Are there any real CDs out there??

[danielf]

To all here in the community:

Are there any examples of a full set of real CDs produced with Vectorworks available on-line? I've seen what's available on the main Vectorworks site, but I must say what I?ve seen there is heavy on the illustration graphics and fall very short of actually demonstrating real CD documentation. I can only image the ink cost for printing what I saw there!!

This leads someone like myself, who is exploring the option of moving into a BIM application, to wonder if model based CD drawings are a strain to produce with a BIM approach to design / documentation. After all clear, precise, well organized documentation at every scale is the end game in term of a CAD process.

I'm working through the free tutorials with a trial version of VWA 2009 and I like how the program feels, but I don't imagine in 30 days of trial time I will be able to explore the program in regards to real world/real time/ real design & documentation requirements.

Thanks for any tips on where to find high quality CD drawings to look through.

daniel

[mike m oz]

There used to be a set of Terry Ackerman's drawings at Vectordepot but they are no longer there. You can however see a few of Terry's details in the Marketplace section. (VM-001 to VEM-005).

[mar schrammeyer]

Check out panthony (Toulouse)

http://techboard.nemetschek.net/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=95308&Searchpage=1&Main=20380&Words=toulouse&Search=true#Post95308

[danielf]

Thanks guys, i'll chase down those leads!! :-)

[danielf]

Mar -- I checked out the Toulouse elevation...not sure thats what i had in mind when i said i was looking for a full finished set of CDs. Making pretty pictures and making technical drawings for permit sets are two different things. And i only wonder how much my printing cost will rise if I use this 'pretty picture' approach to CD docs with all the fills and gradients is see in all the VW exmaples?? Is that really how folks produce permit/construction/bid sets who use VW??

Is this really the methodology VW is designed for? How about normal black line drawings which are clear and consise for all aspects of any normal set of CDs?? daniel

[CipesDesign]

danielf, One of the most powerful things about VW's is that you can produce whatever graphic "feel" you're after (or that is used as a "standard" in your office or your practice). Yes you can do very straight forward black line drawings. Or you can do very nice shadings, colorings, texturings, etc. All of which can be (mostly) produced from a 3d Model (call it BIM if you want to). When I say mostly I mean that there are always certain things that you'll need to clean up, enhance, or just plain draw, even if you have done a very thorough job of modeling. I have attached three sheets from a fairly recent CD set to give you an idea of what is possible. There is a PLAN sheet, a SECTION sheet and an ELEVATION sheet. All of the Title Blocks have been removed for client privacy, etc. These are (obviously) in my graphic and presentation style, but VW's is very versatile and you will almost certainly be able to produce whatever style you desire.

As far as printing costs go, although I have no way of doing an actual cost comparison, my feeling is that any B & W page will cost very close to any other B & W page to produce. Obviously within reason (ie: if the page is literally full of dark shapes it will obviously use more ink).

Anyhow, why not try a "dummy" set (like for a little casita or a garage) just to see if you can achieve what you're looking for?

Regards...

[mar schrammeyer]

here is a small file just a change of use of a garage, tried other files but they are all to big.

[danielf]

Peter -- Thank you so much for generously posting some of your drawings...I really appreciate it!! They are nice drawings. In my office I use a HP Design Jet 430 plotter for ArchD size sheets or a Laser Printer for 11x17 or smaller prints, both of which provides for shades of grey but no color -- so all the color tones I've seen in all the examples of VW drawings seem to me to be mostly useful for on-screen display purposes. Do you make plots with color?? Or do the colors render in shades of grey for B/W plots & prints?

I love the notion of VWs graphic flexibility as there is a full range of expression that is needed through out the design & documentation process. And I like the notion of having the ability to use color/tone effectively to enhance the legibility of CD docs for the primary purpose of assisting the GC in understanding the design. After all that is the priority for me when generating technical docs?clarity in communication to the builder.

At the moment I?ve worked through the VWF tutorial and most of the VWA tutorial and am still struggling with holding together in my mind the paradigm & methodology that is VW...especially when it comes to Class vs. Layer visibility settings and overrides and in conjunction with Sheet & Design Viewports. Whew, flexibility is expensive in terms of brain cells!!!

