When will software empower Architects?

[Brian O'Hanlon]

-

-

-

 

I worked for a couple of days a week ago with a professional architectural modelling team. Before you jump in and experience life at ground zero, you don't have a clue. I noticed that architectural illustration must obey its own rules and boundaries, many of which I had not observed when looking from the outside in.

 

I get along best with the few people here at CG Architect who are their own designer and visualist in one. I guess, when one person does both things - you inherently have the communication and feedback between disiplines. I work mostly in the project management myself, where contractors on site, technical experts and designers freely inter-miggle with each other. My tools are simple 2D drawings done using AutoCAD, but at least I avoid the 'loneliness of the lone distance architectural visualist'.

 

I have noticed the meme of 'sketchup' program spread all around the design community here in the city I live/work in - Dublin, Ireland. This happens every couple of years, when for a brief period, the architects discover software. They are thrilled to find this whole new space they can explore. Of course, what happens is they get busy and grow up. So all the modelling is out-sourced to the pros. A couple of years later, the fresh younger generation of 'upstarts' re-discover software again briefly, only to abandon it as before.

 

A lot of softwares claim to enable the designer to visualise their ideas - or create new ones. I have mixed feelings about software really, and what it can or cannot do. But one program always stood out for me. A program that embodied all that I wanted from a tool - it is Lightwave. Maybe it is just the fact, I have always like Star Wars etc. And Lightwave is that kind of tool which is used alot by people in movie industry. I don't know.

 

I almost hate to say this, because it isn't fair on posters here at CG Architect, but that Spin Quad forum, especially the WIP forum there, seems to me, what a modelling/rendering/animation forum should be like.

 

http://www.spinquad.com/forums/

 

With a great tool like LW at their disposal, they really seem to be allowing their imaginations to roam free, and really getting the hang of what it should mean to model in the first place.

 

While I understand the different kinds of constraints placed upon you architectural modellers, in terms of time limitations and necessity to take the views, etc the clients ask you for. It is a pity more of that investigative spirit in terms of modelling of space, building materials and structures doesn't go on here.

 

What I really love about the LW bunch, is their freedom to play with magic marker sketches, photos of real objects like old toys, old posters from old movies, and then model off that base. Sometimes, the modeller might use photoshop to perfectly air brush together something like a flat 2D vision of what he/she wants, before bringing that Photoshoped digital air brush rendering in, as something to work off of in a LW 3D environment.

 

It seems to me personally, this is the process and way in which modelling software should have developed. With this intimate connection between a designer using their hand to draw things, and a modeller on another. I feel this link was effectively broken in the game of 3D architectural modelling. Certainly, very few of the architectural visualists I know ever sit down with magic markers and layout paper and other designers.

 

Which is a real shame. Because neither understands the others thought process or tools. Mostly, it is a sad and miserable practice of emailing back and forth. That goes on for the brief duration, when the architectural illustrator is employed for the architect. Often the architectural visualist doesn't even get to meet the architect at all. He/she only gets a phonecall and a bunch of drawings of some intermediary person and gets on with it.

 

 

Brian O' Hanlon.

-

-

-

[alexg]

I have just do a quickbrowse into Spinquad, and it seems similar to CGTalk to me. For me, CGTalk's Challenge is the best place to see how wild ideas develop into grand images.

 

Idea-sketch-ref image-modelling workflow is very much the same either in arch-viz or general product / character design, no matter what the software is.

 

The only difference that I know of is that character designers & illustrators are generally more open in showing off their ideas from the start, while we in arch viz (almost) always keep the design in secret, only showing off the visualization rendering as end-product, taking the excitement of developing the ideas into sketches away from public viewing.

 

I still believe that all softwares have limitations, it all depends on the hands of the user to maximize our design. It's just a different way of 'drawing' the ideas out.

Unless there's a Matrix-like software that allows us to jack-in our brains to the computer (and build 3d model automatically from our thoughts), we will still have to rely on these drawing tools to design.

[IC]

I'm not sure that they (Spinquad members) are so different from CGArchitect members.

I'm a member of Spinquad and I post all my non-architectural work there as no-one here would respond to it. I enjoy dabbling in all aspects of CGI and I think a lot of other people here do too.

