Revit

[Chris MacDonald]

Anybody here suffering with this insufferable program?

 

I (and my colleagues) are having to go down the revit import route, rather than modelling things (properly) ourselves. I should probably mention we work at an architectural practice. Management see it as "why are we making two models, when we can make one? Look, they even say it updates!" and so on.

 

The thing is in the past when I've brought revit into max, it's been crappy and I've always chalked that up to the guy that made the model being crap; but now we've got several guys on board that are all well versed in revit and the models still suck.

 

This topic isn't really going anywhere, merely a rant. I guess the worst part of it is just sitting around waiting for the model to be updated, then re-importing it, fixing issues, slapping on a few materials and hitting render.

 

Paint by numbers.

[notamondayfan]

Does sound pretty soul destroying. I find modelling the building essential to creating visuals, as you can explore the space and ideas spark while constructing the building. Also I find modelling really easy and fast, so to me it's probably just as quick to re-model something as it is to clean up some dodgy imported model.

 

Dean

[Scott Schroeder]

I feel your pain. We've gone down this route as well, but I convinced most people to let me remodel as much as I can as long as time permits. For the most part, I usually remodel doors, railings, curved walls, and possibly the curtain walls.

 

Sometimes, you just have to suck it up and deal with the Revit to Max link as there just isn't time and doing it this way makes the most sense. When you have a, "Oh by the way we were just shortlisted and we have the interview in 1 minute, can you get us a render?" you really just need to get it done.

 

I recently did a job that was a total Revit link and it was actually pretty successful and by successful I mean I only felt like playing in traffic 50% of the time. I find that creating your own import preset helps as well as you can turn off a lot of crap that comes in with Revit. Using combine by family works best for how we prep our Revit models.

[cg_Butler]

May I ask your workflow for getting Revit in to max. I've started a project very recently and was initially given a navis model. Subsequently we were issued Revit models and some dxf's.

 

I'm wondering what the best practice for getting Revit in to max is, without all the bath taps and furniture they have put on every floor of every building, in every room!

 

Cheers.

[Scott Schroeder]

I just create a new 3d view in Revit and I hide in that view everything that I don't want to come in. Then link to that view in Max. If you don't want to keep the link live, then bind it in your file. The link and bind workflow can give you better import options that just straight importing the FBX.

[cg_Butler]

I decided it was best to export as DXF's from Revit as we were supplied the models from various companies. DXF seems to come in to max in a much more friendly way than an FBX. It seems to work okay so far.

 

I didn't realize you could link to revit, but i think in our instance linking wouldn't make sens because we need to edit the models.

[Chris MacDonald]

Well this is the problem, file linking.

 

I could comfortably take a revit model in a 3D format and remodel any parts that I needed to, and so on; but that then breaks the whole point of revit which is having one single up-to-date model that everyone works from.

[Stephen Thomas]

About to get into this too in my studio, so I'll shortly be testing how best to link/import files and brief my colleagues on how to make my life easier. We do mostly interiors too, so I can only imagine the shitty furniture models I'm going to get...

[Scott Schroeder]

The way our office uses Revit, our best method is a hybrid linking where I remodel what I need and keep what I can. A lot of what I have to fix means nothing to the Revit team as they'll never see it in 2d, such as adding walls to soffits and slightly mis-aligned walls.

 

It still makes updates easier than having to look at a drawing or re-importing dwg linework. If you work in a place that has really solid Revit models and/or do really simple interiors/exteriors then you can pretty much run with a direct link.

 

Once you get into commercial models and large scale models, the ease of absolute linking breaks down.

[Justin Hunt]

its also one of those things that gets better with time, mostly as the revit modelers get better it gets easier to use their models.

 

It also helps to set up a specific sheet that has only what you need to bring across, ie get rid of structural elements that you wont see, any fixtures and fittings you dont need etc.

 

The other thing is to change your mind set, yes the model will be crappy, thats OK for 70% of the types of visuals you will be doing. Once you get down to marketing quality, then you re-model to that standard. Its not ideal but does help in getting over some frustration.

 

jhv

[Chris MacDonald]

It still makes updates easier than having to look at a drawing or re-importing dwg linework. If you work in a place that has really solid Revit models and/or do really simple interiors/exteriors then you can pretty much run with a direct link.

 

Once you get into commercial models and large scale models, the ease of absolute linking breaks down.

 

Almost all of my stuff is large scale. I can't remember the last time I did just a house, etc. The current building that is really driving me crazy is a £14 million college campus.

[M V]

We should get very used to it though. Revit is only going to become more common and architects will be supplying their model and expecting reduced pricing because "the model is done already".

[Chris MacDonald]

I just think everybody ends up with an inferior quality product at the end of it, from a visualisation perspective.

