SketchUP like modelling capability

[mike m oz]

VW is part of the way there - but the capability and ease of use needs to be substantially improved.

Like it or not SketchUP has changed the architectural 3D modelling paradigm forever, and VW needs to adapt to this by providing a similar capability.

Even Autodesk have recognised this and is planning to include SketchUP like capability in the near future.

Coming Sooner, or Later. On the horizon for some future version of AutoCAD is mass modeling functionality for conceptual design, similar to that found in SketchUp. Users can draw simple 2D lines and extrude into 3D shapes, then add colors and apply styles such as overhanging lines. It would also be possible to perform sun and shadow studies.

Cadalyst Dec 6 2005 http://www.cadalyst.com/cadalyst/article/articleDetail.jsp?id=256426

This capability needs to come quickly too - even 2 years down the track will be too late. The horse will have well and truly bolted by then. Don't miss the opportunity

[Jeffrey W Ouellette]

I wholeheartedly disagree. IMHO.

SketchUp is a completely different program from the major AEC packages with BIM functionality like VW, ArchiCAD, MicroStation, AllPlan and AutoDesk/Revit.

It is what it says it is... a 3D 'sketching' program. No more. Because of this, it appears very powerful in the way it delineates 3D forms and provides methods for the creation and manipulation of these rudimentary forms. It does this very effectively. It does it faster and with seemingly more ease than anyone else, because that's all it does. Its code is focused on a narrower scope than most CADD programs. Its code requires far less computing overhead. That's not a bad thing.

But, really look at the interface. What does it do beyond the rudimentary 3D form creation and rendering capabilities? Can you produce construction documents from it? Do you have interactive database capabilities for producing take-offs, schedules or reports? Is there Radiosity rendering? Workgroup/X-ref functionality for large projects?

SketchUp is a great tool to bring ideas quickly to form and present them in various sexy ways. I like how it produces some very interesting imagery quickly in the hands of an experienced user. Clients like the end results, too.

VW can also get the sexy output, granted with a bit more work and user manipulation. But it is a full featured BIM tool. It is a bigger program with code cover a much broader scope of issues. As a result, the code requires more computing overhead. The walls are objects, not mere skins like they are in SketchUp. Window and Door parametric objects have further evolved into representing real world products. Objects have database fields (records) that can be collected and regurgitated into schedules and reports. You can create framing plans and models with a couple more clicks.

Now, SketchUp offers itself as an interoperable piece of a user's toolbox of CADD resources. It now offers plug-ins for AutoDesk, VW and ArchiCAD. @Last Software recognizes that it is not producing an alternative to a true CADD program, but that it is a very powerful modeling tool that has the ability to dovetail into exsiting CADD/BIM solutions that have greater functionality.

Your AutoCAD quote is another example of AutoDesk desperately scrambling to meet the apparent needs of its shrinking user base, trying to make up for all the other shortcomings of the program. I doubt they will be very successful very soon in providing the same functionality as SketchUp. And at what price?

To get the same functionality as VW Architect w/ RW, you must pay US$4695 for AutoCAD Architectural Desktop and another US$1995 for VIZ. A total of US$6690. One seat. No SketchUp. For US$1650 you can get VW Architect w/RenderWorks. For another US$495 you can get SketchUp (plug-in for VW is FREE). A total of US$2145. You can buy THREE seats of this configuration for what you would pay for one seat of AutoDesk products with less functionality (NO SketchUp).

I like VW as it is (v12) and where its going, knowing how far it has come (I started in MiniCAD 5, 2D only!). Instead of pandering to the hip new craze, let SketchUp be SketchUp and let VW focus on being the most powerful, economical tool with the greatest ease of use of all the full-fledged CADD/BIM solutions out there. You want SketchUp, buy it, use it. Dovetail it into VW and your workflow. But don't neglect the power already there in VW and its advantages over a less robust modeling program.

[matto]

While improvements to modelling would certainly be welcome, not sure borrowing from Sketch up is the best tact, VW has a way of working and i think it would be better to see that expanded, as it is well suited to package as a whole.

Sketch up is certainly a great fun tool, and well used in our office, the new plug in is a great start but any improvements getting the two to talk is all so a good move.

Not sure the article is a great link, it would seem they talked about allot of new features that may or may not see the light of day in AutoCAD but already exist elsewhere. Like a non-realistic renderer that sound some what similar to sketch render in VW or Parissi.

It seems AutoDesk want to create the bloated solution that does everything. Personally I'd rather see a kit of tools that work well together.

[mike m oz]

A clarification - I am not looking for full on SU functionality. More the capability to explore 3D forms and do massing studies more easily within VW.

VW is part of the way there already. The Architectural Massing Example and Creating Unconventional 3D Forms movies show this. This capability needs to be enhanced though so that such studies can be done in VW rather than in SketchUP.

I have to say though that the basic rendering quality, shadow casting and on the fly section generation capabilities of SketchUP would be a nice addition too.

[mike m oz]

The details of AutoCAD 2007 are beginning to filter out and it appears that adding SketchUP like modelling capability was definetly a big priority for AutoDesk.

