Hi,
I am soliciting input on design software for use on a PC. I see several packages advertised, but have no experience with any. I have extensive experience with AutoCad, but am not looking for a high end product. I am looking for a economical package that will help me lay out a basic design and floorplan that I can take to a professional architect for structural analysis and finish prints.
Thanks,
Tom Flaglor
Replies
Is Autocad light in your price range?
Kevin Halliburton
"I believe that architecture is a pragmatic art. To become art it must be built on a foundation of necessity." - I.M. Pei -
3dArchitect is very intuitive to use, read as easy learning curve, and easy on the pocketbook. It will not let you do any structural or construction elements or details, but for floor planning it's fine. Has 3D views that helps those that are spatially challanged. Whether that's enough for you I don't know.
Let's not confuse the issue with facts!
That's probably just right for what I need to do. I have AutoCAD 2000 now, and it's great for many things. It's just awfully complicated for the basic stuff I want to produce on this project.
Is 3DArchitect something I would purchase from Amazon.com, or is it proprietary software that I get only from the original source? What would you expect to pay?
Tom
3DArchitect is found in most of your 'Staples' type stores, I believe it runs about $40.00 for the Delux version. Your wall thickness choices are in even 2 inch increments, reflecting the standard 4 1/2" wall thickness not at all, so for precise fractional measurements it's not up to snuff. Snuff said it's fine for what it does. It can give line elevation or 3d representations of interiors, it will let you built most common roof shapes and get exterior elevations and perspectives. All perspectives are from eyeball height though the angle is infinitly selectable. You can really play with things like cabinet dimensions and view multi screens, ie. elevation and plan, and have changes made instantly in both views. I like it because I can quickly enter prospective clients dimensions, rough in cabinets and give 3d view print outs, they often seem impressed. Also use it to give plans to subs so we all know what we are talking about.Let's not confuse the issue with facts!
Will 3D Architect allow deck design?
Check out Punch home design
What version of 3d are you using? I have been a user for 5 or so years now and found that the program started going downhill after version 3.0. Hence, even though they (Broderbund) are up to version 5.0 (I believe), I have stuck with 3.0.
Version 3.0 is usually available on e-bay for around $10.00 - had to buy one when mine didn't get returned after a system crash.
Regards,
Eric S.
I believe I have version 4.0. Has worked fine, just now that we have upgraded to Windows XP I seem to have lost access to the print properties window when I go to print. Haven't had much time to try and sort this out yet but i'ts limiting my printing options. As to the deck question, it doesn't do them.Let's not confuse the issue with facts!
If you already know Autocad, and have it on your pc, that yould be a good choice. I use Autocad LT and it doe s a nice job. Much discussion here about the Autocad learning curve, and you would probably agree, but you'rer past that. There are several 3d programs available...again much discussion here...a lot depends on your price range and what you want to produce. it sounds like you just want clean drawings to take to an archy...then Autocad or LT would probably be best for you.
Do it right, or do it twice.
Tom since you made mention that you already have "extensive experience with AutoCad" you might find 3d Home Architect really thin and lacking. Also I think that puts points on the scoreboard for Kevin's recommendation of Autocad Lite however let me also throw another one out there for you to consider too, Vectorworks. While it's not without it own learning curve it certainly a lot easier to learn that the AutoCAD family of products so if you understand AutoCAD you would probably find it very easy to pickup and learn. It also costs a good bit more than the $40 3d Home Architect but it's a real CAD program. There is also a version of it called Vectorworks Architect 10 in which it comes with a library of architectural objects and is set up for "architectural" use as opposed to some of the other disciplines it can be used for. It's also cross platform both Windows and Mac.
In fact something else that came to mind last week while I was in NYC attending macworld was that while AutoCad is the defacto standard in the architectural industry holding something like 85% of the market in the theatrical design industry (which I where I came from) Vectorwork is the big dominant player. Part of that is due to a lot of third party lighting design stuff written for Vectorworks as well as there own product Vectorworks Spotlight 10 which I think is an awesome kool tool.
That doens't necessarily mean that AutoCAD is any good for theatre design and Vectorworks isn't as good as AutoCAD for architects because I know theatre desginers that use AutoCAD and architects using Vectorworks. I just thought that was an interesting factoid regarding market share and distribution.
There are a bunch of other CAD tools too that noone has menetioned yet and I just not thinking about right this second so I wouldn't consider this discussion played out at all. You might want to search throught this website if you don't want to wait any longer for the users of other products to chime in.
