*
lawrence,
we won’t be raising the limits on attachment storage any time soon (and i do delete files over 50 kb, so please respect the guidelines), but you can always arrange your own free server space at a community like geocities or tripod and host larger files there.
Skim-coating with joint compound covers texture, renews old drywall and plaster, and leaves smooth surfaces ready to paint.
"I have learned so much thanks to the searchable articles on the FHB website. I can confidently say that I expect to be a life-long subscriber." - M.K.
Replies
*
Hi folks,
Since the 3D CAD program question pops up periodically here, I thought it might be nice to start a little gallery of stuff any of us have done with various software programs so others can see what you can do and how long it might really take. I'll post my first example in the next message.
Steve
*Here's a whole house I've done in MiniCad Vectorworks 8. I've got about a solid week into it, with three different variations on additions.Steve
*Here's another variation on the addition project shown above. The door is too outscale, and I'm not happy with the fenestration, but the owners bailed on this idea early on, so I never refined it. I would have made the door smaller, added another window to the bottom floor in the middle of the front box, and moved the two upper windows closer together. It's a very common Greek Revival pattern in this neck of the woodsSteve
*Steve,Why are you wasting space with your little toy?Gabe
*
Joseph FuscoView Image
*Is there a sudden shortage of space???-pm
*Steve,I'm not sure if my earlier reply will show up in this thread, if it does, fine. If if doesn't, let me vent again.I just wanted to compliment you for your effort to share information with the rest of us.You clearly stated the purpose of your post. To indentify Cad software, what it can do and how long a person might take to achieve a given result. In addition, you suggested that others might join in with their Cad programs and the results they have achieved, along with the time they spent to get these results.What I don't understand, is why others would criticize you for doing so. I commend you for your effort.
*I'm impressed -- and jealous! It's funny, the Mac platform is very strong in graphic design, publishing, that sort of thing -- but there is almost nothing accessible in CAD. I tried TurboCad 2D/3D a while ago and just felt it was too much work. This must make working with lay clients much easier.As for file size, 35k is about as small as they get. Sean asked for maximum of 50k.
*Andrew,I dont know about 3-d, but Drawingboard, the 2-d version of Vellum runs on Mac. I downloaded the free version of Turbo-cad, but just could not get it without a manual.JonC
*If you are going to go Turbocad, you might want to think about buying the latest pro version (v6 Pro). It should be going $200-300 right now. It is basically Autocad, for $6800 less. It is missing a few things, but only the most advanced users will notice. None of the full featured general CAD programs seem to be that easy to use for architectural stuff; it takes a lot of work to get something like Steve posted. Nice work, I'm filled with envy.
*Ken,
Joseph FuscoView Image
*Joe, I am replying as I scan down the list. Right off the top of my head I can tell you that he used minicad Vector smething 8, and it took a week.Apparently I have an enhanced short-term memory.Joe - I thought you would be one of the people posting 3d images here!-Rob
*Rob,
Joseph FuscoView Image
*Nice work Steve. How much computer power does it take to operate Vectorworks efficiently? Even on my small Mac, MiniCAD5 runs at lightning speed, far faster than AutoCADR14 on a big new Pentium and the drawing files are miniscule compared to the fat ones in AutoCAD. Did the client pay you up front for the model or is it something you do to try to entice them to hire you as a builder? Is it worthwhile from an economic standpoint? I always encourage clients to build a model (or pay me to do it), either virtual or old-fashioned cardboard. It's without a doubt the best way to communicate an idea.
