Learn to use Auto Cad 2005 which has become the industry standard in a variety of professional fields.
I need to grow my head. Looking forward, I realize the importance of expanding my skills and knowledge to include abilities more cereberal and less physical. I will be 49 in March and although I can still smoke the youngins (most of the time) it now is beginning to hurt.
I took drafting in High School, and although I never did much after that, I still find it intriguing.
This course is being offered in an adult ed format; 8/2hr sessions. Course description says I will be introduced to essential concepts, commands, and electronic tools needed in preparing and printing drawings. That’s about all I can find out. Auto Cad 2 is another course.
What insight can any of you offer me before I take the plunge. I love to learn knew things, but I am usually my own teacher. I find sometimes it is so much easier for someone else to be doing the teaching sometimes!
I am thinking that learning something such as this will greatly increase my credentials in the feild of residential construction, and will make me a more desireable canidate as a prospective employee.
How does Chief or Softplan differ from Auto Cad?
Thanks in advance.
Eric
Replies
Experts tell us that putting your brain though a new kind of challenge is healthy for it and postpones
old age dementia, etc, so it can't be a bad thing to take the class.
But for faster production work, you want ChiefA, Vectorworks or Softplan
They are all object based, so you draw a wall instead of a line. Opennings such as windows and doors or blank out arches already have a relationship with the wall once placed in it.
Welcome to the
Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime.
where ...
Excellence is its own reward!
Thanks for the responce Paul.
Would you go as far as to suggest I would be better off purchasing one of the programs and teaching myself?
I think I am aiming for gaining a skill that is useful in a general sense, and my sense tells me that more companies are probably useing a real(?) Auto Cad program.
Do you think that learning AC would cause me to have difficulty learning to use one of the otheres that you mention?
Thanks,
Eric[email protected]
It's Never Too Late To Become What You Might Have Been
If your main purpose is to add value to your resume` and exercise your brain, this course in ACAD is good for you. ACAD has a larger learning curve. Next post has some other Questions that I'll answer tohim
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!
I have friends who are architects and they all use AC. I have watched one use it and he flies when he's laying things out- infinitely faster than pencil on paper, especially when changes are needed. It may be the most complex drafting system but it also does the most when it's needed. If you learn AC, you should be able to use/learn any of the others.
"I cut this piece four times and it's still too short."
object based.
i have autocad but only use it for viewing drawings emailed to me by subs, architects, etc.
never learned to really use it, and until i retire, i doubt i will have the time. i have an older version of vectorworks, but again, haven't really had the time to fool around with it.
it sounds as though there is great benefit to object based design programs. does autocad not have this capability ? it seems like the vast majority of the designers i work with use the autocad brand.
what gives ? i understand autocad is a great design tool that is useful to all types of designs from residences to high rises to bridges, bolts and aircraft carriers. does that broad range of capabilities make it less suitable for residential design ? is autocad lacking an important feature ( object based design ) ?
is the learning curve the same for all of the design programs ?
carpenter in transition
"does autocad not have this capability ?"AFAIK, ACAD has no limitations for what it CAN do, but it is cumbersome with a long learning curve. The residential designers who switch to SP from ACAD constantly make remarks that they can't believe how much easier and faster it is to work in that environment. "the vast majority of the designers i work with use the autocad brand. "A large part of the ACAD marketing is to get it taught in the schools as the gold standard, so those who learn CAD as part of a colleege education are already prejudiced in favor of it. That is one of the main reasons it is dominant in the larger shops with several seats. Not because it is best. 'Course 'best' is an ambivalent term. If designing a space capsule or a high rise tower, ACAD is the right large collection of tools.but one drawback is the large complexity to it. ACAD has the Tools for many different disciplines. Then to get in a residential environment, another add-on program that uses the ACAD engine is needed. Now you have a lot of software running at great cost."is the learning curve the same for all of the design programs ?"I don't believe so. I learnewd SP myself ffrom the manual and function very well, have added tricks from the SPLASH forum.I started learning ACAD once and gave it up as far too much harder. I did better with Turbo-cad.
I mostly use Turbocad or Intellicad now to open drawings from surveyors or other designers. My latest SP will now allow me to import ACAD drawings though
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!