View Image
ParadigmProjects.com | Paradigm-360.com | Mac4Construction.com
Good recomendation on the Vectorworks Jerrald. Several directions you can go with that one depending on your budget. Two others worth considering are Arch-T and Intellicad.
If I decide to start doing design work on my own at any point in the future my first choice will be Autodesk Architectural Desktop but it's not for the casual user.Kevin Halliburton
"I believe that architecture is a pragmatic art. To become art it must be built on a foundation of necessity." - I.M. Pei -
Ya know Kevin if I really had my druthers and had gobs of money lying around ($3,950 ) I would love to get ArchiCAD (a great review and the Graphisoft.com website ). Have you ever seen that in use? I'll tell you I see AutoCAD often enough and once upon a time knew it well enough to use it but having also played around with ArchiCAD I don't understand why all the architects out there aren't tossing their PCs and AutoCad and switching to Macs with ArchiCAD.
I don't do much CAD anymore and I'm thinking about outsourcing or hiring someone else to do what we need to do so I'm very happy with VectorWorks but ArchiCAD is a dream to use. While that review says "Expensive and relatively difficult to master, ArchiCAD is just not designed for the hobbyist. " I'm thinking difficult to master compared to what? Certainly not compared to AutoCad. I don't know I just thought and think that AutoCad had a "mountain of learnin' curveS" to deal with. From what I saw with ArchiCAD ( and I have seen ArchiCAD 8 in action yet) there was a lot of stuff to learn as in features but nothing was difficult. What it really blew me away with was in how elegantly it handled changes and revisions. You should check it out sometime if you ever come across someone on a Mac who's using it.
View Image
ParadigmProjects.com | Paradigm-360.com | Mac4Construction.com
I've never seen Archicad in action but I know that it is the software of choice for architecture firms using Macs. For me, the switch to Mac is just way too big of a leap. Right, wrong or indifferent - I live in a Windows world.Kevin Halliburton
"I believe that architecture is a pragmatic art. To become art it must be built on a foundation of necessity." - I.M. Pei -
Just an FYI regarding ArchiCAD. It is available on both Windows and Mac. In fact, I believe that its Windows user base is now larger than the Mac.
I use it in my architectural practice. It's definitely capable of amazing things, but to use it fully, is fairly demanding. It's relatively easy to use in a basic way, though.
Richard
Well, what do ya know? Learn something new every day. Thanks for the info Richard. I'll look into it.Kevin Halliburton
"I believe that architecture is a pragmatic art. To become art it must be built on a foundation of necessity." - I.M. Pei -
Kevin -
Since Ketiv sold Arch-T some years ago I haven't upgraded or followed its development. Back then, Arch-T was an ARX application that ran inside AutoCAD. Has it been developed into a standalone product in its own right?
...........
Dennis in Bellevue WA
[email protected]
You know, you're right - it's still an ARX application running inside Autocad. Architectural Desktop would be a much better choice in that price range.
However, Arch-T will also work with Intellicad which would be a much more affordable option than combining it with Autocad.
Kevin Halliburton
"I believe that architecture is a pragmatic art. To become art it must be built on a foundation of necessity." - I.M. Pei -
Edited 7/24/2003 9:46:39 AM ET by Wrecked Angle
Kevin -
Just by way of explanation ... I'm an architect but I don't practice "design" rather I do construction detailing primarily for commercial concrete subcontractors here in the Seattle area. I work strictly in 3D since most of my clients call me when they can't figure out what's supposed to be done (grin).
That said, I've tried using Revit after Autodesk purchased that technology and still found it woefully lacking to do the kinds of things I'm frequently asked to do. The first thing I tried to create was a concrete and wood stud wall for something like you'd see in a daylight basement with high window sills above grade, etc. There was no way to create a wall that was a composite between one construction assembly and another that changed material at mid ht. or whatever.
In all fairness, this was a coupla years ago and there may have been improvements or enhancements that allow much more complex wall assemblies. But from what I'd seen up to that point, there has been nothing produced thus far that can achieve what brute force solids modeling can do once you've tamed that beast.
I'm semi retired now and don't plan on any upgrades beyond my 2002 AutoCAD nor the add-on tools I currently use but I'm still interested in the development of application specific technology so I'm curious where its gone since I last paid any attention.
Does Eagle Point still publish Arch-T?
...........
