Anti-SketchUp! Snobbery [or Ignorance?]
-
@unknownuser said:
@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
It certainly is an odd attitude to look at SU as 'insufficent' in some manner.
If you do master work with SU or some other software, it should recognized as such. It would be like saying, "M. C. Escher uses a pencil? Oh, well. . .it's nice doodling."Similarly, from my experience, -some- who don't use an engineering or architectural graphic package everyday, but have 'drawn some lines' and 'added some text' several dozen times over the span of a few years have an odd attitude that such programs don't warrant recognition in the office environment. It's the, "Autocad? (or any graphic software). . . I've worked with it for years!" syndrome. However, those same few do have periods of 'seeing the light' when they come to the guy in the trenches everyday with the software wanting him to fix work that has been raped with exploding hatch and blocks ALL on the same layer, etc.
P: Cyberdactyl
-
This just tickles my nerves, SU is a great tool and although the interface is easy and it's available for free that does not mean that it's a kid's tool. I have had enormous discussions with the informatics staff at my uni over this.
They stick to maya for the sole reason that it is the best program for architectual visualisations. I disagree. Getting the interface down in maya takes you much longer than it would in SU. And the beauty of this all is that 90% of the architecture students DO use SketchUp in their design process. Eversince SU became big SU became the design standard.
The second argument they claim is that all presentations look the same. Again a false argument. Kerky, Vray, Podium and SU output combined with PS create numerous different results. And architecture students prefer these tools over maya and their mental ray. Why? Because 90% of the students use these tools so you can help eachother (shared information among peers is much better than a small staff knowing the program through and through). And these tools are much easier to master.
So if anyone comes to me with these arguments I just refer them to this:
And the gallery of this forum.
I must say that usually shuts them up quite fast. -
@robmoors said:
So if anyone comes to me with these arguments I just refer them to this:
And the gallery of this forum.
Very nice collection there.
P: Cyberdactyl
-
The sad thing about this attitude is that it is not based on either knowledge or experience, purely habit.
Now this may be controversial (especially on this site), but I would gladly welcome the day that someone trumps @last and produces better 3D software than SU- I'd be all over it like a cheap suit! I love SU because it's soooo damn good, not because I'm used to it.
Leave the jerks to ACAD, 3DS, Maya, etc.- they'll all be obselete in under 10 years anyway.
-
I think it is safe to say that most people who are "snobbish" toward SU are unaware of it's capabilities. I've gotten more than one "wow, you did that on SU?" comment.
Mirjman, your comments about SU in acadamia are true for all programs. I've reviewed quite a few student projects produced on autocad that were banal because their knowledge of the program was limited.
-
I'm Coming late to this discussion, but I do feel there is a bit of snobbery in relation to SU. Just like everything else, many people look at price as defining quality. Of course this is very wrong, but it is a fact of life. If you payed $5000 for your design software, you must be better and more skilled than someone who payed $500.
In my world I run into those, and another type of snob. These are the people who think that if you work on a computer you are a lesser designer. They consider you a "technician/craftsman" which they think of as the category of mediocrity. This means of course that you are incapable of creating something truly artistic.
I've heard this several times. Most recently I was told by a production that they wanted someone who could also hand draft shop plans with a pencil and paper. I said I could do it but why? "Computer drafting just doesn't have that artistic feel" they said. (In my work, plans used by the shop, invariably end up on the floor, and finally in the garbage.) My response was that this was not illustration or rendering, it was just information for the builders. In fact, as these plans are for movie/TV sets, the whole thing is fake anyway. Only the look of the finished product is important, not the look of the construction info. Ah, ignorance.
-
@unknownuser said:
Most recently I was told by a production that they wanted someone who could also hand draft shop plans with a pencil and paper. I said I could do it but why? "Computer drafting just doesn't have that artistic feel" they said. (In my work, plans used by the shop, invariably end up on the floor, and finally in the garbage.) My response was that this was not illustration or rendering, it was just information for the builders. In fact, as these plans are for movie/TV sets, the whole thing is fake anyway. Only the look of the finished product is important, not the look of the construction info.
The more we talk about this, the more laughable the idea of "industry standard production" becomes. The worse firm I ever worked for had a "traditional skills only" attitude. They hand drew, marker rendered and air brushed everything. Total waste of time.
The firm did have one token Mac Designer who only used Illustrator. I think the most futile human endeavour I have seen that didn't involve life and death had to be watching token Mac guy trying to do a two point perspective in Illustrator of a store interior complete with hundreds of "rendered" products. It took him about a week to painstakingly apply and tweak gradients, then he gave up. I left shortly after, the firm went bust a year later.
-
@unknownuser said:
I think the most futile human endeavour I have seen that didn't involve life and death had to be watching token Mac guy trying to do a two point perspective in Illustrator of a store interior complete with hundreds of "rendered" products. It took him about a week to painstakingly apply and tweak gradients, then he gave up. I left shortly after, the firm went bust a year later.
That would be funny if it wasn't so pitiful!
-
Morning Jackson
-
haha, morning Jon! Up to anything at the weekend?, etc, etc, office smalltalk, etc, etc, how about that result in Paris huh?
