HELP ! Old architect transition software : FAIL

[Epco]

Ok, not "old", but designing buildings for 20 years. Pencil for 8 years, then cool little NON-autocad program. Very successful with it for 12 years. I'm a designer, not a software person. (for renderings, I export DWG to my 3D guy w/ color specs)

.
PROBLEM: My little CAD works literally like a pencil on paper, in other words, absolutely nothing like Autocad. There was NO learning curve: the cursor is a stylus - i.e. if you can draw a line, it's on the screen. Great little program, served me well, now defunct, and desperately need to upgrade.

I've twice tried to pick up AutoCad, but can't even draw a square or polyline, and quit in frustration after a few hours of trying on my own. (yep, zero training, but I did that in my old program, and only had to learn settings (scale/call-out options, etc.) which you know cold after 1 hour.

Has anyone made the transition to AC (from a Non AC-based program), and if so, HOW did you do it ?
No, I'm not about to take a class where everyone is learning "Design 101". I've designed (and made my own drawings) everything from subdivisions to multi-story mixed-use.
(that's not being arrogant, it's just utterly non-productive)

( I'd also really like to be able to use Revit - but I'm assuming that's an even bigger nightmare ? )

[jaberwok]

Ok, not "old", but designing buildings for 20 years. Pencil for 8 years, then cool little NON-autocad program. Very successful with it for 12 years. I'm a designer, not a software person. (for renderings, I export DWG to my 3D guy w/ color specs)

.
PROBLEM: My little CAD works literally like a pencil on paper, in other words, absolutely nothing like Autocad. There was NO learning curve: the cursor is a stylus - i.e. if you can draw a line, it's on the screen. Great little program, served me well, now defunct, and desperately need to upgrade.

I've twice tried to pick up AutoCad, but can't even draw a square or polyline, and quit in frustration after a few hours of trying on my own. (yep, zero training, but I did that in my old program, and only had to learn settings (scale/call-out options, etc.) which you know cold after 1 hour.

Has anyone made the transition to AC (from a Non AC-based program), and if so, HOW did you do it ?
No, I'm not about to take a class where everyone is learning "Design 101". I've designed (and made my own drawings) everything from subdivisions to multi-story mixed-use.
(that's not being arrogant, it's just utterly non-productive)

( I'd also really like to be able to use Revit - but I'm assuming that's an even bigger nightmare ? )

Hi, welcome to AUGI.
Last things first - if you really want to go to Revit, forget acad - learning acad won't help very much.

For the rest - there are lots and lots of acad tutorials (for all levels) on the net including videos on Youtube. There are AUGI's own tutorials - look for archived ATP classes.
I taught myself to use acad in 1984; of course, it was a lot simpler then but the (2D) basics don't change.

Good luck.

edit: I was pretty old then too - I'd spent 20 years at the board.

[tedg]

Well what's nice is you already know how to design, and what good drawings look like (versus some kids right out of skool who "know autocad" but can't put a good set of drawings together).
That is important. I came from a board drafting background (not as much as John though ) and that helps to know how to set up drawings, what info is needed, planning ahead, etc.

As John mentions, Revit and AutoCAD are two different animals, so learning one, will not necessarily prepare you for the other one.
It depends on what you really want to do later on in your career where you put your effort.

AutoCAD (stright vanilla AutoCAD) is a great "drafting tool". Great for 2D work, and is capable of 3D design, but if you plan on desiging buildings in 3D, I'd go with Revit.
Either one of these does take training. I learned AutoCAD (a long time ago) at a community college, and they already expected/required you to have drafting expereince before you take "AutoCAD 101". So you weren't in the class learning how to draft or design, it was the next level, taking what you know and applying it in AutoCAD.

My REVIT training came from a 2-day training session and lots of hands-on, working on projects. I would like to get some more formal advanced training though.

Good luck.

[duhvinci]

I'm sure things seem daunting - but you'll get through it. Remember to use the help file (or whatever is passing for a help file now-a-days). One simple thing to keep in mind is to always keep an eye on the command line so you know what the command is expecting from you and to examine the options it is presenting you.

Good luck.

[Epco]

Last things first - if you really want to go to Revit, forget acad - learning acad won't help very much.

As John mentions, Revit and AutoCAD are two different animals, so learning one, will not necessarily prepare you for the other one.
AutoCAD (stright vanilla AutoCAD) is a great "drafting tool". Great for 2D work, and is capable of 3D design, but if you plan on desiging buildings in 3D, I'd go with Revit.

Thank you, John, Ted, Patrick, for the suggestions, and the encouragement.

Very glad you pointed out that Revit is so different than ACad: that's a critical revelation. From what I understand, I'd prefer Revit.

2 Revit factors: dynamic data in BIM, & 3D modeling, I see as valuable to collaboration with PE's, & my work-pace/output.
(though I'd still send out for rendering quality to my guy - just better use of my time).

So, is Revit functionality at least slightly more intuitive that ACad ?

many posts mention training self-success of "Revitkid" & "Lynda" videos, so that's encouraging

[cdatechguy]

So, is Revit functionality at least slightly more intuitive that ACad ?[/U] [/I]

AutoCAD is a "drafting" tool...much like drafting on a drawing board. BTW, I had 4 years of drafting design/architecture before I went to ITT Tech...ITT was a breeze since I already knew all there was about drafting.
With that in mind, unless your using AutoCAD Architecture, if you draw a wall, place some windows and doors in Revit and then elevate it you see your wall with a door, windows already there. In AutoCAD you would have to draw all of this manually (unless using ACA). Now, the nice thing about Revit vs ACA, if I want to move a window or door, I can do that in ANY view!! With ACA you have to move it in the Construct, then save. Reload/regenerate your section or elevation views. (Yeah, I am using ACA right now and can't stand it!!...luckily I have Revit project too..)