Dennis in Bellevue WA
[email protected]
If I remember correctly, the rights to Arch T are owned by by the IntelliCAD consortium http://www.intellicad.org/ and I believe Automated Drafting Systems currently is the only distributor in the U.S. http://www.autodsys.com/
Arch T is on my to get list. It still runs inside AutoCAD and now IntelliCAD (which I use). Automated Drafting Systems http://www.autodsys.com took over development and distribution of Arch T last November. Versions for AutoCAD 2004 and IntelliCAD 4 are in the works. Here's a review of the IntelliCAD version http://www.cadinfo.net/reviews/archt.htm
Be sure and check out ProDeskTopExpress. The first 1M dirtibutions have free registration of downloads. It is a 34M freeby.
It's big brother is ProDesktop and is a "three dimensional (3D) design software" and it (ProDesktop) has quite a Web community.
They are CADs, so you will have to "teach" it to just do floor plans, etc.
The learning curve (PDTX) is really shallow, but I haven't reinstalled on this box yet and it has been many sleepless days since I last played with it, so I can't get too specific, Sorry.
SamT
"Law reflects, but in no sense determines the moral worth of a society.... The better the society, the less law there will be. In Heaven, there will be no law, and the lion will lie down with the lamb.... The worse the society, the more law there will be. In Hell, there will be nothing but law, and due process will be meticulously observed."
Grant Gilmore, The Ages of American Law (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1977), pp. 110-111.
From 32866.117
3D Home Architect is theconsumer version of Chief Architect. Try Chiefarchitect.com Easy learning curve, very powerful. Been using it for years. Leigh
"3D Home Architect is theconsumer version of Chief Architect."
It WAS!
Starting with version 5 they use a whole different code base. It is no long compatible with with Chief Architect or even it's earlier versions.
Chief Architect is now putting out a "home version" for about $500.
Get 3D Architect version 3 for about $15 at different places. It's easy to learn and there's a whole topic,help, thread at http://www.countryplans.com . I used it for years and designed a strip buildout for a daycare with it. I use ChiefArchitect now for houses plans. I got a good deal. A client bought the program and I designed a house for him from his dreamhouse notes. I kept the program and he got plans to build with.We are waiting for mortgage appproval now.
"I am not young enough to know everything."
- Oscar Wilde (1854-1900)
Edited 7/23/2003 1:12:59 AM ET by Bill
I recently (4-5 mos) bought the Chief Architect Home Edition 5.0 for about $500 and I would hesitate to recommend it. I would probably recommend that you save your pennies and get the full version (9?) or SoftPlan for the same (higher) price if you need/want 3d, or buy AutoCad LT for $500. I am a good Autocad user, but I find Chief frustrating to work with. I was able to draw an existing house to show proposed changes, but there are several glitches in the rendering because the program expected to see a standard detail, and I can't modify it to show the speific conditions. And I'm not talking about little details...getting two different pitch roofs to intersect is dang near impossible. Much of the help built into the program is designed for the full version, so either does nbot apply or the steps are different. I also emailed a copy of my file and tried to get some of the more experienced users to massage my drawing to correct errors, but it is not compatible with the full version. I guess it's like having a mediocre framing nailer that only accepts one particular brand of nails...seemed like a bargain at the time, but not special enough to warrant the trouble.
Do it right, or do it twice.
Tom -
See if the link to http://www.cadopia.com is still valid. There you can download a copy of IntelliCAD, an AutoCAD clone of sorts that was produced by the Open Source Consortium. The Command: line interface uses practically the same command lines and sub menu options. The software will run for (last time I looked) 1000 times and is fully functional.
I mention this since you said something about taking your drawings to an architect for final drawing production. IntelliCAD files are fully compatible with AutoCAD meaning that you can provide the architect with your electronic versions and conceivably save money by not having to have him/her re-draft them. Same would be true of Acad LT as well, of course, only IntelliCAD is essentially a *free* program.
Dennis in Bellevue WA
[email protected]
You have to pay for Intellicad now; not gobs of money, but some. Be careful about saying "fully compatible" with Autocad; you can run into problems with the same drawing opening differently on different computers with the same version of Acad, and definitely between versions. Acad 2004 is supposed to be quite different from previous versions (not installed on my computer yet, but that's what the literature says), and Autocad is famous for changing it's DWG format to screw up the other CAD companies that are trying to make their files compatible with Acad.....as soon as the consortium companies reverse engineer DWG, Autocad changes it.
That said, Intellicad is a good program; it's probably what I would move to if I didn't have access to Autocad (I'm not doing architectural work though).cabinetmaker/college woodworking instructor. Cape Breton, N.S
Adrian -
Thanks for the update on IntelliCAD. The evaluation version is, I see, still downloadable for no more than registration on their site. I didn't bother to download it but I assume the same conditions apply as with previous downloadable eval versions - fully functional for a specified number of uses or so.