Now I have not used AC, but I have used some other, simplier CAD programs.And for the object orient I have only used an older version of 3d Arch, which is a stripped down version of Cheif Arch.But here is an example of the basic difference.In a CAD program if you want to draw a wall you start with a parallel line tool and give it the spacing and start and stop points.Then if you put a window in that wall, since you are only looking at it from a 2d view you need to cut the lines (although a real wall only has a hole in it) and place the window. If you move or remove the wall then you need to patch or fix the lines for the wall. Some cads have better tools to do that with than others.In an OO arch cad program it understands what a wall is and what characteristics that it has. So you start by telling the width and the HEIGHT of the wall. So when you go to elevation or 3d views it can draw the wall without other input.And it knows how a window goes in a wall. So it becomes a wall with a window, rather than 2 sets of parallel lines that are broken by a window symbol.Now for AC there are tools that can do some of the package of operations to make it smoother to work with things like a wall. And there are complete add on packages, very $$$, to make it function as an OO program.
In an OO arch cad program
huh?[email protected]
It's Never Too Late To Become What You Might Have Been
Object Oriented.
I've been using AutoCad LT (LT is the 2D version) for over 15 years and will grab the mouse for all but the most simple sketches. I use it to design every project - right down to each cut in each board which saves me a ton of aggravation once I start making sawdust. - lol
My biggest problem with AutoCad LT is that I really can't do 3D drawings for customer presentations. My 2D elevation and plan drawings make perfect sense to me, but customers usually can't translate my drawings into a mental picture of the finished project.
I'm looking into making the move to a different CAD program that will let me do 3D "pictures". I recently downloaded the free version of Google Sketchup and have been playing with it and am fairly impressed. I'm not ready to make presentation drawings with it yet, but I like what I've seen so far.
I guess that the moral of the story is that there are other programs that may work better for you. AutoCad is definitely an industry standard, but there are other programs that are easier to learn and are less expensive.
Eric, I use AutocadLT. I learned Autocad in college--I wouldn't have wanted to figure it out on my own.
Over the past few years I have used:
a Mac-based program called Powercadd that is very similar to AutocadLT (but better),
Sketchup (which I found handy for getting massing models to hand-draw perspective sketches over but it's too cumbersome for photo-realistic drawings),
and trial versions of Softplan and Chief Architect.
As the other posters have said, the object-based programs (SP and CA) do much more of the thinking for you. I found it easy to get set up and draw a basic house, change windows, etc. If I were going to be a design-build contractor I would invest in an object based program.
Because my job is foreman for a design-build company, I don't do much drawing except to figure out radii, detail a steel beam, or quickly sketching of a built-in. On the side I do design work, anything from custom furniture to whole-house remodels, and I find Autocad to be very versatile and accurate but I often get annoyed by the extra steps it takes to clean up a drawing, and you have to keep all the drawings in mind. It's really no different than hand-drawing, just more accurate and faster once you get over the learning curve.
So, if I were you I would go ahead and take the class, you'll get familiar with how to draw on the computer with the most common professional program out there. If you learn Autocad, you will be able to pick up any other drafting program relatively easily.
eric... when i got started i had a 17year old kid working for me
later he went to harvard school of design..
his roommate wrote the first out of house instruction manual for AutoCad " Inside AutoCad"
after he got his AIA, he started his own firm on Park Ave.. he has 6 architects on staff..
they do a lot of Hampton work. they do a lot of $20 million dollar homes
as far as i know .. he has never used AutoCad in his office.. they use Vectorworks..
i started with AC in '84.. tried it for year and went back to my drawing board
in '97, i bought Chief Architect , vs. 5
i'm now on Chief 10..
my understanding is that Chief & Softplan are the easiest to use and are pulling aaway from Vectorworks
you can become proficient enough to do a set of construction drawings in Chief or Softplan in a couple of weeks , especially if the house is not too complicated
if i were drawing 40 hours a week , i would be a power user in Chief.. as it is , i muddle thru.. i wouldn't even attempt to become proficient in AutoCad... much too long a learning curve
another consideration is...
cost to buy.. Chief & Softplan are apx. $2000 full systems
AutoCad is about $5000 full system
the hardware is the same for any of them ( computer / plotter )
i'd spend my time learning Chief or Softplan.. if you wound up in a company that used AC , you could transition to it then.. or you could demonstrate why they should transition to Chief or Softplan
both Chief & Softplan have demo discs that will let you do almost everything except print plans
this is a guess: most residential design is NOT being done on AutoCadMike Smith Rhode Island : Design / Build / Repair / Restore
this is a guess: most residential design is NOT being done on AutoCad
I bet it's more a 50/50 split. Around here almost all the Architects we work with use AutoCad. The college here also uses it and has no other programs. I myself use it for floor plans etc but I'm not proficient.. As a DRAFTING program it's great.