[Epco]

Thanks Michael for confirming that Revit is more advantageous to A/E's than Autocad - and even more importantly (to me) - that one doesn't need to have both.

What would be really helpful to know is about USING it (things like standard draw commands, cursor/pointer dragging, etc.) : is it easier (or, better asked) is it more intuitive to USE, than Autocad ?

As I stated, I have never used Autocad (nor any derivation based on Autocad); after 12 yrs. on non-Autocad-based system, I'd prefer to pickup a tool at least slightly closer to the intuitive interface I'm accustomed to, rather than the clunky impediment I found Autocad to be the few times I tried to wrestle with it.


(I'm sure Autocad isn't "clunky" to those long-accustomed to it - but that took a long time to acquire - time I just don't have. When I switch, I need to be able to hit the ground running. Someone's suggested re-drawing a very familiar/recent project: which is exactly what I'll do)

[jaberwok]

Thanks Michael for confirming that Revit is more advantageous to A/E's than Autocad - and even more importantly (to me) - that one doesn't need to have both.

What would be really helpful to know is about USING it (things like standard draw commands, cursor/pointer dragging, etc.) : is it easier (or, better asked) is it more intuitive to USE, than Autocad ?

As I stated, I have never used Autocad (nor any derivation based on Autocad); after 12 yrs. on non-Autocad-based system, I'd prefer to pickup a tool at least slightly closer to the intuitive interface I'm accustomed to, rather than the clunky impediment I found Autocad to be the few times I tried to wrestle with it.


(I'm sure Autocad isn't "clunky" to those long-accustomed to it - but that took a long time to acquire - time I just don't have. When I switch, I need to be able to hit the ground running. Someone's suggested re-drawing a very familiar/recent project: which is exactly what I'll do)

Whichever way you go, you're going to have to learn a new way of doing things.
Revit was designed in the 2000s using current programming practices.
Acad was designed in 1980(ish), has had one complete rebuild (R13) and has had new bells and whistles added every year - it's a dinosaur with motors and a heavy load attached.
I can't comment on Revit's "intuitiveness" but, from what you say, Revit will take you further, faster and last you longer than acad.

Take a look at these forums and this forum

[tedg]

Thanks Michael for confirming that Revit is more advantageous to A/E's than Autocad - and even more importantly (to me) - that one doesn't need to have both.

What would be really helpful to know is about USING it (things like standard draw commands, cursor/pointer dragging, etc.) : is it easier (or, better asked) is it more intuitive to USE, than Autocad ?

As I stated, I have never used Autocad (nor any derivation based on Autocad); after 12 yrs. on non-Autocad-based system, I'd prefer to pickup a tool at least slightly closer to the intuitive interface I'm accustomed to, rather than the clunky impediment I found Autocad to be the few times I tried to wrestle with it.


(I'm sure Autocad isn't "clunky" to those long-accustomed to it - but that took a long time to acquire - time I just don't have. When I switch, I need to be able to hit the ground running. Someone's suggested re-drawing a very familiar/recent project: which is exactly what I'll do)

From your original post, it looks like you have some "cad" experience, which does help when laying down lines on a computer screen, you still need to do this in REVIT.

In REVIT, when you're placing (3D) walls, you are still "drawing" them with a reference line like you would in any cad program. But when you're done, you have walls that are at a height that you determine based on levels and offsets. And when you're placing or editing roofs, floors, stairs, you will be in a "sketch" environment too.

Also, if needed, you can export REVIT views/sheets/models right to AutoCAD if someone needs it (but if the AutoCAD files need to be to some standard, will take some screwing around with).

It sounds like you work for yourself (your own company)? Most A/E firms (atleast the middle to large ones) have standards, procedures, expected products/deliverables etc, that need to meet the needs of many clients. They also usually have Architects & Engineers that do the important math/code stuff and Drafting/Design staff that do production work. We have some Architects and Engineers that do some AutoCAD work and dabble in REVIT, but the "Cad Designers" (which is what I am) do the production work and create the deliverables that get printed and/or sent to the client.


If you are an indipendent Architect designing houses and buildings for individual clients without the need for different client's cad standards and deliverables, REVIT is definately the way to go.

The company I work for we do both AutoCAD and REVIT. The decision is made early on which direction to go, but usually driven by project scope, budget, time contraints, and the deliverables (does in need to be in a specific format/cad standard when done).

If we have the option, we will go with REVIT, but if it's a small project like a renovation and we only have a limited time to get it done, we'll bang it out in AutoCAD.

You, not being a "heavy AutoCAD user getting into REVIT" is only going to help you. I am a long-time AutoCAD user and when I was getting into REVIT, I needed to "re-learn" stuff because, as mentioned, the ways you view and create things are different between the two, and it can be frustrating sometimes to an experienced Acad user.


Hope this helps

[dgorsman]

I'll throw in a word of caution. While the tools in Revit make the work easier, there is a lot behind the program that requires training, handholding, and/or patience in order to make those tools work. It certainly isn't an install-n-go type program like Notepad (or a pencil). Multi-user companies typically have dedicated support personnel to handle the set-up and maintenance, with a sole-user operation the user needs to be able to handle this themselves or have someone do it for them. Its very easy to not pay attention to such things only for them to cause severe problems later, to the point of throwing up hands and declaring the program is useless.