I posted an article (in another thread you may have already responed to) about cabinet design/detailing software. I found only one article here in this forum on the subject that you had posted. Would you mind if I contacted you by email to discuss this subject as it's off topic here.
...........
Dennis in Bellevue WA
[email protected]
Just wanted to add my vote for Vectorworks.
I use vesion 8.5 (can't justify the upgrade for occasional use).
They have a great discussion group mailing list.
I use it for designing cabinets, remodels, new construction...
You can "build" things with precisely dimensioned pieces.
3D is a strong suit of VW, too.
I started with Vectorworks 6, which I bought on Ebay a couple years ago. (Made sure it was unregistered). Then upgraded to 8.5. But I am sure that an older version could be of more value than some less complex CAD apps. As you work with it, you will likely want to do more complex things, VW can accomodate lots of complexity, yet it is easy to use for simple drawings.
P
Thanks to all of you for the helpful posts. As usual, I got mad and just started drawing, using Autocad 2000. I already had it installed. I did a basic front elevation drawing, then transferred to a footprint, and developed a floor plan. I used single-line representations of the walls while my wife and I argued around about room sizes and locations, and am now going back and adding the details to scale. I am a crude AutoCAD user, but I have had good success with it.
If I complete the floor plans and exterior details this way, is there any point to going to a true Architectural program? Or would you guys think that this is enough good information to take to a real architect for expert structural design and detail analysis?
Does anyone want to recommend an architect who would be willing and capable of developing working drawings from what I have described? I am in East Tennessee, although that probably doesn't matter. What would others expect to pay for such a service? I do not require eleborately detailed prints. House is approx. 3200 sf, cottage/shingle style, 2 story.
Thanks again,
Tom Flaglor
I can't think of any reason you would need a design package more powerful than Autocad to do preliminary design layouts of the nature you describe. As to whether your architect will need more info, they definitely will but it will not be in the form of drawings.
What you have in the way of drawings should be plenty. The most important information you can take to an architect are things like what your budget is, how you use each space in the home, what you want each space to "feel" like, direction of key views on your site, etc.. The collection of that information is called programing. A qualified architect will know just the right questions to ask to arrive at a clear understanding of your design requirements.
The drawing will be a useful tool but only after all of the other questions have been answered. I would place a lot more emphases on gathering programing type data than putting together a set of working drawings if you plan to hire an architect.Kevin Halliburton
"I believe that architecture is a pragmatic art. To become art it must be built on a foundation of necessity." - I.M. Pei -
>....The most important information you can take to an architect are things like what your budget is, how you use each space in the home, what you want each space to "feel" like, direction of key views on your site, etc.. The collection ofthat information is called programing. A qualified architect will know just the right questions to ask to arrive at a clear understanding of your design requirements.
I think you're absolutely right, Kevin. Although I think it's fair to submit clippings and sketches of what one would like the space to be, spatial arrangement and relationships and so forth. If a client were to come to me with a full fledged set of drawings, floor plans elevations and what not, I think my response would be to have them hire an engineer to answer the structural questions and a good builder to handle the permit and construction issues. This sort of thing leads to a lot of frustration on the part of the designer in all too many cases should code issues dictate changes the owner isn't willing to accept.
That sort of thing.
...........
Dennis in Bellevue WA
[email protected]
You guys bring up a good point to me. I, in fact, do know relatively exactly what I want. I want to hire someone to make structural drawings of what I bring to them. In my previous engineering career, I'd call them working drawings. While I certainly would value any helpful input, I don't need "architectural" help.
In my area, the "architect" will provide both design work, if needed, and structural drawings. In the case of this project, I mostly need structural drawings. Is this a reasonable request? When building my current home, I took a rough design and floor plan to a local "architect", who drew the structural details that I turned over to subs. Unfortunately, this guy is no longer around. And, the new house design is more complex.
Tom
It's feasable but may be somewhat hard to find. You are primarily looking for a draftsman, not an architect. but doing structural plans without doing design work is like tying one hand behind my back.
You must have an inkling of an idea that all the systems in a house are woven together and changing any one of them can change several others. Asking for structural only is an insult to a designer. Maybe someone with more of an engineering backgrround is what you are looking for. It's really hard for a good man to turn off the creativity and quit solving problems.
I can't count the number of times that I had a client who knew exactly what they wanted, but it was structurally or dimensionally impossible to build that way.
Who wins? The pencil or the erasure? .
Excellence is its own reward!