As a design tool for residential construction I don't believe it can compare to an object oriented program such as Chief or SoftPlan. Drawing in 3D in Acad is a pure PITA.
From what I understand of Chief and the like, it's incredibly simple to create perspectives and walk-throughs etc. Not to mention the built in features for windows/doors/trim/etc.
I wish I could talk the boss into buying a copy of chief.
Have you tried getting a copy of the demo?
you could practice enough to get to know it, then on the next project you get, compare for him the amt of time it takes in ACAD vs the time to do so much more with 3D also in the Chief. Translate that to dollars and make a pitch how it alters sales presentations and Wham!, If he is abusiness man...I'm not sure how it works in chief, but for interoperability, ACAD makes it hard to have a common CAD format. I can import a DWG or DWF file and then convert it to an SPF and turn lines into walls etc, but there is no backwards familiarity really I can save as their format, but if there is a lot of back and forth with other ifrms, you could lose information and have errors that accululate and create liability.
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!
I have a demo version of Chief, the problem is finding time (read making time) to use/learn it. I keep meaning to dedicate sometime, and every time I do, something else comes up.
I believe once I was able to show him a few drawing's in the demo the selling part would be quite easy.
I can whip up a basic floor plan in no time in autocad with enough window/door/ electrical/plumbing/basic layout etc. information to get through project on our end. As a sales tool I think cheif could be indispensable.
Time is my only limitation at this point.
By it yourself.Get the the BH&G version.http://www.homedesignersoftware.com/The basic program is $59 and the Pro is $495. There are also a couple of of versions/package.Here is a comparison of the versions.http://www.homedesignersoftware.com/pdf/Land-vs-Base-vs-Suite-vs-Deluxe-Pro.pdfAnd there are several coupons.http://www.homedesignersoftware.com/rebates/And it *SEEMS* that if you get the pro you can get a $500 rebate to the full C.A. I did not read the link.And Costco has the Pro for $399 and Amazon for $423.But you could get the $59 version (maybe even out of company petty cash) and so he a little of what it will do and then sell him on the C.A. version.And you can download a free demo of C.A.http://www.chiefarchitect.com/products/demo.htmlPS, I think that you mentioned going back to school. If you do/have then look at getting a student version. Don't know aht the limititions are. But it will be good for learning.http://www.studica.com/ChiefArchitect/
I'll look into the BH&G version, thanks.
I am back in school already, however the program I am in has little do with Architecture or design so it may be a strech to convince them to buy a copy
I did not look at that site for the details.But the last time I did this, of course at the time the only computer that could run softare was an abacus, was that all you needed was a student ID.You could be studying Rusian litature and get a student version of cad.
My gut sense is that you are right on most of this. But"i'd spend my time learning Chief or Softplan.. if you wound up in a company that used AC , you could transition to it then.. or you could demonstrate why they should transition to Chief or Softplan"That one is a judgement call. I have seen a LOT of ads nationwide calling for the resume` to include proficiency in ACAD. I don't think they should, but they do. I suppose it depends a lot on Eric's career goals. Myself, if I went to full time design and wanted to work in somebody elses office, I would make that pitch or find a practice that used SP already. I would be wiling to learn Chief, but not ACAD. But then, knowing me, my ultimate choice would be to subcontract design jobs and use SP, refusing jobs that required ACAD or Chief.
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!
Mike,
Thanks for the input. Your post caused me to pause a bit............
I have not intention (at this time at least) of doing this to become proficient at ACAD. My intention I suppose is to introduce myself to the world of electronic drawing. And to just learn something new. Understand a bit about what is talked about in some of these discussions on the topic.
I don't believe I will ever purchase the program. ACAD 2 is also an offered course, and depending on what I get out of the first course perhaps I will take that as well.
I have other reasons as well. $195.00 and 16 hours is an affordable investment even if I consider it entertainment. Even if I don't get well versed at it, at least I have an idea of what it is all about should the opportunity arise where I need to know a little about it or perhaps use it as well. I won't be completely in the dark.
