you and I are on the same wave length about this, sorry, my previous post sounded a bit harsh, I misunderstood. What I can't understand though, if SU is just part of the process, why do some people have a problem with that? Maybe it is better to just not publicise your process? I am a proud SU user though
@unknownuser said:
The second firm didn't appear to use SketchUp but they did make an old-fashioned 3-D physical model.
I like physical models too as in IMO they are so easy to understand.
Advertisement