Is it worth me learning Revit....?

[janams]

Just like the others said already, if you want to carry on becoming an architect then you should learn it. Many companies in the UK ie: big supermarkets, many projects in public and private sectors will not employ you to design and build their projects unless you use Revit. It seems to be going more and more in that direction...

[BrianMyers]

I wonder if they are sorry they asked this question in the first place. They must be getting sick of the getting alerts to new posts to just find a school yard fight going on. But I guess I am not helping by posting this now. Sorry Abby!

 

Kris and Abby,

 

My apologies if I in any way lowered the value of this thread. When I first entered it I wasn't expecting to have an individual consider my way of thinking to be "retarded" or "seriously hallucinogenic" and I won't stoop to that level to further acknowledge that conversation.

 

If you would ever like to know more about Revit then feel free to ask! I work with over 30 firms, sizes ranging from 5 to over 200 that use the software daily and I have lots of stories to tell. There are also lots of good people here in the forum that will also gladly answer your questions and help, you've met a few of them in this thread.

 

Good luck Abby! :-)

Edited July 15, 2011 by BrianMyers

[Karl Larsen]

Just like the others said already, if you want to carry on becoming an architect then you should learn it. Many companies in the UK ie: big supermarkets, many projects in public and private sectors will not employ you to design and build their projects unless you use Revit. It seems to be going more and more in that direction...

 

As I said earlier, it is probably a good idea to learn, if you want to get hired by a company that uses it. But I'm not drinking the REVIT Kool-Aid just because Autodesk or a few resellers and/or CAD consultants that have taken my opinions personally and/or that endeavor to make a profit from getting you to use it, aren't happy with my contributions to the discussion. And it's not important enough to me to bullet point a response...

For the majority of small businesses that are run by creative designers and that must rely on tangible efficiency to remain profitable in real-world terms, and in a tough economy on projects that aren’t government subsidized with taxpayers money, it is far too costly and requires enormous investments in training and a religious adherence to a process-dogma that is totally unrealistic in the nitty-gritty world of real small-businesses.

The difference in the opinions stems from earning a profit getting projects finished so you can keep paying your employees and yourself, and keep your doors open, vs. earning a profit showing people how to get a program to do magic tricks.

[BrianMyers]

I was able to track down this article:

 

http://www.aecbytes.com/newsletter/2010/issue_45.html

 

The AIA in 2009 stated that approx. 50% of it's members used BIM software. I know that number has risen since then, last I heard it was hovering around 60% and growing. If nothing else, since over half the industry is using it it's a good skill to pick up.

 

I hope this helps!

[Karl Larsen]

The AIA is still a proponent of A-WALL-INT... which became obsolete around 1997? (For those of you that don’t know, the AIA Layer standard was developed way back in the DOS days of AutoCAD, which if I recall correctly, was limited to 11 characters for layer names). I challenge anyone to tell me why "WALL", or "APPLIANCE", or "DOOR", or "MILLWORK", or "CEILING", isn't the basis for the AIA Layer Standard instead of clinging to an obsolete cryptic convention that no one ever really adheres to anyway. I once asked a guy from the AIA if a secret whistle came with the CAD Standard – he didn’t like me, but he couldn’t answer the Layer Standard challenge either.

This is the kind of thinking that is embedded in so much of what AutoCAD/REVIT and the AIA produce – and it makes minus zero sense to me. Architectural drafting is just not that complicated, and doesn’t need to be. None of the architecture today is outstandingly better because of any software package, nor does it cost less to produce, nor is it produced faster, nor are the drawings any better quality than any truly good architectural drafter can produce.

It’s not about the program - it’s about the project. It’s not about does the hatch pattern for the roof tiles look exactly like the real roof tiles – it’s about what the roof tiles look like on the project.

[Sauger]

As I said earlier, it is probably a good idea to learn, if you want to get hired by a company that uses it. But I'm not drinking the REVIT Kool-Aid just because Autodesk or a few resellers and/or CAD consultants that have taken my opinions personally and/or that endeavor to make a profit from getting you to use it, aren't happy with my contributions to the discussion. And it's not important enough to me to bullet point a response...

For the majority of small businesses that are run by creative designers and that must rely on tangible efficiency to remain profitable in real-world terms, and in a tough economy on projects that aren’t government subsidized with taxpayers money, it is far too costly and requires enormous investments in training and a religious adherence to a process-dogma that is totally unrealistic in the nitty-gritty world of real small-businesses.

The difference in the opinions stems from earning a profit getting projects finished so you can keep paying your employees and yourself, and keep your doors open, vs. earning a profit showing people how to get a program to do magic tricks.

 

I hate to agree with you, but any creative mind will.