As the weather gets cooler and the days get shorter I find myself indoors more and more. This will be one less night to sit in front of the tube or find some other thing to distract me while I drink beer.
I have the discipline to get to the class and learn, but perhaps lack it and the focus to learn SP or CA at home by myself. I believe I actually have a trial SP around here somewhere!
Right now my job sucks and it becomes more obvious with each passing day that it is likely a dead end. It won't grow. So, I'll grow myself a bit.
This is not intended to retort your thoughts and suggestions. On the contrary; your post caused me to put in writing my mental justification for doing this. I may even have missed a few.
Your post and the 4 or 5 that followed have given me much to think about. It never ceases to amaze me what a wonderful resource this place is.
Thanks again,
Eric[email protected]
It's Never Too Late To Become What You Might Have Been
Eric,I would definetely take the class.Here's a little personal history to show you where I'm coming from. I took a 3 hour course my Sophomore year in college on AutoCAD LT. This was after 6 hours of board drafting classes. I learned quite a lot, but as others have said, I really only see the tip of the iceberg. I purchased AC for use in my business and it certainly does what I need it to. 3d is not possible (at least for me) and I have spent many, many hours honing my skills and learning new things.When the time comes to replace my version of ACAD, I will take a very serious look at SP, CA, and any others that have popped up in the mean time. As the others have said, the object based programs can do 98% of what I need to do very easily.I love the capabilities that ACAD affords to me. I love knowing that I can draw a 2,000 SF house that is 1/16" out of square. I love being able to zoom in to see that I did in fact copy that line .00001" over. I'm a nerd, and proud of it. Unfortunately, none of these capabilities are really beneficial to me. It's like knowing that you can finish a concete slab to be ±1/32" from flat/level. That's great if you're working for NASA or something like that, but we would lose money laboring over details that make no practical difference in the finished product. So ACAD is not likely to be practical for your long term use.The benefits of taking the class on ACAD are these:1. ACAD is the standard for drafting programs. If the Archy/designer that you're dealing with doesn't use ACAD, you have the best chance of importing the file from his program into ACAD over all the other choices. I've found that most engineers use .dwg files so that makes my life easier since I can email a plan to get the trusses designed or the beams checked.2. Since ACAD is so prevalent, your basic knowledge might come in handy somewhere down the road. I recently installed the free version of SketchUp, and my skills in ACAD helped me pick up the way SU works much more quickly.As you said, it's only 16 hours and $200, I'm sure you will get your money out of it.
Jon Blakemore RappahannockINC.com Fredericksburg, VA
I love knowing that I can draw a 2,000 SF house that is 1/16" out of square.
Now, that's an important point of sorts--if a tad off topic. Generic ACAD, used as a plan drafting tool, is one of the few that really will let you use field dimensions and "jiggle" everything back together in some sort of cohesive whole.
CA is good software, it's darn close to beign the only s/w out there with any sort of specialization in the residential market. It however, does not seem "comfortable" with walls out of square, true, & plumb (or not in the very brief times I've tested the versions as they come out).
Sure, the walls can be edited, but the laying them out can be tedious, a bit (not that Architectural Dek Top, from AutoCAD is any better <grr>). CA & ADT both then get all cranky about window & door insertion, once, finally, you get the walls to match the field dimenions.
ADT is 'best' for structures at least 3 and not more than 10 stories tall, too (and has one of the worst "auto roof" features I've ever seen--which is even worse for residential work).
Now, I find ACAD easy to use. Ought to, I've been using it since 1983 (back when the hip new feature they added was diagonal lines in the Z plane). Frankly, I'm of the opinion that ACAD peaked right inbetween R14 & R2000, too. They wandered away from production flat drafting and small customers in quantity to bells-n-whistles, and selling to IT people by IT people at huge single-seat prices to huge customers (big enough to have non-drafting IT departments).Occupational hazard of my occupation not being around (sorry Bubba)
Cap,Do you do any 3d drafting in ACAD?
Jon Blakemore RappahannockINC.com Fredericksburg, VA
Do you do any 3d drafting in ACAD?
All kinds.
Previously, I spent a great deal of time casting cabinet parts into finished carcasses, and also divining from vague absolute requirements the 3d primitives & finished models for production CNC work.