My simple mind is comfortable with the AutoCAD Modelspace + Paperspace relationship with Layer associated line type, line weight, screen color and visibility or even printability. In AutoCAD the 3D model [or the 2D drawings representing all the views of the model] is a cohesive whole living in model space where the Z axis functions. Paperspace is simply a place to open windows into that world with viewports which are scaled as needed and laid out on the sheet in any arraignment that is needed with as many scales as needed per viewport and then noted & dimensioned to create the CDs. AutoCAD Modelspace is not a world subdivided like VW Design Layer space containers are, except that when it?s useful to place parts of a model [or 2D drawings] on separate layers for view control of parts of the model or parts of the 2D drawings for print control or work flow proposes. This is the same for Paperspace, . I?m sure that?s part and parcel what Layers are designed for in VW, but for some reasons it?s not translating in my brain just yet.

The word Class seems to mean much more then Line type, weight, visibility & fills when joined with Sheet & Design Layer & Viewports [sheet or Design].

So not having that well in hand I don?t think I?m quite ready to design anything in VW as I don?t feel I have enough grasp or control on how to operate the ship as it were!!

Overall as I explore VW my number one criteria for evaluating its value for me is whether or not VW has the ability to increase my productivity/efficiency with out diminishing the quality of what I already do with my current AutoCAD + SketchUp work flow?.which is actually a very easy and simple process; and one where both software do exactly what I want them to do with no surprises, what I draw is precisely what I see, so I don?t have to develop work-arounds or software skills that are needed to overcome hiccups in the programs.

BUT they lack automated Scheduling, and any type of simple design changes can cause global reworking of drawings?.yuck?. which is why the BIM idea is so seductive to me.

So here I am making an honest effort to evaluate VW. I did the same with Revit but found it unnatural and graphically unappealing, though I like the interface of 2010 and its structure is actually quite simple and requires little effort to understand how sheets & View & levels are generated and managed. But the ?sketch? approach to 3D modeling & the Massing Space just didn?t feel right to me, or the notion of detailing in discrete spots as if that?s a best way to work seemed to detached from the model where distant reference points are often needed to work through a detail with confidence. Of course I hardly know the program so these may be none issues but it seemed like a big walk to get there so it sort of turned me off.

Whew?okay I?ll let your ?ear? rest as I?ve said enough. Thanks for your input and offerings!! daniel

www.danielfactor.com [you can see the type of work i do there]

Edited July 6, 2009 by danielf

[danielf]

thanks Mar...i'll check it out and get back to you.

[brudgers]

Realistically, there's a big learning curve whenever you switch CAD software.

Regardless of what you switch from or to, it's going to take quite a bit of time to get your workflow worked out.

Vectorworks is no different, and you should not expect it to be.

There are areas where Vectorworks excels and areas where it doesn't, as is the case with sketchup, Revit, or AutoCad.

[danielf]

Mar -- thank you so much for sending what you have...i've just opened it up and took a quick look at all the drawings....this should be a big help for me in regards to understanding how to structure a file, create a set of complimentary drawings, and how to work through the SLV, DLV and hopefully classes and layer structure. big help, much appreciated!! Now I must go and try to forensically deconstruct the file and learn what i can. Thanks agian!! :-) daniel

[danielf]

Oh, yes brudgers, i agree, and i will sip the 'kool aid' with proper expectations....no doubt the big gulping is most certainly a way a ways. BTW in your opinion where does VW excel and where does is faint relative to the other programs you noted? And likewise where are the others stong and weak...and expert well informed opinion is always welcomed.

Edited July 6, 2009 by danielf

[brudgers]

Oh, yes brudgers, i agree, and i will sip the 'kool aid' with proper expectations....no doubt the big gulping is most certainly a way a ways. BTW in your opinion where does VW excel and where does is faint relative to the other programs you noted? And likewise where are the others stong and weak...and expert well informed opinion is always welcomed.

Whatever expertise I have, if any, would be related to the process of switching workflows to adapt to new software. I've done three of them over the past twenty years: From using Acad to using ADT, from using ADT like Acad with features to using ADT like ADT, and finally from ADT to Vectorworks...which I'm still doing.

Where vectorworks is particularly strong is:

1. graphic presentation. It's easier to produce better looking drawings.

2. 2d design processes. Filled objects just have more integrety in representing what they are supposed to represent.