*Hi Patrick,There may not be a shortage of space now, but if everyone followed Steve's lead, we sure as hell will be short soon.If we limit ourselves to posting graphics to illustrate problems or solutions, the board will have no trouble with memory.To use it simply to show off a program, doesn't make sense. If you want I could post one, on AutoCad that will suck so much memory that YOU won't be able to remember your own name.Have you noticed, that as of this moment, not one other person has followed through with the original intent of the post.Like I said, cute toy, but save it for when it's needed.Gabe
*Steve - can you us show a picture of the original house? This is exactly what I have long hoped to do, show a customer what their place will look like with an addition or dormor. Can you change style of windows and doors with a couple keystrokes? How about siding, color of house/trim. This could be a big addition to our board. We need a section dedicated to computer stuff like JLC has, and folks posting there who know what they are talkin' about. Great Idea, and good work Steve - jb
*thx
*Nice work Steve...it's a start. You really should get into some hard core design programs now that you have your feet wet. You'll be able to start adding trim details to your work. I've been selling jobs using the computer for years now. It is probably the main reason I'm still in business here in the harsh business climate in Canada, and probably the reason for the eighty hour weeks.I can't show you anything until Sean ups the ante to a couple of megs. L
*Joe,I appreciate many of your posts. I could go either way on this particular debate. By the way, I AM psychic, Let me see if I can guess what you are thinking.....Wait its coming to me...You're thinking, "How can I piss on someone's parade again?" Am I right? Anyhow, I think that the original poster met his stated objective. But his real objective was to use this board as a subsitute for his mom's refrigerator. Know what I mean?Hey, I gotta go crawl under my rock again.Tom
*
Joseph FuscoView Image
*Cadintosh from the genius behind Graphic Converter.Download from http://www.lemkesoft.de
*Fred,
Joseph FuscoView Image
*Tommy,
Joseph FuscoView Image
* Holly Cow!
Joseph Fusco View Image
*lawrence, we won't be raising the limits on attachment storage any time soon (and i do delete files over 50 kb, so please respect the guidelines), but you can always arrange your own free server space at a community like geocities or tripod and host larger files there.
*Hi all,Sorry I haven't been around to answer the questions that have come up. I put this thread up on Thursday and have been away from the computer since then.I'll reply to individual posts about specificsSteve
*Hi Gerry,I run it pretty successfully on a 120 MHZ Mac 9500 with 48 Megs of real RAM installed. I allocate 36 megs to Vectorworks, but the RenderWorks rendering plug-in sucks another 16 megs, So I'm running at the edge of my real RAM. I use RAM Doubler 8 set at 3x so the computer thinks it has 96 megs, but no one application can use more than the actual physical RAM installed.I upgraded to VectorWorks from MiniCad6 and the rendering is now a lot faster due to VectorWorks using QuickDraw 3D capacity in the newer Mac Systems (I'm using System 8.0)The renderings posted have been rendered using the Renderworks plug-in which takes about 3 minutes to render what you saw. If I use the QuickDraw 3D rendering engine instead I get the rendering in about 15 seconds, but the lighting effects are very much reduced in quality.The client is paying for design time at 20 dollars an hour. I've cut him about a 50 percent break on the billable hours on this because I had some substantial learning curve on the upgrade. I was pretty efficient at MiniCad6, but this is a good deal different in a lot of ways. This particular client is only hiring me for design work. I originally bought MiniCad4 to try and entice a client to hire me as a builder and did the design for that one on spec. It got me the job, a 70K addition. The next client I billed at 20 dollars an hour for the design time on a 120K whole house remodel. The female of the couple could not visualize anything without drawings from several angles. I've had other builders pay me 20/hr for drawings for them to sell what they were doing for their clients.It's a great sales tool, but it does take time. I don't do it for free anymore.Steve
*Gabe,Sorry to offend you. I'm "wasting space with my little toy" because the topic of 3D CAD has come up several times in the past year or so, before we had the ability to post pictures, and the threads generated a good deal of interest. It's hard to visualize what a program will do without seeing real examples. Steve