For residential work, I generally have a hybrid. I'll take my 3d prototype (blank) drawing and XREF in a developed plan. From that, I'll extrude a finished shell, adding such details as are needed to sell the product.
Much of that is possible from having built legions of 3d 'props.' Couches, chairs, light fixtures, kitchen appliances, doors, etc. You also tend to need a right deep library of texture images, too. After that, it's down to setting up the lighting just like you were "shooting" the room IRL (props, drapes, light bounces, etc.)
Here at work? Not so much. Only once, and not for the plans model, but for the fancy rendering for the bankers.Occupational hazard of my occupation not being around (sorry Bubba)
I never saw much use for Arch Desk Top, I've played with it a bit here and there and never quite "got it" It didn't seem to be a real good tool IMO
much use for Arch Desk Top, I've played with it a bit here and there and never quite "got it"
Only way to use ADT, I am convinced, is to get Paul Aubin's book (matched to the version of ADT one has), and follow his dictates on efficient use.
Even then, PA does not really stress the project limits ADT really has (like how 2 story buildings are harder than 5 story ones; or how, any thing over about 10 floors, you get into a hassle about drawing every stinking one of them (or you get really wierd ceiling plans, building & wall sections). Oh, and it's middling teeth-pulling to execute a sensible wall section for anything over about 6-7 floors, anyway.
So, if your office is knocking out leveraged shell buildings in the 3-10 story range, ADT is wunderbar (and, if it ain't, Autodesk will promise that all you need is the next Version, only $4995 from your dealer . . . <tired sigh>).Occupational hazard of my occupation not being around (sorry Bubba)
lots of responses here that mirror my own, but i'll just back them upi graduated arch school at an interesting time . . . when firms were going from hand-drafting to computerized drafting. Got proficient at the old method, then watched it turn obsolete overnight. I've learned a couple of high-end programs since then (Archicad and Microstation) but it's a painful, frustrating situation. It's what i hate most about the business.Learning something like Autocad works best if you've got someone experienced to help you out, at least in the beginning. And from what others have told me the classes are a waste of money, unless you first have a working knowledge of the program and know what to ask. Autocad is kind of the 'default' program for a lot of firms, but it's not the best or the only option. And most firms that do primarily residential work seem to be the ones to investigate more 'forgiving' programs.My own two cents would be to start with something else, or at least Autocad Lite. A lot less $$$ and hassle. And if you want to really learn it, use it everyday. An hour or two here and there won't be worth the trouble.
OK, I'll throw my 2 cents in. I use autocad for everything. I draw in 3D as a matter of habit. I got started 20 years ago with some early version by taking night courses at the local high school, then as I upgraded versions I went back to the local college and honed my skills again.
I use it to work out details mostly, stair layouts, roof systems, cabinet cut sheets and anything else I dont want to stand around scratching my head over. A few keystrokes and I can printout multiple dimensions within any tolerance you like
I cant say its for everyone. I do have a background in the machine trade before I got involved in carpentry so I have no problem with intricate working drawings. Also I took a certificate course in civil engineering when I made the cross over, more drafting
softplan, cheif arch and the like are nice rendering programs that will let someone with little technical experience show mom and pop what their addition will look like, but they wont generate highly detailed working drawings
Autocad on the other hand could give you those renderings if you have that kind of time. I have produced some very nice renderings but only as a challenge to myself. to do it on a regular basis would not be cost effective
you need to spend a lot of time learning the package. there are a lot of features I will never use even though I know they are there.
"but they wont generate highly detailed working drawings"That depends how you define highly detailed. Builders don't need things defined within thousandths of an inch. But I can do all the working drawings needed by simply cleaning up elevations and cross sections and adding dimensions. Maybe twenty minutes for each drawing.It doesn't sound like you are very familiar with Softplan. no it doesn't ahve the same CAD tools as ACAD, but for most residential builders work, it doesn't need them.
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!
"Autocad on the other hand could give you those renderings if you have that kind of time."I didn't notice this line first time around. You make a good case for Softplan with that comment. I was profitably productive with SP in 2-3 weeks learning time, practicing a few hours each night at home.
