- #HOW TO CONFIGURE SOFTPLAN 2016 SOFT LIST FULL VERSION#
- #HOW TO CONFIGURE SOFTPLAN 2016 SOFT LIST SOFTWARE#
However, I agree, with respect to Kitchen design and their docs, Chief is competitive with any, including 20/20. CA's use in Residential is really dependent on the documentation required by the builder and the review boards - usually not that difficult and with limited specifications. I would not use CA for any significant commercial project. Completely unacceptable for large commercial and somewhere in between for anything else. IMNOHO – CA is just adequate for CD, and mostly for mainstream residential. I've used Archicad since version 17 and Chief for about 10 years now. I'd rate Archicad as superior to any in the area of construction documents in the arena of ease of use, versatility, time, completeness and accuracy. You neglected to describe your intended use which makes it difficult to compare products as the ones you mentioned are targeted to different markets. From a purely condoc perspective, I think it does some of the nicest 2D drawings I've seen. I'm surprised that you aren't including Vectorworks in your evaluation mix. When I evaluated last, it required many files to consolidate into a single project, so seemed heavy on file management, but that may have changed. Softplan: For residential, it does very nice drawings, but pretty mainstream production quality. (Although very few people who also have spent time with ArchiCAD seem to prefer Revit.) But I have colleagues who seem to like it. Revit: I can't stand the interface or the company that produces it, so nothing good to say there. However, if you are doing things like canted walls, highly intricate details, commercial/large projects, renovations, and/or especially working with other people on the same project, you will be happier with ArchiCAD. You should watch the video on their website, and give it a spin. There is little reason to think it is inaccurate, and it has features like cabinets and framing that far exceed what ArchiCAD is capable of at the moment. If you are doing primarily mainstream residential, especially in the U.S., it has gotten very powerful and is quite impressive. I'm afraid I have to disagree with gpowless about Chief Architect. I have used both ArchiCAD and Chief Architect for roughly 20 years each. I understand Revit has grown up a bit but I'm not convinced enough to move away from something I have been comfortable for 18 years. because it is still stuck on being a child of AutoCad which has its roots on repeating drafting board methods and 2D line drawing. it was in its infancy and was suffering from many backward compatible issues and 2. I have rejected Revit over time as a viable platform because 1. Many of my designs require countless details and I am always able to convey the design and construction materials and methods to the owners, building offiials and contractors without having to clarify over and over again.
#HOW TO CONFIGURE SOFTPLAN 2016 SOFT LIST SOFTWARE#
The depth of modelling is flexible and I don't need to use any post-processing software for final models. The rendering and presentation of design results are far superior to anything I have seen from SoftPlan or Revit.
With ARCHICAD one can produce complete 3D construction drawings from sheds to complex tall buildings.
But as you gain experience the features built in reduce the time & repetitiveness of operations. You can type a letter right away without having to learn many of its feature. But I was producing decent construction drawings within 2 weeks.
#HOW TO CONFIGURE SOFTPLAN 2016 SOFT LIST FULL VERSION#
One had to purchase the full version without the options we have today. When I first started my practice ARCHICAD had everything I was looking for. He ultimately turned back to AutoCad to increase his efficiency and accuracy.įor small buildings (under 6000 sq ft) I think SoftPlan goes head to head with Revit or Archicad but for larger buildings I have my doubts. A collegue of mine used it for a couple of years but always had complaints about non-standard roof creation. The output produces reasonable accurate contruction drawings. That could have been my inexperience but it turned me off completely. The last time I tested it I found that I had to try to defeat some of its common tool behavior to get it to do what I wanted. I think its niche is limited to mainly small home designs. The final construction drawings it produces seem to me to be simple and inaccurate. I have found that to do anything creative beyond 4 walls is increasingly difficult. Before I purchased ARCHICAD 6.0 I explored and tested Chief Architect and Softplan and have re-evaluated both on and off through the last 18 years.Ĭhief Architect is quick to learn and use at a rudimentary level.
0 kommentar(er)