There is a fairly detailed discussion on the addition of SketchUP like capability at this PushPullBar forum thread: http://www.pushpullbar.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2349&page=1&pp=10

[ 03-05-2006, 11:25 AM: Message edited by: mike m oz ]

[jan15]

I would guess that, as with the features Autocad copied from Vectorworks, the conceptual modeller will be a pale shadow of the original, nothing that would tempt any Sketchup users to switch, but just something to convince Autocad-only users that they've got it all.

[msclark]

I think the point here is that much of the 3d functionality of Vectorworks is lost because of it's horribly slow open GL rendering and horribly unintuitive 3d navigation while in perspective. You should be able to spin the model around in a perspective view with the flyover tool and the rendering should be practically instant as it is with sketchup. If this was the case, I would have to rely on sketchup less as a presentation and design feedback tool and spend more energy in vectorworks making a tight building model. For me this is Vectorwork's biggest drawback - the 3d viewing is just so weak.

[rdrines]

As a long time VW owner and now a SketchUp user, I find the paradigm that SketchUp provides to be very intuitive. I now exclusively create all my components and many models in SketchUp before bringing the output into VW-12. For those not familiar with SketchUp, if you want something taller, pull it up. Want it shorter, push it down. Want it wider, pull it out. Want it thinner, push it in. It is those intuitive working methods that makes 3D work so much faster, and in most cases requires less edits, because the drawing environment is so supportive of how people see, view, and handle 3D objects.

Another area I especially like about SU is the ability to work in a 3D environment where surfaces are easily seen, removed or X-rayed while items are being shaped. In that shaping environment surfaces can be shaded, removed, monochrome, textured, or colored with a simple button click all while the vector drawing and render mode is active. This visual environment provides so many helpful clues that 3D work becomes fun because the work gets done so easily and fast.

From a new planning approach, if a user wants to create a building on a site where trees or obstacles can not be adjusted, create the plot, adjust the elevations using the SU?s Sandbox tools, place and size the obstacles where they are positioned and your ready to see how the building will see and be viewed from the surrounding area. SU also makes it easy to understand how the model?s layout will be affected by the Sun?s position for any date or time of any year.

SketchUp isn't a final drawing package and maybe that is good, but with VW so good at creating CDs, the marriage of the two programs has been a tremendous improvement to getting stuff done in much less time than anything comparable I've done in VW alone. Where the SU-VW marriage falls apart is in the transition between the two programs. Anything created in SU, needs to be tweaked for color, texture and layer when it is brought into VW, and sometimes that clean up takes a lot of time. When NNA created a SU-Plug-In, it seemed like maybe the colors and textures would survive the VW migration better, but in fact DWG/DXF works better than the plug-in right now.

I think what this wish list item means is that if VW had a more intuitive and consistent approach across it toolbox, then 3D work would be a lot easier than it is right now. All too often the approach one VW tool takes is different than how a different tool is applied to an object. In the early days, this was acceptable for a while, but with SU being such an intuitive creation tool, it is time for VW to make its tools more intuitive, and there are hints in VW-12 that just might be the direction VW is heading.

[mike m oz]

The more I see and experience of SketchUP the more I like its intuitiveness. It is quick, easy and simple. Being more intuitive is something that VW needs.

[jan15]

...Being more intuitive is something that VW needs.

Ironic, isn't it? Ten years ago, Minicad/VectorWorks owned that word. It would have been hard to imagine anything more intuitive.

[mike m oz]

I agree jan15. Ten years ago MiniCAD was well ahead of the pack on intuitiveness. This edge has been lost as the alternatives have improved their programs, and the relative newcomer SketchUP is now the most intuitivene program around.

[mike m oz]

AECbytes recognises the imperative (March 2007 viewpoint)

Coming close to 18 months after its last release, the new SketchUp 6 is particularly significant as it is the first release of SketchUp since its acquisition by Google. In that time, Google has already released a free version of SketchUp, which has boosted its popularity even further. While Google did this primarily to encourage more users to develop models for its Google Earth application, it also benefits the AEC industry by putting a quick and easy-to-use 3D modeling tool in the hands of any aspiring designer, student, or practicing architect for free. This should help to nurture a whole new generation of architects that will start working on design ideas by modeling rather than drawing. BIM is then only one step further, putting an end, once and for all, to the "dumb CAD drawings" era. The free availability of SketchUp must, no doubt, be causing angst to some AEC vendors as it will hasten the demise of their CAD applications; yet ironically, the 3D mindset it nurtures will benefit some of those very vendors by enabling the entire industry to transition to their BIM solutions more easily.

http://www.aecbytes.com/

[islandmon]

putting an end, once and for all, to the "dumb CAD drawings" era.

How utterly ludicrous ... CAD = ComputerAidedDesign ... CAD = programming...

the algorithms required to generate complex geometric relations are not ' dumb' ...

certainly harvesting out the information requires care & sophistication ...

but it's all there in the application database none the less.

How ' the 3d mindset' makes BIM solutions easier begs the question, "Is more 'dumb CAD' actually better or worser ? "

[Kaare Baekgaard]

Im blown away by the Photo Match capability of SketchUp. I have done a lot of photo manipulation in VW - it takes forever and it is not at all accurate. I acknowledge, that ScetchUp is a completely different package, but there are a lot of overlapping areas, where the intuitive approach of SketchUp would suit VW users just fine. How to deal with textures is one example. VW is not exactly drag n' drop simplicity when it comes to visualization.