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!
maverick... AC is fine , but your view of other CAD programs is not
you've obviously never worked with either chief or softplan or you would never make this bald statement :
<<<softplan, cheif arch and the like are nice rendering programs that will let someone with little technical experience show mom and pop what their addition will look like, but they wont generate highly detailed working drawings>>>
they will generate any level of detail you want to any tolerance
you really should know what the capabilities are before you jump to wrong conclusions
just because they can do rendering doen't mean they can't also do detailed construction drawingsMike Smith Rhode Island : Design / Build / Repair / Restore
the thing I like about autocad is; since everybody draws in it, I can get blueprint e-mailed to me, and my computer will open them up.
Edited 9/11/2006 8:58 am by brownbagg
Eric, if you want to learn to be a CAD jockey so as to meet your stated goals of improving your marketability in the residential construction field, in view of being someone's employee, then by all means go ahead and take the course.
You will hit many more bases by knowing ACAD than any other package. In residential construction where any kind of CAD is used, ACAD is the market leader by a huge margin.
But here is the caveat. You must end the course by getting your own personal copy of the program, for personal use at home. You really won't retain those skills unless you go to work with them, and having the program at home so you can use it in your work, or just to practice with, is an absolute necessity.
And here is another big "but." If you want this skill to use yourself, in your own independent business, then forget ACAD and go with something like what Pifin and Mike Smith are using. These packages are powerful aids for producing models, renderings, and drawings for all types of residential construction.
If you want the rock bottom low cost package, Google's Sketchup (free) is the way to go. I use it and can do a whole lot with it.
"But here is the caveat. You must end the course by getting your own personal copy of the program, for personal use at home. "something to consider ProgeCAD LThttp://www.progecad.com/
bobl Volo, non valeo
Baloney detecter WFR
The courses will give you the basics and get you familiar with the functions. Since you already know how to build things, that will help you produce meaningful drawings.
I have seen architectural school graduates that can make beautiful drawings, but they have no clue what they are drawing.
The best way to become proficient in autocad is to use it anytime you can.
eric... i know at least one guy who quit building and does nothing but produce plans for other builders.. he is so busy , he doesn't even upgrade his software.. he's using vs. 8.0 about three years old now
as you know,the average builder has no ability to produce construction drawings..
so if you wanted to slide into a new career, you could certainly do it with CAD
one reason i switched from a drawing board is because i could only put one drawing at a time on my board
with cad you can keep a lot of balls in the air
next weekend i'll be at a Chief seminar and user group for a meeting and two days of training..
the user group has all kinds of people in it.. builders, designers, architects, and homeowners.. something for everyone
you can lurk at most of these groups.. i know anyone can join the Chief user group, run by users. or you can log onto Chief Talk which is run by Chief (A.R.T. )
some groups are more restrictive than others and require owning the software...Mike Smith Rhode Island : Design / Build / Repair / Restore
auto cad is a very big program. It would take two years to just learn some of it. You will never use all the commands in the program. So just learn what you will need. No since learning gears if you will never draw them.we have schools here that teach autocad, the only purpose of the school is to keep teachers employed, So take the schools with a grain of salt.
next weekend i'll be at a Chief seminar and user group for a meeting and two days of training..
Now you're killing me. Lack of research on my part. Knee jerk, hmmm.
Where're you going for that? Good to here you'll no longer be telling us how you "muddle" through CA!
Eric[email protected]
It's Never Too Late To Become What You Might Have Been
"with cad you can keep a lot of balls in the air"I've three jobs in design phase right now
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!
Hi Eric,
Done that been there on getting older and starting to hurt. I'm 50 going on 51 and I've developed osteoarthritis in my hands. So about a year ago I decided to transition out of the field and into the office. Took intro to AutoCad at night at the local college, then took Architectural Desktop (the maker of AutoCad is AutoDesk and this Architectural Desktop is their version of Softplan but not as good), then took Solidworks (a very powerful 3D modeling software) and am now taking Advanced Solidworks.
1 month after taking my first CAD class I got a job using those skills for a commercial woodworking company. I plan to keep on taking more CAD classes (the more you know, the more demand there is for you).
Take a look in the local "help wanted" adds in your area, and then check "Craigslist" for CAD openings for your area. You will find more companies looking for AutoCad simply because there are so many uses for it. 2nd you will most likely find many companies looking for Solidworks skills. Then you will find lots of builders and arch. firms looking for CA and SP.