*Come on Steve, save the hogwash,"It's hard to visualize what a program will do without seeing real examples".It's called a monitor and we all have one.Nothing wrong with a sketch or cad drawing to illustrate a problem or a solution, but to simply use up space with look at what I can do, is egowaste.Gabe
*Hi Andrew,The MAC offerings are indeed slimmer. VectorWorks and Chief Architect are cross-platform. VectorWorks was Mac-only till (Minicad) version 7. AutoCAD is reportedly developing for the MAC again since it's on the upswing. But if it's anything like their last MAC version, it'll flop. It failed the first time because it was a slow and clumsy port.These renderings are exported image files. I exported them as Photoshop format, took them into Photoshop, tweaked the levels a bit, saved as JPEG, then posted. The original Files for the drawings are growing past aabout 1 meg. Adding textures (the siding, shingles, flooring, stonework) adds about 135K per texture. The more symbols you use the fatter it gets too.Steve
*Hi Gabe,Sorry it bothers you so much. Sean gave us the ability to post within certain limits. If he asks me to curb myslef I will. I'm glad you are not the sysop. Steve
*Hi Joe,I did identify the software and the time invested. I'll leave it to others to decide if met my objectives. Apparently you vote no.Steve
*Hi JB,The windows and doors are symbols generated by a third-party plug-in called QuickDesign that costs about 300 bucks. It does cabinets, doors, windows, stairs, countertops, roofs and others that I don't use. You can spec a window in a dialog box, say 6-over-6 doouble-hung. You can spec the muntins, the trim size, the swing of a door, etc. If you want to do more after the script generates the symbol you can go in and edit it. I often do to change the color of stuff or to add a higher level of detail.Trim and stuff you have to draw with tools in the program. It's tedious.The siding and shingles are imported textures.Steve
*Hi Joe,Nice drawing. Is it something you actually wound up building? It would be interesting to see how close to reality it is.What was the program and the system overhead? How much did it cost?I really am curious, Joe. I'm here to learn and share what I can.Steve
*Hi Tom,Aren't we all doing that to some degree here? I'll admit it, I had just spent a week on this and thought it was pretty cool, but I also meant it when I said that I thought it was a relevent topic.If it's not it'll die out like all the other irrelevant topics that get started here. You were interested enough to look anyway.Steve
*Don't sound so worried Sean...I wouldn't do that to you! Great new handle! Oh, and I have plenty of space on my site, they said it won't be a problem as long as I stay under 30 megs.
*Won't waste bandwith here. I've got several pictures of a project at:http://home.att.net/~g.wheeler/tankhous.htmnear the bottom of the page. They are basically Datacad screenshots of a two-story tankhouse I moved onto the property here.Have worked on a number of projects and am getting good at basic 3D stuff. Have been working with Datacad's software for over 10 years. Have not gotten into the photorealistic stuff yet.A project I was working on this month included a series of large commercial projects next to each other with over 3,500 parking spaces. A master site plan with three "big boxes" and misc. smaller retail and restaurants. All can be viewed in 3D.If people show interest I can post further stuff.
*Hi Gary,Cool tankhouse. I've always been a fan of outbuildings of all varieties. Mt. Vernon is one of my favorite places because of the small village of outbuildings that surround it.How expensive is Datacad? Can it do more realistic renderings than what you've shown in the tankhouse drawings? The site-plan stuff looks useful. In my VectorWorks drawings there is no terrain or background of any kind. There is supposed to be a terrain modeler in there somewhere, but haven't taken the time to learn it yet. Got to spend some time making money too.Steve
*Hi Lawrence,What other programs do you recommend? I have Photoshop and Illustrator and Painter, but I'm not versed in Iluustrator or Painter. My wife uses them. Vectorworks just got a lot better with this version. the texture capability is new to it. I could add more detail to the trim, but it takes time to build each piece and position it. This client didn't want to spend more than 800 bucks and was mostly interested in massing studies. I did a lot of the trim detail for myself and didn't charge for it.It took me quite a while to get the hang of drawing 3D objects from scratch, but once I got past a certain conceptual hurdle it was suddenly a lot easier. Still haven't got a clue when it comes to the bezier drawing tools though.Could you post some examples of the level of detail that you produce, and what programs/system requirements it took? I would love to see them.Steve