One of my friends just returned from vacation, and asked me if I felt in comfort with all my Revit hammering, I´m not.

 

It´s a drug more or less, you conform to it, or break free if an true artist.

I do respect the confidence it it gives me, but then any tool superviced properly will do that.

 

My best guess is on direct modeling, combined with the parametric structure that give a form that can be used in a sensible final result.

 

Freedom/dictatorship sometimes go hand in hand.

[bluedogok]

I have been on Revit for 4 years, prior to that was 17 years of Autocad and 2 years of Computervision CADDS 4X (overlapped with Autocad) , since I have been on Revit I have completely left Autocad behind. I have never used Sketch Up so I can't address anything about that program but have modeled in 3D using Revit or Autocad since about 1990, CV was always 3D based but at $40,000 a workstation (at the time) it couldn't survive against the cheaper Acad based market and left the AEC industy in the mid to late 90's.

 

The firm that I work for has been on Revit for 9 years, adopting it before Autodesk bought them. Our Austin and San Antonio offices (9 and 3 employees respectively) are 100% Revit, the only thing that we use Autocad for is manipulating consultant or legacy CAD files. Our Indianapolis office (35 employees) production is about 50% Revit but there is also a division there that does systems furniture so they are tied to Autocad/CAPACAD. We do all our work for private developers and clients, in the four years that I have been for we had had one GSA project that originated from this office it came about because of our ties to a particular building that the GSA was moving into in a very short time frame. Many of the consultants that we use also use Revit although most are a mix of Acad and Revit for producing documents. We do mainly commercial interiors and architecture, this can be anything from a 900sf tenant finish out to large ground up projects (I am on the architecture side). We have developed templates to enhance efficiencies for those small projects so we are able to produce them with 3D images for the same cost that others are doing in 2D Autocad, in effect providing more for the same price.

 

For our building projects is has become a great tool to achieve an agreement on design with clients who have a hard time visualizing anything since we are able to spin models around and cut sections and see the impact that some decisions might have on the the building and consultants. That input has allowed us to get the design moving towards CD's faster than in the past and as we all know most project deadlines are not getting any longer. It has changed the traditional project design phasing since you have to do so much up front design/materials thinking that you have to make it up on the back end and it has been hard to get some clients to quit thinking (and paying) on those traditional project milestones and more in line with how our process really unfolds...of course that is easier said than done.

 

As far as someone not thinking how their project goes together, that is a personal responsibility issue regardless of how the documents are produced whether by hand drawings or using any particular software. If they aren't concerning themselves with how a project is going to be built before it gets to a contractor then I don't feel they are doing their job. Revit should make you think more about how a project goes together because it is a critical aspect of design, not just design something and let others figure it out like so many try to do. We also do coordination of other projects for contractors in Revit and Navisworks (I'm not involved in that work), on a couple of large projects the contractors have said that we helped them save a bunch of time and money on change orders because we found conflicts in the 2D documents that others produced well before they got to the stage of ordering materials because we virtually built the project while they were still drilling piers.

 

I do agree that it requires a substantial commitment by company owners of both time and money to make it a profitable proposition and many just aren't up to the upfront cost as some have stated. It can have a steep learning curve for some. Some of the engineering consultants that I worked with in the past at other firms aren't willing to do it and I don't work with them anymore even though they did good work for a reasonable rate.

 

To the original question, BIM is the future of the industry regardless of whether some like or not, that is the way the future is headed. It would be best to learn BIM whether it is Revit, Archicad, Bentley BIM or whatever the flavor that is popular in your market. It just expands your job options to potential employers.

[l GAP l]

Wow, I really did open up a can of worms with my original question and I really do appreciate the time that everyone took in giving their responses, I have read every single reply! Sorry for not responding earlier, I've been away traveling, but now that I have returned I will be knuckling down and learning revit - every indication seems to point towards the industry heading in that direction.

 

Thanks again.

[gottfriedschmidtke]

just joint this page today, since I hit all this interesting statements about REVIT.

 

I do use REVIT since 3 years with a 20 year background in AutoCAD, sketchup and multiple other 3d software ..which was and is always very helpful in developing and presenting architecture.

I used to show my clients and colleagues my ideas just with sketches, which I did and do during meetings ( I still love it)...

I mention this, because all means have there purpose and REVIT(BIM) opened a big door for us as a team ( 140 people) and as a tool for all phases in design and construction for large and small projects.

 

At the end of the day the product is only as good as the master, who creates it.

REVIT is only a tool...keep that in mind.

Pick your own tool and be a master with it....but don't judge tools if you have no clue how to use it. That just tells about your attitude, but not about the tool

[hockley91]

Attitude is half the battle...