You'll find many programs us commands that are similar to AutoCad so it's a great "first or intro drawing program" to learn. Once you get a feel for it then you'll move on to object and/or parametric drawing. You've already been given examples of SP as object drawing - parametric is also different than AutoCad. AutoCad is boolean drawing. In boolean drawing you sketch an object to the correct dimensions and then you use dimension tools to label the length, width, height, etc.... of the object you sketched. In parametric drawing, first you do a sketch merely approximating the rough shape of an object. Then you apply smart "driving" dimensions to the sketch, these dimensions change the sketch to the exact specifics of the dimensions you have added. This "dimension driven" drawing is called "parametric". Once you make the transition to object and parametric drawing the programs you will learn are more advanced, powerful, and efficient at drawing and modeling more complex objects, parts, and assemblies (read machines, building, wall assemblies, etc...)
Anyway the long and the short of it is getting ANY experience in CAD is good. DEFIANTLY take classes. Muddling through these CAD programs can be done but it takes about 5 to 10 times as long to learn and gets VERY frustrating.
Smart move on looking out for your future. You ain't getting any younger.
If my hands hadn't been giving out on me I would have stayed in the field and missed a smart trick on getting more education. Now I'm in the office and loving it. Going to have to work out more and drop some lbs. and get back in shape, but come -20 below this winter I'm going to be snug as a bug in a rug in my office sipping coffee and drawing on my computer.
Good luck, and best wishes,
Cork in Chicago
I have been using AutoCad for about 15 years now. I started on AutoCad release 9 and am currently using Autocad 2005 and have worked on ever release in between. I have also tried out various other packages like Data Cad which is really in my opinion the only other "professional" package that is acceptable for construction drawings. Some may argue microstation is just as good, but I disagree. Maybe for engineering, but not for building construction. I've worked for three different architects, two civil engineers and one mechanical engineer, and have my degree in Landscape architecture. I've drawn everything from parks, to subdivisions, to large homes to hvac and sprinkler designs. I know AutoCad inside and out. That being said, there is nothing that AutoCad can't do. Movies like Shrek are even created using an Auto Cad platform. I would be nowhere with out my knowledge of Autocad. for the average homeowner and contractor who "does their own drawings" software like 3d home architect is more than enough and makes it very easy to create 3d drawings of a finished product, but it lacks the versatility of Autocad. You'll be very pleased with the software if the instructor can teach it to you properly. I'm a little worried that you may not get what you are looking for in 16 hours of training. The software and its applications are so vast that it would take altelast 3-4 times that to really get a grasp and feel comfortable using the program to produce quality working drawings. The other problem with the course that I see is that they will leave you on your own as far as obtaining the software which for a full version with a single license is well over $3500. Most people use AutoCad LT, but it lacks 3d capabilities. Anyway, I don't want to ramble on anymore, but I think you are on the right track with you interest in Autocad. The greatest benifit that I see with AutoCad over Programs like Cheif or Soft plan are AutoCads endless capabilities. I can generate floor plans, elevations, building sections, foundation plans, riser diagrams, HVAC layouts, kitchen and bath perspectives, and landscape layouts all on the same drawing. I can also do material take offs, calculate the best way to use a sheet of plywood with creating the least amount of waste, calculate the volume of mulch needed for a flower bed, do heat loss calculations for sizing an HVAC system etc.... Give the course a shot, and if you enjoy the software, look for further training. Please ask me any questions about the software as well. It's one subject I feel very comfortable offering advise on.
Edited 9/11/2006 3:44 pm ET by rnsykes
16 hours of education in ACAD would be a decent enough foundation--but likely not nearly specified enough for great residential work.
That being said, I still find that a computer will not give skills to the unskilled (else TB or PH or the like would make much better houses . . . )
Having ACAD skills translates into lots of things; the 'way' of organizing things is very similar on different platforms (it's the differences that cause hair-pulling, ask anyone trying to transition from Microstation to ACAD or vice versa).
However, my bias for residential work is still CA, mostly because it makes just about the right proportion of "selling" to "working" drawings. Of course, CA works best moving entire walls about, which is a little foreign to my drafting mind, which causes vexations when I want odd things like a plumbing wall or the like. So, it's different.
The real key for productivity with ACAD is in prep work. It's in having a good block library, a fully-developed Layer system in place (and using it), in having linetypes; text, & dimension styles all ready in a template/prototype drawing (that's an either/both, too). Mind you, I also have about 20MB of custom-designed AutoLisp funtions to go with all that, too--I can be very productive.