What if? "Free" Family Editor Version

[Scott D Davis]

So I had a brainstorm session this afternoon while sitting on the 605 freeway in So. California, headed home from a client meeting. I was thinking of library content, and how we need it, and how the more we have the better. We need manufacturers to produce content. We need students to produce content , we need everyone to produce content!

So what if Revit/Autodesk released a version of Revit that was just like the demo version in the Project editor, but that allowed full ability to save only from the family editor? This would allow anyone to create content in the family editor and save the families, and then they could run Revit in demo mode to test their content in a model!

In fact, I think maybe all the demo/trial versions should come this way. I know they are fully functional now for 60 days, but at the end of the 60, if no license is present, then the project side goes into demo mode, but the family editor remains fully functional.

This seems like a great way to me to get people/students/manufacturers creating library components for the Revit community to use. They get to create content for free, while actual projects require the full version. Enough rambling.....What do you think?

[cgrover]

Scott,

That is a great idea. I would agree that in this case more is better. Just my 2 cents.

grover

[beegee]

Not a bad idea Scott, although it probably comes down to new users of Revit making families, which is by far the most difficult part of Revit to master and one that new users generally shy away from.

What about re-introducing the idea of a "Families Wanted " list, so that people can post up families they would like to see made and those with enough time and resources can tackle them ? That was the way RUGI got started and got its content together.

[rhys]

Both ideas are great. Anything to increase content has to be good. Many manufacturers have teams or consultants who produce acad blocks, learning the family editor just to produce your own range of products would not be that daunting for a manufacturers team. Once a typical family has been developed the rest of the range would just need repetitive work using a subset of the full family editor skills.

[PeterJ]

Generally I am for this idea, but wouldn't the people making those families with a free family editor require a full version to test the families out properly?

[rhys]

Don't see why they would need to save a test project. Would they?

[PeterJ]

You need to make more families, R! Half the time when I make one that appears to behave exactly as I want it in the family editor it behaves erratically in the model.

[rhys]

Your telling me!!! They sure do. BUT Revit allows demo use of projects without save so couldn't that be used to test families even though the project can't be saved?

[Scott_Bloss]

I think this is a wonderful idea. I am all for it.

[Martin P]

This really is a great idea. Could be a great benefit to us all, including autodesk.

[aaronrumple]

...suggested this to the factory almost 2 years ago.

They need a system that encourages vendors to make content - and not just bad content from converted engineering drawings line we see in DWG.

Vendors should be able to make the content and then have a standardized graphical UI which would allow the end user to select and configure the componet. I also suggest a "Revit Certified" logo which would identify that the componets meet certain industry standards.

[Damo]

Scott,

You had your brainwave whilst on a freeway in sunny California, I had my idea whilst sitting in a hot humid bus in West London.

Here are my thoughts.
IT seems there is a consensus amongst users that more content is crucial, and would be a win-win-win situation: for the Users - AutoDesk - and the manufacturers (whose products will be automatically specified in schedules etc)

As a relatively new user, the Family Editor is the one area of the programme that gives me headaches. Revit (excluding the Family Editor) is excellent, logical and works the way architects work. Cannot praise it enough – seriously! But it falls down badly in the Family Editor, IMHO.

And when you thought you were getting somewhere, it doesn’t work like you expect in the model. PeterJ’s point precisely. Just this week I’ve spend an inordinate amount of time trying to do something that should be very simple. (Where Revit Giveth, the Family Editor Taketh Away)

The Family editor has 2 issues. (1) is the way it works (usability), and (2) is that the outcome can be unreliable when tested in the model (see my post this week on “Wall Tiling pattern on wall face problems”)

My great idea was to have a new Family Content Producer, that takes the logical philosophy of Revit and makes content production a breeze. It doesn’t matter whether this is a separate standalone programme, plug-in or whatever, I really don’t care, as long as it works, and easily.

The Revit Philosophy is, as I see it: You pick what you want from a menu, adjust it as necessary and then place it. Eg: you want a wall, you select a wall for the list, change the wall properties as you need, and place the wall in the model – very easy.

Family Content Producer (FCP) would work similarly. You want a door frame, you select a frame from the side menu. You want mullions, select mullions and snap them to the frame. You want handrails, balustrades, infill panels (Solid, void or translucent etc) you just pick them off the menu. (Complex stuff like 3D toilet bowls and baths etc can be left to the experts)

In my FCP you are pulling components off a menu, just like in Revit. None of this extrude, sweep, model lines etc (before I get any flames I accept they have their very good uses elsewhere).

And another benefit of this is that families submitted to AUGI exchange will have certain minimum standards built-in because we are selecting Revit family components. How many times have you picked a family off the web, thinking it would be ideal, and realise there are some strange things happening that you cannot work out?

Now, back to those wayward families.

[rhys]

Yes yes yes and whats more I'd pay for it!!!

[sfaust]

sounds like a great idea, and I would be all for more pieces and parts to "plunk in." However, the idea of the family editor is to be able to make all the little pieces and parts that are either uncommon or custom, hence you will never have all of the pieces and parts that you need. I agree that family editor can be frustrating and probably needs some work, but I'm not sure how you can get away from having extrusions, revolves, etc. It is designed to allow you to get to the most basic geometric level of an object if you need to, and lets face it, we're architects and we're always going to want something custom...

Somewhat of a sidenote, I have been figuring out lately that family editor seems to behave better with more nested families. I have been creating pieces of complex families and nesting them all into another family and it seems to work better than having it all in one family.

just my .02

[PeterJ]

Before ADT was AEC and in AEC 5.1, which I used a few times that is just how you manufactured windows.

I'd love to see this, though a part of it is already there in that you can use ready drawn profiles for any extrusion or sweep that you fancy