 

In fact, a few other CGA members are also members of Spinquad and that's probably how it works all over-the Max and Maya users will frequent other forums where they talk about CG and software matters outside architecture.

 

But as this is an architectural viz site, that's all people post here.

 

To answer your first point, I think Sketch-Up is different. It has found a niche market and it doesn't replace CAD or 3d apps.

[brightlight]

Give me a pair of gloves like Tom Cruise in Minority Report

add a mixture of Sketchup, Rhino, Max, Lightwave, Vue Infinite, Alias Studio,

Catia, Form Z and Photoshop and watch me go man just watch me go.........

[kippu]

okay that cracked me up jim .....hehehehe

 

nice post brian

[aaron-cds]

Brian - the sketching does happen. It just happens long before the arch-viz process (and there's nothing wrong with that). When I design a building or space, the first thing I do is grab a roll of trace paper and burn through about 20 feet of it. Most architects design this way too. As great as sketch-up is, it will never replace the speed of a good drawer. Ideas flow so quickly that a pencil and trace paper is the only thing that can keep up. However, once I've got a design idea I want to study further, I move into sketch-up. It's a great design development tool and a good schematic design tool for the people who can't draw .

 

I don't see this as being a bad thing. It's just simply how it works. When it's time to do a rendering of the finished design, the cad drawings are ready for the modeler to work from. I would hate getting napkin sketches to model from. Architecture is not as forgiving as modelling a ninja or space alien. There are dimensional tolerances that must be maintained.

 

I guess I'm one of the few you get along with here at cgarchitect . I'm a licensed architect and I own my own visualization company.

[IC]

Architecture is not as forgiving as modelling a ninja or space alien. There are dimensional tolerances that must be maintained.

 

I guess I'm one of the few you get along with here at cgarchitect . I'm a licensed architect and I own my own visualization company.

 

If you model anything in a professional capacity, the standards for discrepancy are the same. A poorly proportioned alien stands out a mile visually in our Star Wars drenched popular culture.

If anything, having dimensions makes modelling architecture much easier.

 

Man-Brian isn't going to get along with me at all

[Brian O'Hanlon]

Thanks for pointing out to me how similar Spin Quad forum is to CG Talk, and CG Talk challenge. Thanks. I am outside of my domain here a good bit, in talking about CG online forums in general these days. I was aware I was probably leaving out other great forums, when I mentioned Spin Quad. But it was just to make a point, I expected to get corrected on that.

 

Thanks.

 

Brian.

[Sawyer]

What I keep hoping to see is a real paper/digi input connection. Right now we have the ability to illustrate the world to scale do so many amazing cool things right from our disproportionately wide and pasty asses. But its the piece of paper that seems to be the thing that throw us the most.

 

One place I worked we would print the site, print the footprints at scale and cut them out, then the archi would move the footprints on the site tape them down and give it back to us. Then it took the drafters so many measurments to recreate the placement that the archi did. Not only that but the drafter was doubling work to put it into the computer.

I often work with the desinger with no computer skills who takes my image, prints it, writes on it, scans it, e-mails it back.

[vizwhiz]

i worked for an architect about 8 years ago who said (believe it or not)

That computers were not robustly developed enough To do arch work

 

i did The floor plans in autocad 14

The rest of The entire project was done by hand

 

All of it, elevations sections detail etc bla bla bla

They drafted on bond and cut and pasted bond back to bond

 

and Then had it re-scanned 48x36 and drew on Top of That

The floorplan at 1:50 (metric) was 78x36 with The dimensions

 

and etc symbols suppressed and The Porte Cochere removed for clarity

 

do a google for 'updown court' surrey england

This project sold for $140 Million when finished

 

just some idle info

 

paper, rocks scissors

 

randy

[Brian O'Hanlon]

Give me a pair of gloves like Tom Cruise in Minority Report

add a mixture of Sketchup, Rhino, Max, Lightwave, Vue Infinite, Alias Studio,

Catia, Form Z and Photoshop and watch me go man just watch me go.........

 

Thom Mayne of Morphosis architects posed exactly this type of senario to the students here in Dublin last year, when he was over delivering a lecture. He asked the young students, if using a particular kind of software limited their capabilities in ways. He asked, should they have different softwares for designing different buildings, or different components within the same building.