I'd never thought of it as such, but this is a global office! Coffee? -
Well, actually, I'm about to skive off for an hour on a driving lesson, I'll get us some biscuits while I'm out
-
I own a small remodeling company and my drawings are used during the bidding stage to help clients visualize their project, I've used a cad program that cost a bit more than SU and took quite a bit longer to learn how to use. I was a SU skeptic, my 17 year old son introduced me to SU so I really didn't think much of it at the time. However I downloaded the 8 hr. trial, visited the old Google forum, and SCF for tips and tricks (not to mention all the great works that can be seen here). It goes without saying that I was sold. Now I mostly use SU for visualizations (so much quicker), still use cad for working drawings when needed but what a drag compared to SU. I believe the turn off of Su for some people is first off, the name, it does sound rather childish, secondly I would think is the fact that there is a free version and the pro version is inexpensive when compared to some cad programs, and third is the quick and easy learning curve though I seem to learn something new here everyday. So how can something that sounds childish, cost a little, and is easy to learn be a powerful program? I think if more of these "snobs" actually tried SU there would be a lot less of them.
Mike
-
Interesting debate . . . . despite the (obvious) genius of Sketchup, Architect's still need to supply clients (and local authorities) 2D plans and with dimensions and text. A Client recently asked us (annoyingly) "can your software do basic plan views? The 3D stuff looks 'too good', and makes it look like the work will be too expensive' my Main Board wont sign this off unless I give them a simple plain plan view that looks cheaper."
We gave them the simple plan view. But SU's has an achilles heel when you try to produce 2D plans with text and hatching to the standard that traditional CAD can.
If you are doing a live presentation for a Client and feeling inferior and downtrodden by the little sketchup logo at the top of your screen . . someone on the old board gave me a link to an app called WinSpy which lets you rename the title bar at the top of the window to whatever you like. So rather than 'model 4 - sketchup' it might say 'model 4 - ZEN CAD' or whatever you like.
-
@stuartb said:
an app called WinSpy which lets you rename the title bar at the top of the window to whatever you like. So rather than 'model 4 - sketchup' it might say 'model 4 - ZEN CAD' or whatever you like.
Neat- I think I'll rename it SuperDuperHiTechCommandLineTookMe10YearsJustToGetTheBasicsDownAndIHadToRemortgageMyHouseToBuyItCAD (Version 53.1.2.2.)
p.s. a planning department officer told me a couple of days ago that they prefer elevations without shadows- he said they find them confusing!
-
Jackson, you realise they just released version 53.1.2.3 of that last week. Your old files won't open unless you pay for the 'upgrade'!
-
@stuartb said:
Jackson, you realise they just released version 53.1.2.3 of that last week. Your old files won't open unless you pay for the 'upgrade'!
Dammit!
-
Hello Friends. This is only my 2nd post in this entire forum, but I have been an SU user since V. 2.0. I think it is amazing. I started out as a Traditional hand renderer. I still do that. I generated Persp. by hand for years. I did Autocad, form Z, etc. etc. All too slow, learning curve too steep. I needed a program that I could learn quickly--generate 3Ds quickly, giving my clients multiple views, print out and render over the top. Saves me time. I make more money. I have introduced Sketchup to the College I teach at. It is now in the curriculum. I introduced it into the large organization that I work for (I am an architect for the LDS Church)--it is now S.O.P for a lot of my colleagues! Yeah, we have Max, Z and all the others, but SU is faster and eases the workflow for a lot of us who just hate muddling thru acad. I still use SU in all my work. I am learning Max, only to add another arrow to my quiver so to speak, but I always think about how I can just drop my SU models into max and render from there. I use Podium too. Awesome. Simple does not mean simplistic. Su is a very sophisticated tool--is there stuff that I wish it could do better? yeah. but that is probably cuz I don't pay enuff attention to the forums to find out how other folks have solved my issues. SU is terrific.
(paid for by the Friends of SketchUP)
P: David_H
-
Thanks for sharing David! And welcome to this forum! I'm very happy to meet you and am honored by your long standing support!
I look forward to reading more of your ideas and perhaps on ways to improve SketchUp!
Cheers,
- CraigD
-
I think fear and ignorance play a big part in the snobbery. I just yesterday sat through a BIM briefing at my firm by some AutoDesk folks. They were introducing our Revit implementation team to the product and concepts, and at one point a designer asked about the file exchange between Sketchup and Revit. The AutoDesk presenter went on to say "why would you want to do your conceptual mass modeling in Sketchup when you can do it in revit and get real time feedback on the model - that is precise and accurate to boot" Well....let's just say they got an earfull about how they didn't know much about skecthup if they didn't think it was accurate, and if they ever get even close to Revit being as intuitive for modeling as sketchup is - they would have a lot more users.
I felt like a proud parent when he stood up for Sketchup like this. This is the same guy that took me a while to convince him to even look at sketchup. I think it is becoming clear that the design software vendors are all a little envious of the ease of use we have come to love!
Bytor
-
I think a lot of these Cad guys don't get the fact that in SU you can think so intuitively whereas in Revit or Archicad, you are having to "think" thru so much from the outset.--What kind of walls are they. Archicad and Revit are cool. I am all for BIMMing, as far as that goes, but With SU you can just dive in a draw. I like that.
By the way. ..That's my Dog. .. Phoebe the WonderHound!
P: David_H
Advertisement