I go along totally with the Economics argument, of which technologies like CAD, VIZ-ualisation, Email, Wireless connectivity, mobility, storage of digital communication transactions and Issuing of instructions by means of digital format, are all just sub-sets of the one argument. And I also stand by the point, that all of this stuff, is on an S-shaped curve that will allow any adopter to do more things, cheaper, faster and with more control as time goes on. All that matters is who will adopt it, who will adopt it with sucess and who will not do either of those two!
why not use BIM for arch viz? ...streamline the process. create everything once. yes, you still need to play dress up for final renderings, but the core is already there. and this core can be used for CAD drawings, renderings, animations, ect... ect...
there seems to be a concern that quality will drop if renderings are done in a BIM process. why do they have to? i currently use formz and 3dmax for building, rendering, and animating. my formz models are typically more accurate then the plans i get from autocad. i won't even snap to autocad plans because they are so bad, but my formz model is insanely accurate.
it is only a matter of time before a software company invests enough time to get this right.
...and as for the art side of renderings. that is the side i love. .....but be reasonable, if good sun, texture, sky presets were available at the push of a button, they would suffice for 90% of the images an architect needs.
there will be a place for high quality renderings that can not be fullfilled in house. that everyone is in agreement on. ....but, streamlining the process will be the game over the next 10 years.
I go with this.
But what you aren't thinking about, is the amount of individuals and small companies besides architects... who are involved and embedded in what we currently know, as the building construction industry or process. A lot of non-architects who build a lot of stuff, and know how to build a lot of stuff, have been the earliest adopters of technologies like outsourced visualisation services, outsourced CAD services and god only knows what else. In fact, architects never really did jump onto this bandwagon at all. Because there was this risk of associating themselves much too closely with individuals who build very similar schemes, and sometimes, even better stuff, but just don't fall under that small umbrella of a very noble and respectable profession.
Think about it, combined with a very keen understanding of what it takes to put up four walls and a roof, the services of CAD technology, visualisation technology, communication technology like broadband and wireless internet access, allow a whole raft of individuals who are nowhere near to being actual architects, to construct stuff in timeframes that is unprecedented. Most Architects don't even know how to keep up to this trend, if the truth may be known. The building game as a whole has an awful lot less to do with 'design' and an awful lot more to do with 'instinctive understanding' of what is involved in 'building' things, assembling things and forming things from actual materials, real life contracting teams, site conditions, clients, time frames and budgets, rather than pixels and vectors. But in the right hands, the pixels/vector combination can very often produce the result of making real stuff such as concrete pour much faster, bugets extend further and even steel bolt/weld connections support more lateral wind loads! :-)
Simple, and it sounds convincing to me.I totally agree with "Crazy Homeless Guy".
I think in the next 5 years all of these issues will be a little clearer in the direction it's going. Maybe 5 years after that, we'll know for sure what's happening in this field.
There is definitely room for some organization here that'll be ironed out as the two fields (architecture & visualization) become more common with each other.
I know, with my architecture day job, that the 3D models I've been producing have helped the contractors out tremendously in their visualization of the overall projects. Some of them have even gone to the extent of having the images taped to the wall in the job trailer.
I think the "in-house" field will happen and is happening. Maybe the 3D illustrators will just be hanging out with the developers? We'll know for sure in the next 5-10 years...
I said all of this a while ago, in a thread which got very animated between myself and some regular illustrator posters here. I would argue, that a visualisation which isn't much use to the contractor, isn't much use period... and that is why I called at that time, or strongly suggested, there being a second level of moderation to what is known here as 'the finished work critique' area of this message board. I was subsequently blown out, and haven't been back here since then, but most of my experience since that time, has bourne out my original statements. I mean, I haven't thrown any of my believes out since then, and don't intend to.
same here. renderings help the contractor see what the architect is trying to do. i did some renderings for st. vincent indianapolis, and the contractor had several copies in the job trailer. the foreman/superintendant on the job would carry them around the job site, when he was explaining how something needed to built to his workers, he would whip out the renderings and show what the final reult would be.
The kinds of people who use rendering services, are normally people with all day to stay talking on phones or talking about a visualisation.... generally these people will have moved out of their original domain, and prefer instead to dedicate themselves towards a bright new and possibly more lucrative career in master planning, feasability studies and developing property on an ambitious, dynamic and visionary level. They are seldom working architects at all... I dunno, at what point, people began to accept willfully that architects in any way have tied themselves to the visualisation service industry... because I cannot see how anyone would come to that conclusion.If a 3D visualizer that has been in the business for a while, still has trouble reading plans, then that puts a kink in the pipeline of production. That person has to phone up the designer, or architect, hopefully they are in the office, ask questions, get answers and implement what they have learned in the model. Why not shortcut all of that?
Sure, in my experience visualisation artists will pound on a lot of doors of established architectural practices, the big names... and the big named architects will entertain their little 'sales pitches' in so far as it serves to keep their own in house visualist, sketch artist or even architect on his/her toes, worried about their security and continued usefulness to the firm. In that sense certainly, the visualisation profession has done a hell of a service to all big named architects out there! :-)
Hell, the big named architect may even throw the odd commission to the visualist, similar to how Dell Computer Corporation will periodically threaten Intel, with buying from their competitor in the semi industry, that is, AMD. If it serves to cut a better deal with Intel on the price of buying chips for the next year. Always keep the competition alive, just give it enough to stay alive, and it will serve you very well. Generally I am positive, as it was in the olden times, it is the developer, auctioneer or planner, but never the trained architect, who will spring the cash, and really comission that 'big model' be it in sawn timber or in moulded digital megabytes.
Certainly does get to the centre of the problem, doesn't it? :-)Most importantly, I would recommend two things. First look for a new job. Find an employer who has realistic expectations for the productivity for one person.
Hmmm, often people confuse small sized practices with smaller sized work loads... this can often be a real shock coming from a larger place with lots of support staff and all kinds of stuff. But the point was still well expressed and it is a good one.Having worked for some large firms for years, you may need to look to a boutique or smaller firm specializing in design.
I feel that somethings need to change from within a person, sometimes it means being more forceful, for instance I find back answering great at times... and have definitely managed to dress down quite a few characters along the way... at least everyone learns where they stand actually relative to the size and complexity of the task at hand. Lets just remember that task eh? Construction,... rather than visualisation.
Brian O' Hanlon.