We were recently asked by a BUILDblog reader about how we generate graphic presentations. It’s a great question and one that seemed like it would make a good blog post. There are a number of different reasons that we put together graphic presentations; client meetings, blog posts, office display on our working wall, architectural exhibits and simply to record our thoughts and clarify our ideas. While we’ve experimented over the years with various mediums, we’ve found a few patterns that work well for us and convey ideas properly to clients. It’s always a balancing act between representing ideas accurately and being efficient with a project’s design budget. A big part of the equation is getting people inspired and enrolled in the design with straight-forward methods. The right software and techniques can make a tremendous difference with these variables; knowing how to use them appropriately can lead to successful outcomes every time. Interestingly enough, more expensive, more sophisticated technology doesn’t always produce the most effective outcome. So in the philosophy of transparency and sharing what we know, we’ve put together a diagrammatic timeline of the various graphic stages we go through for each phase of an architectural project –each stage notes the technology we use to achieve the results.
For more design talk follow us on Twitter.
“more expensive, more sophisticated technology doesn’t always produce the most effective outcome” -totally agree, I’ve seen back of the napkin sketches that are far more enrolling than some time consuming renderings. Thanks for the transparency guys.
Nice work people! Does the ‘more expensive, more sophisticated technology’ include BIM packages?
Thanks for elaborating on my question! I really like your ideas and ways of doing things. Inspiring 🙂
Interesting process guys. Does all the different software you use talk to each other so there is no ‘re-doing’ of any drawings?
When I started out on my own after uni I started with Archicad. While working for someone else at the same time I used Autocad LT which I found tedious to have to draw every single line etc after the Archicad 3D experience.
For me back on my own now I only use Archicad for everything.
Though I probably only use a fraction of its potential.
It has meant only one software purchase as well though.
I understand Revit is 3D equivalent from Autodesk.
I wonder how other firms deal with which software to use to keep track of time spent without compromising the process or the outcome?
From the simplest and honest pencil to the most sophisticated CAD tool, the key will always remain in your own style. If you’re sensible, the tool will improve it, but not substitute your essence. As amr does, I use Archicad for everything since 1995, and I couldn’t thing in going back to 2D or working without BIM, but the one who grips the mouse is still me, not the software itself.
@Edwin -we haven’t used BIM technology ourselves, but we keep hearing a lot of praise for it. We were referring more to elaborate and time consuming photo-realistic renderings.
@Anders -it was our pleasure. We’re always happy to have the answer to a question turn into a blog post.
@amr -a very good question. No, our software doesn’t talk to each other but we’re finding that importing a PDF from AutoCAD into Illustrator or SketchUp doesn’t require much ‘re-doing’. The Archicad system seems very fluid but our familiarity with AutoCAD is too much of an advantage to abandon at this point.
@Antonio -it sounds like the Archicad + BIM system is a no-brainer, we should look into it.
This is great – I always enjoy seeing how other people do it. I start with sketchup – I use it much like I would use modeling clay or cardboard and superglue but cleaner and no ouchy burns.
Excellent post as always, just a quick note to compatability issues, you can readily import dwg files into Sketchup or Illustrator and work from them without having to do anything other than applying a lineweight to a line colour. Illustrator simplifies this by allowing a quick selection of all matching line colours meaning a quick conversion to lineweight is straight forward. Importing dwg files rather than pdf’s allows you to keep polylines and text editability, pdf’s are essentially ‘exploded’ drawings which really limit efficient editability to the base drawing within illustrator. Another cool feature of Sketchup Pro is the ability to export models as .eps files which maintain all of the vector information in Illustrator. I find that the combination of many familiar packages and using my own intuition allows for a much more compelling presentation package than relying solely on a ‘lifelike’ rendering from a very complex 3D modelling pacakge…my two cents…
@Duncan -nice, that’s some very useful information. Thanks for the tips.
Have you folks at Build looked into Vectorworks as an alternative for your needs? I think that combined with Renderworks it is a pretty powerful design and presentation tool at a much lower cost than the Autodesk software. I’ve made the switch from Autcad to Vectorworks and am so far very impressed with its capabilities. There’s a bit of a learning curve with the software and I’m still in learning stages so am in no way an expert. I’d be curious if any others that frequent this blog are using this product and how they like it.
I wish our entire profession could be more like your firm. I love the openness. I have found talking with peers about many of the subjects you discuss on your blog, such as drawing production to be akin to asking their salary.
I’m curious that Rhino is listed under const docs yet those images could easily be created with sketchup and photoshop. I played with Rhino in school but have never been able to justify it in a professional setting (except for the Zaha’s of the world). Do you use it for the CNC with RhinoCAM? Or is it just a program that you are comfortable with?
@Tim -thanks for the accolades. The software that we use for rendering often depends on what the younger people in the firm are learning in school. We’ve experimented with Rhino, Form-Z and now SketchUp. We’ll most likely continue to look at new programs relative to what students are most familiar with in academics.
I’ve been using Kerkythea to render Sketchup models. You can add lights and set materials qualities in sketchup, and then export to Kerkythea. Once there you just have to adjust a few sun settings and hit render. Not mind blowing super realistic ‘I can’t believe that’s a rendering!’ quality but does a good job for the amount of time it takes. Best part is its open source (i.e. free…though you should donate if use it).
http://www.kerkythea.net/joomla
My firm uses Revit but the rendering is laborious. We fall back on Sketchup because it is quick, dirty, and clients still Ooh and Aah despite the lack of photorealism.
Revit is working to improve it’s usability for schematic design, but it’s fairly laborious there too. Schematic work needs to be fluid and flexible.
I love your blog.
Wondered whether you guys would consider posting a timeline to go along with this? Ball park. I know each project is different and some ideas come sooner.
Always interested how long this process can take others.
Happy to compare notes.
I just started at a new firm (surprised anyone is hiring now-a-days) and during the interviews they focused heavily on Revit and rendering via Revit. Which I thought was strange since they primarily use 2D Autocad. Perhaps they were looking for someone to help them move into the amazing world of BIM that everyone keeps talking about.
I told (& am now showing) them it’s easier and faster to produce schematics via Sketchup. I might be biased since I’m still on the fence about BIM, but I agree that, for now, it is definitely too unwieldy for SD.
nice guys. great post.
Great stuff as always. If I could suggest/ask for one thing, I would love the pictures/graphics to be a bit larger so you can read them a bit better. Maybe click on pic to make bigger?
BTW, we use ArchiCAD.
Thanks for sharing all of your great info.