 

Just because "it's the way architecture is moving" doesn't mean it should be the way this industry moves. Yes, we are very tightly linked to architecture (obviously); but if it were up to architects, we'd all be doing hand drawings with rotring pens; our industry is a seperate industry both in terms of what we provide and the technology that backs it up.

 

I am all for technologies that make everyone's lives easier, but the advantages that architects are seeing from Revit simply haven't filtered through to us yet. I am not sure they will.

 

Perhaps I am just bitter, perhaps I am really receiving worse models than you guys, perhaps not. Either way, it feels like pulling teeth trying to work with these models on such tight deadlines, with such high demands.

[M V]

My take on it is, if you can't beat em, join em. Become a Revit expert. Learn the pitfalls, learn how to educate your client on their BIM model and it's advantages and disadvantages in regards to arch viz. If you don't, someone else will and they will be rolling around in work in 3-5 years. The biggest problem as I see it is that firms are still learning (and some struggling) with modeling and detailing. The age old attitude of "just linework over it", runs rampant and leads to poorly constructed (sometimes non existent) modeling. If a client wants to send me a Revit model and wants a discount because the "model is done", import it and run a quick draft render and send them a sample. Let them see that just because it's Revit, doesn't mean it's modeled well.

[Chris MacDonald]

If you don't, someone else will and they will be rolling around in work in 3-5 years.

 

I don't doubt that for one second. Are none of you (that use revit on a regular basis) missing modelling, missing getting to grips with a building, missing putting in the time and effort to make it look fantastic? I feel like a junior could click import, slap a few materials on and hit render; yeah, it might not look great but half the time nobody seems to care.

[beestee]

I don't think it matters what package a model comes from, if the person(s) creating the model is(are) disconnected from the rendering process, then I will expect the quality to be below what is needed for quality renders, sometimes well below...but sometimes I am also surprised at the quality I receive, usually when I am active in establishing a process with the modeler and keeping them involved through the rendering process, showing them the result of their effort.

[Chris MacDonald]

The thing is of all the BIM models I've received, the ones out of Archicad have been the best by a long way, from a geometry point of view. Still not perfect but far, far better than Revit.

[Justin Hunt]

Yes I do miss getting to grips with the building but no I dont miss modelling. I prefer to get a revit model and do the clean ups in Revit before I bring it into Max. I liken this to doing clean up on 2D CAD drawings before bringing it in.

 

I think with Revit it does help having a good BIM manager and a good set of professional practice standards in place. This will help eliminate those crazy families where the toilet roll holder has more pollies than the whole of the rest of the model.

[tomaspayani]

you have to realise that revit and 3d max might both be 3D softwares but as tools their objective varies greatly.

Revit focuses on the building only, not the 3D viz of it, in our office we have structural engineers who load their inventor files into dwg's then into revit, our HVAC/piping sits in revit with some additional tools bolted on to the software, same goes for the electrical department whilst us architects use revit without anything apps or addons. This means you always have a complete overview of the building, its structural components, mechanical, layouts etc, you can make schedules, calculations, lists and so on very easily in revit, all drawings and sheets updates automatically and if something clashes you will now straight away. the coordination between disciplines is where its at and thats what its ment to do and it does it well. its not ment to create a model for architectural vizualisations and calling it crap because of this is like beeing angry at your tractor because it can't beat a ferrari in a drag race.

When i do vizualisation work i export a dwg from the revit model, do the walls, openings and basic details in sketchup, then import this into max where i add detail work that im more comfortable doing in max rather than sketchup. if we have layout changes i update the max model accordingly. Id try to explain to your boss that the two softwares have different objective and that the model needed to fulfill those objective are quite different.

[hockley91]

Complaints with Revit come from all areas of design and construction. I work in Visualization, but I am also involved in production with Revit on many of our projects.

 

You have to give the production team some slack. They don't see it the we "need" to see it. They are pure production and trying to meet a deadline. Each project has been different and from the production point of view it can be plagued with problems...especially when people get involved who do not use Revit regularly.

 

Even on the projects I work on, I can't get to everything. We're all tackling different aspects of the project to get things done. So, the QC for 3DS Max suffers.

 

I always have to add additional modeling anyway....so it's something I am accepting and dealing with. I try to get my two cents across as much as I can when working on a project. I don't really "link" the revit file, but I do what others have suggested though. I bring in certain categories of the model so that the 3DS Max file does not get so huge. It's a work in progress for me anyway...

 

In any case, I absolutely think Revit is an amazing program. It's actually more flexible than people realize and the pro's certainly outweigh any con's. It's not perfect, but it sure beats Autocad in terms of production.

 

Just my "two cents"!

Adam