CompuServe Messages

/* expensive pencil and there isn't much discussion on how to utilize the technology in new and comprehensive ways. */ I think that CADD's effectiveness is well understood these days, that it's not just an elaborate pencil (in that regard for CDs) but an effective tool where symmetry, duplication, repetition and recycling is involved. With Multimedia though (and I've said this before, it's a total analogy of where CADd was in the early 80's right now), the same curiousity exists but not the practicality or profitability. Toxic takes a very different approach to presenting 3D Studio to new architects. For one thing, we don't even wow them with animations initially. We start simple by showing how their CADD designs can be imported into 3DS, and then how materials and lighting can be added for photorealism, how perspectives can then be shot for very quick renderings. This is enough. At first. It sells, it works at bidding sesisons and with owner-consultation sessions. Plug and play modularity to materials and geomtries is as important in training as 3DS functions. For example, if a countertop in a given kitchen might have several materials, the countertop material might reference a raster file called CNTRTOP1.GIF which can then be substituted with any other raster file and immeditely rendered again (in other words, WOOD1.GIF or TILE1.GIF would be copies as CNTRTOP1.GIF and vavoom!). Starting simple with a practical application seems to be very effective. Only later do we send them a tape of architectural animations and let them salivate at the added potential they have already purchased. It's not a disservice to 3DS not go into architectural animations. Look at how much AutoCAD is never taught at first (SQL ties, DCL/AutoLISP, 3D) yet it is a productive tool in 2D at first by doing simple copying, cuting scaling applications that were tough manually. "Show benefit from minute one" is Toxic's prime philosophy. /* the step of visualization would fit in nicely. A whole new way of approaching a project is necessary and architects today are caught in the transition. */ As they always will be. 🙂 But hey, it keeps them competitive and on their toes, right? The first "guys" to get CADD under their belt made healthy profits from the technology. Architects who jump on MMedia will benefit in the same way IMHO. /* Any ideas on what is being done or what should be done in the education process? */ You mean besides the telecourses? <g> I attend several colleges and universities in a given year to discuss with the CADD/Multimedia/Computer department heads what they're doing to get students >jobs< after they graduate. NAAUG is always a part of that equation. To my knowledge, very little is being done to show profitability with 3DS. Right now (as CADD was again 1 decade ago) it's more of a "neat thang", and some see the potential of it, but not the implementation of it into a professional environment. CADD on the other hand is coming long very well… most educational centers know how to teach design/drafting productivity. <note: they may not be teaching it, but they know how to teach it> It's a long learning curve that will eventually happen on its own as CADD's did. But some of us aren't willing to wait around for 10 years. 🙂 -dave