 

I wrote something about Thom Mayne's lecture at the time, attached in PDF format, which I think encapsulates some of the message he was trying to convey about design.

 

B.

[Brian O'Hanlon]

Ideas flow so quickly that a pencil and trace paper is the only thing that can keep up. However, once I've got a design idea I want to study further, I move into sketch-up.

 

I was wondering, if CG Architect could host a specific forum here, where the 'sketches' done by hand, aswell as the early sketchup images, and final CG rendered images could all be presented together?

 

What I mean is, it would encourage a notion amongst the community here on CG Architect, that this is all about the process, and not only the final tweaks to the lighting conditions within the Vray engine etc.

 

It just seems to me, that so many LW posters on other forums seem to do this, it is a real shame that CG Architect cannot host a space somewhere for that kind of discussion about 'process' aswell as discussion about final rendering and photomontage perfection.

 

Perhaps, this would only be of interest to members you are designers and visualists simultaneously. But maybe it would be of interest to everyone, I don't really know. Maybe the professional visualists would find it interesting, and the professional architects might visit this space too. We've never really tried it here at CG Architect.

 

Certainly, if such a space did exist here on CG Architect, I would likely post up some work here for others to view. Perhaps there are more people out there like me?

 

Brian O' Hanlon.

[Brian O'Hanlon]

Thom Mayne Architects's process is moving towards fabrication.

 

I mean, his process scans a continuous chain from sketch through to completion of the finishing building.

 

Here is a 'personal fabricator' which someone sent me a link to lately:

 

http://www.fabathome.org/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page

 

Part 3 PowerPoint, in this 'Build As One' series of presentations at Bentley website, gives you some insight into Thom Mayne's work process.

 

http://www.bentley.com/en-US/Promo/Build+As+One/Presentations.htm

 

Brian O' Hanlon.

[josephalexander]

The thing to understand about the typical design process is that it's segmented. A large office will often times have a design team and a CD team. One works out the design, and then the CD team completely redraws everything to make it work, then the contractor redraws everything again to make it buildable and affordable.

So there's a gap between each step of the process. The assumption is that if everyone works on the same set of drawing, or computer model, the process will be more efficient.

In addition, the traditional process (ACAD) uses people to coordinate drawings. This is very labor intensive and tends to lead to errors. The idea is that if everything is automatically coordinated in a 3D model an office can significantly reduce man-hours and a gain in coordination and a better understanding of material quantifications of the building.

 

I haven't seen a program that encompasses everything from design to fabrication. I've become extremely skeptical of BIM programs after using Revit for four months. They all tend to be very strong at certain levels: Pre-Design, Design Documentation, Construction Documentation, Fabrication. But all are weak in regards to seamless workflow through all levels. At anyrate this has been my experience. I'm sure new users and publicity people will disagree, but I've become slightly jaded.

 

-Joe

[Brian O'Hanlon]

I take your point Joe. I have been having a similar discussion with some folks about a new online platform called 'Second Life'.

 

http://www.cooperationcommons.com/cooperation-commons/the-production-of-space

 

I believe, BIM and SL platforms are both in their infancy. I can understand the software vendors have to do their job, and try to move product too however in the meantime.

 

B.

[Tamir]

Hi guys I’m a bit new to this forum but I believe that some of the challenges you been pointed out can be answered

1st is their a software that can take us all the way from Schematics To DD To CD to Specs To fabrication and one that is capable of producing complex geometry.

Well that would be the combination of ArchiCAD + Maxon Form. Those two compliment each other in many ways and contain links that allow you to move you’re model back and forth seamlessly to provide exceptional modeling capability as well as first class documentation

2nd is there a software that can convert 2D Marker sketches in to a 3D model

well there is one Alias Wavefront's Auto Studio. which when used with a digital drawing board such as the Wacom enables the artist to literally draw sketches in 3D and than trace the form in to accurate geometry

of course there is a catch it costs about $60.000 since it was aimed at the automobile design industry

So there are very good software’s out there, ones that can change the way we design, they are just expensive

[josephalexander]

We're looking into Solid Works over the next two months.

We're going to put it through a gauntlet. I'll update you guys if we have success with it.

 

 

 

-Joe