3. PDF support.

4. Wide range of modules out of the box.

5. Price.

It's weaknesses are:

1. Mac support and therefore, no Object Linking and Embedding and OBDC. Forget about displaying a live copy of another document in Vectorworks.

2. Bugs - perhaps a symtom of the allocation of resources required by dual platform support.

3. Little object based intelligence.

4. Poor user control of the interface and the inablity to organize drawing data using a tree based structure.

[CipesDesign]

danielf, some additional notes regarding printing: I own and use the exact same printer as you (HP DesignJet 430), and so I also always print in B & W. I do a lot of colors in models for presentation purposes but always print to "grayscale" for CD's. I used to print everything out on the 430 then take to the local copy shop for copies. Now I almost always just send the copy shop a multi-page PDF and they print right from that. One of the advantages is that (on a Mac at least) it is super easy to take a PDF sheet/page with colors and Save As then use the quartz filter "Gray Tones" to make everything grayscale quite nicely. The Elevation Sheet in my last post was one such sheet (was colored, now B & W). Additionally, in my practice the client pays for most of the printing, certainly for all of the sets of the final CD's, so the cost is much less of an issue. Hope al this helps, Peter

[danielf]

Peter -- yep, we do pretty much the same thing in regards of getting copies made at a print shop & reimbursements for plots from the client....but there are plenty of times I run a set of test plots in-house both during the process of drawing creation and certainly for final review. I find it much easier to do corrections and red-lines on paper then on the screen as god knows we spend enough time staring into our monitors --seeing plots in full size & in print also helps to validate line weights and other concerns regarding clarity prior to sending them out to the print shop....so there is still a need for in-house plotting. Plus I find PDFs still blur the lines a bit, much better then before, but still not as sharp as DesignJet plots so I mostly print a full set and send that to the print shop for copies. PDFs work just fine during construction or for RFIs and client reviews stuff whenever needed....mostly because of the ease of emailing the drawings. And nothing beats a laser printer for quick in house drawing productions for a variety of tasks!! Thanks for your comments. cheers, daniel

[danielf]

Brudger wrote: Where vectorworks is particularly strong is:

1. graphic presentation. It's easier to produce better looking drawings.

2. 2d design processes. Filled objects just have more integrety in representing what they are supposed to represent.

These are two important points of interest for me. I'm a ways away from understanding how VW is easier in comparison to AutoCAD for producing better looking drawings given that AutoCAD provides no limits on the kinds of docs I need to create....there is total flexibility in creating sheets filled with all the needed content with great clarity and variety; maybe not the pretty fills, but honestly that is a very low priority in regards to technical CDs for permit & construction.

Still for technical drawings I just haven't seen evidence that 'filled objects' have more integrity in representing what they are suppose to represent as you say, and certainly not in comparison to AutoCAD?s hatching and line work w/ proper line weights...frankly I haven't seen any evidence that VW is superior in that regard nor have I found this to be true for Revit either.

Of course since I am not proficient in either BIM program I can only rely on the work of others to demonstrate these claims of ease of use & integrity of representation?.which why I am doing the research that I am as a matter of due diligence before changing software. For this I appreciate all the input from all the forum members here at VW?great group of folks willing to share?and this speaks well about the VW community and spirit.

Edited July 6, 2009 by danielf

[danielf]

Brudger wrote:

4. Poor user control of the interface and the inability to organize drawing data using a tree based structure.

I do think the interface is a bit outdated and certainly not very inspiring to work with, but that's not a deal breaker if the tool set and functionality is convincing. But I do think VW can learn a bit from Autodesk 2009 & 2010 releases in terms of interface design & control....very slick and easy to use.

The issue of tree structure is even more important, however. This is something that Revit does quite well and effortlessly. With Revit in very short order it became quite clear how to navigate from drawing to drawing, view to view, detail callout to its larger brethren drawing. With VW after many many hours and two tutorials I'm still trying to get my head around its organizational method with all its drawing types and VP combinations & class structure....and the navigation palette is okay, but the complexity of how drawings are parsed and viewed is not readily evident for a first time user. The net byproduct of this in the early days of learning is a sense that the entirety of the drawing file is very fragmented and so challenges me to feel as if I have a sense of the whole model in design....but I?m sure that?s just a phase of learning how to control the design in VW.

Edited July 6, 2009 by danielf