*>>If you want I could post one, on AutoCad that will suck so much memory that YOU won't be able to remember your own name.<<Hi Gabe,I for one would like to see (in a rendering that is less than 50K) an example of what AutoCad can do that makes it worth what they charge for it. Seriously. Would you please post something? And let us know how long it took to draw, what the system overhead was, the cost of the program, what kind of clientelle pays for drawings, etc. Do you use CAD for smaller projects as well?It is one thing to see the examples that the manufactures use to sell their products, it's another thing to hear about and see real-world examples from people who are out there struggling with the software and trying to make money at the same time.The people on this board are builders of many different levels, and one of the things I find useful is to see the differences and similarities between the guy doing small remodels versus the guy doing 31 million dollar projects.Regards,Steve
*The great thing about cad based products is that it is up to you how accurate, ie. 1/1024" or mm if you like. You can produce architectural quality working drawings where there are 20 drawings all different scales on a single file. Once the functions are learned it is limitless. Your vectorworks program looks great for renderings 3d but for working drawings and features, sections and the like a good cad based program is the ticket...only problem is the 2 years it takes to learn them. I tried to convert something to show you but to no avail...50 k's won't cover the spec settings. Autosketch is a great basic version for under 200$.
*Hi Lawrence,As far as I know VectorWorks is a CAD-based program. It's not a solids modeller. Until this version it had very little rendering capabilities. You had to export to something like Renderman or StrataVision in order to get textures and lighting. The rendering is now accomplished with with their own add-on called RenderWorks.Anyway, the way you draw in Vectorworks is highly controllable too. Objects are created from polygons, extusions, sweeps, boolean operations on 2D or 3D objects, etc. The level of detail is indeed controllable down to the thousandth of a millimeter.Drawings are comprised of as many linked layers as you want, every element can have a class assigned to it. The visibility of classes can be controlled. Database records can be generated from the objects. There is a framing module that will generate a platform framing model of whatever walls you specify along with elevations and a take-off list of every part in the frame (though I have yet to play with that enough to see if it is really usable for working drawings.) You can can cut 2D and 3D sections, full cutaways, etc.The third party symbol-generators and such just automate a lot of routine work.Is there any way for you to export your drawings to an image aditing program where you can then convert to a small JPEG? Would really like to see what you are talking about.Steve
*Steve:It will do more realistic drawings with the Virtual Reality Suite and Renderize Live that come with the program now. The list price for Datacad is about $599.00. It's a powerful program that specializes in architectural drafting 2d and 3d and is easier and much more economical than Autocad. They also have a good user group (DBUG) that helps with problems and feedback. Unfortunatly, any full-featured CAD program takes a while to get good at, unless you are doing very basic residential plans with standard roofs etc. and get one of the more "automatic" programs like Chief Architect.Datacad will do detailed 3d perspective line drawings too, but these don't show well on the web. The file size and image size get too big if you want to show much detail. I include perspectives on my working drawings however, which are xeroxed as 11"x17" sets or blueprinted if larger sets.The rendering programs are nice, but I'm usually more interested in the technical aspects of construction and don't care as much what color the exterior walls and roof are and where the shrubs are located. It hasn't been important for me to learn yet. I can usually visualize pretty good in my head without having to render.I have done colored "animation cel" style painted renderings however with perspective line drawings and know the paint on these won't fade over time.
*Steve and Gary,Nice posts and a good topic. Ignore the fluff. I am enjoying it. While we are at it, I have learned a lot from Joe and also from his Web site. But, unless I am mistaken, if the soffit is 84" and the cabinet above the microwave is 12", then the microwave itself is 72" at the top instead of the recommended 66" for accessability and convenience of the user. I noticed this in one of the installed kitchens he posted as well. What about the rest of you? Microwaves up or down?Dennis
*Gary, good to see you again. Have you seen/played with "Solid Builder" from Eagle Point? Opinion?