Tom -
Around here if there is any kind of engineering issue of any complexity, the/an architect usually hands it off to an engineer anyway. In fact, I did a set of drawings for a neighbor who merely wanted to add on to the front of his house. The foundation wall was over 4' high and the building department required an engineer's calcs and stamped details even over my architectural stamp. So I guess it depends on your jurisdiction as to what's required and the degree of engineering expertise available within the architectural community in your area.
All that said, I think you'd be better served to go directly to a structural engineer. He/She won't have any ego to introduce into the design thus saving you any conflicts (grin). It is, after all, your money, your house. In my area, you don't need an architect's stamp to get a building permit if you draw the plans yourself. But there *are* things like roof trusses, shear calcs, load tracing, foundation wall design and so forth for which the building department will require engineers' calcs and sketches. You'll probably save some money in doing so.
...........
Dennis in Bellevue WA
[email protected]
edit - Forgot to mention - you probably know this but if not, just drop in to your local building jurisdiction/building department and pick up a copy of plan submittal requirements for residential construction. From the sounds of it, you have what it takes to prepare most all the drawings anyway.
Edited 7/25/2003 12:23:47 AM ET by DENNIS
Piffin, Dennis,
Thanks for the input. I am certainly not of the skill or ego to assume that my basic design doesn't need fine tuning. I am just trying to reach some compromise.
Fortunately, (or unfortunately, depending on whom you ask), my rural location requires no approvals whatsoever for building design. There are no restrictions. If I were confident enough, I could just tear into the project without anyone's approval. I am wanting to find a professional person who can take my design and produce a set of drawings that I can build a quality house from. And if I have screwed up the design in a manner that makes it unreasonable to construct, or unpleasant to live in, I want to know that up front.
This is an interesting forum because the folks involved are committed enough to the proper application of their skills and trades to question intent and quality. I suspect that most of you are from areas of the country that force this as an absolute necessity to maintain your businesses. You guys would be amazed what things go on out here in the sticks. I read with fascination the difficulties that many contractors and designers have with the complicated and restrictive local codes. I wish we had some basic restrictions in my part of the country. It would be better for all involved. As it is, anyone with a truck and a hammer can call himself a professional contractor, or plumber, or whatever. The few quality subs are all tied up with the few quality general contractors. And an individual like me has a hard time picking through the rest of the scraps.
Tom
Hi,
I am a builder, and I guess you are in the right track. I like when Customers make their own design. However, IMHO, you still need the professional "touch" to convert your plans in blueprints. You need someone to check if room dimensions, stairs, ceiling heights are meeting the codes, check the roofs, etc.
I use the services of Punchhelpers (http://www.punchhelpers.com/), they will draw the plans, verify codes, show all the project in 3D, and the best, their fees are very low.
Good luck!
Whitte
Hi Tom -
I guess I made a few erroneous assumptions, then. On the one hand I got the impression that you had essentially done the space planning, materials choices and so forth and merely needed someone to document all this into a set of contract drawings. This, your latest comment, suggests that perhaps you do indeed want to have some design input. Which is, of course, OK - I was just confusing the issue.
With all that in mind, I suspect it wouldn't matter whether you took a pile of hand sketches or finished electronic files to a design professional for input into your project. Unless your CAD skills are fairly well honed to the point where you feel you can create an accurate electronic model/drawing of your plans, he/she - the design professional will probably be in the position of having to re-draft everything from scratch anyway. Thus the compatibility issue isn't relative to the discussion. But, since you already have AutoCAD and are at least seemingly proficient in using it, why subject yourself to the heartache of learning something new for this project?
How's that for being non-commital? (grin)
Best of luck with your project, Tom. I, too, live in an area where most folks build things without much attention to permits and such. After having gone through the permit process of my woodworking shop and addition to the house we're remodeling, I can understand why. The county building department is the pits to deal with. Where they find these incompetent boobs to set up there little fiefdoms is beyond me!!
...........
Dennis in Bellevue WA
[email protected]
It maybe out of your price range for doing just one house, but Cadsoft (cadsoft.com) puts out a couple of products which are 3d arch overlays for autocad. One, BUILD!, even has autocad with in it's program. You can use all your acad knowledge and use either the Cadsoft interface or switch to classic acad and maintain the parametric 3d design capbilities.
Tomf
i started on 3d home architect and found it very useful for floor plans and opening placements and even room sizes by throwing in furniture. it is dead easy to learn. I got into more complete design work and bought softplan. it is a great program for what i do, mostly new design build but it weren't cheap.
regards
Ian