*George:No. I'm learning new things every day, but haven't had much time to explore new programs.There was a "CAD Shootout" a few weeks ago, with several programs competing. I wonder if there was anything there. I forgot the web address. I think it was hosted by a Professor Langdon in Los Angeles this year.
*The Cad shootout was really interesting; teams from all the big companies competing to build I think a highrise on a wharf, and have a presentation ready at the end of the day. Autocad scored last; some of the least expensive programs scored best. Pretty intense competition, and lots of post-competition discussion about the results. I don't have the address at hand; you can probably find it by searching 'architectural CADD'
*Hi folks,The CAD shootout results are here:http://www.architecturalcadd.com/cup/results99.htmlI'm too lazy to type in the href. Some of the drawings are posted and the judges comments are interesting.Steve
*Hi Dennis,I like them at counter level or no more than chest-high.My wife wants ours below the counter in the island. I would rather that than up at eye level.Steve
*If you're just going to heat small things like cups of coffee, or t.v. dinners in an office environment or for a young couple, eye level microwave ovens shouldn't be a problem. As long as you can see the inside surface for cleaning. Saves valuable counter space. If you plan to do serious cooking, like large casseroles, large bowls of soup, defrosting a large bird, or want it accessible to elderly, infirm or children, you might want to mount it much lower than that.
*Steve:Thanks for starting this thread. Maybe in addition to discussing the various types of design software our SYSOP, Illustrious Keeper of The Store Sean, would publish some specifics so we could easily illustrate ideas.Many times long paragraphs that try to explain something become so confusing due to regionalisms and complexity that they fail to do their job. A brief picture would get the job done nicely. But most of us aren't expert enough to do anything else.How about it Sean?
*Andrew,RE: CAD and MACI picked this up off the message board at the cad shootout site. It originally ran at MacIntouch site.ArchiCAD was the big winner, but they cost alot more I believe.>>Designers 3D CAD Shoot-OutDate: Mon, 31 May 1999From: francois levySubject: PowerBooks win ShootoutI had the pleasure of being a participant a few days ago at the 4th annual Designers 3D CAD Shoot-Out, at the A/E/C Systems trade show in Los Angeles this past week. The Shoot-out is a live, 3-hour competition where teams of 3 architects and designers, each using different CAD software, are asked to design a building from scratch. The participants have no idea going into the competition what type of building isto be designed, nor where the site is to be. Participants are required to produce plans, elevations, a building section, site model, 12perspectives, 2 high-quality renderings, a 3D metafile, and an animation. Teams are also periodically interrupted by being asked to presentvignettes, showing off their particular software,s features. This is an exciting (and grueling) event.Our team, Robert Anderson, Jeffrey Ouellette, and myself, used Diehl Graphsoft,s VectorWorks , a low-cost, object-oriented CAD programwith parametric object capabilities, integrated 2D drafting and 3D modeling, texturing and information management-streets at about $600. Most other CAD teams ran $4000 a seat apps. While VectorWorks is now completely cross-platform, it had its origins on the Mac. The CAD market is heavily Wintel-oriented, and most CAD apps are Unix/NT, Windows/NT, or Mac/Windows/NT (a minority to which VectorWorks belongs). While some other teams competed using the latest 500 mHz PIIIs, our team elected to run on two PowerBook G3s (a 292 and 266, both with 192 mB RAM and 14.1 TFTs). We were able to get on the ground and run practices quickly and easily, and set-up was a breeze, of course-one cross-over cable and we were locked and loaded.We took 3d place; the winning team (ArchiCad) ran a cross-platform solution; one of their machines as well was a G3 PowerBook. We were able to meet more requirements (such as renderings and animations) than other teams (even the second place team), in spite of their heavier boxes. We owe a lot to our software, but our iron helped, too. All in all, in a heavily Wintel world, the Mac (specifically the PowerBook)did quite well:50% of winning computers were PowerBook G3s; 2 of the three winners used PowerBook G3s; 2 of the three winners used Mac-first cross-platform software; All of the Macs used were on winning teams.<<Steve