CompuServe Thread

Adesk U talent @ booth

3 messages in this thread
#61470From: ROBERT RITGEROct 13, 1993 1:11 AM
Thanks for the response. For CADD I'm a GDS devotee and the two products (Architectural Power Tools and Facade) appear to be covered in the software that I use on our workstations. >>> I think this will change dramatically over the next couple of years as clients become more savy about what capabilities architects "could" bring to the table. They are going to expect to see photo-realistic images. They are going to expect to put on goggles and be taken through a virtual-reality walk-through of a major project. The firms that realize that this is going to become the norm and begin doing it now are going to be many steps ahead of their competitors down the road.<<< As I mentioned to Jim Murphy I'm banking on this eventuality. It will be the clients that push architects ahead by requiring animation and photo-realistic presentations. I hope for our sake the client's don't mind paying for this as an extra service. If it becomes expected output and a basic service too soon then profits will be even more difficult to come by and more architectural firms will disappear.
#61675From: David Cohn, CADalystOct 14, 1993 12:15 PM
I think clients will be willing to pay for some of it, but then clients already pay for things like artist's renderings. One thing that computer rendering offers is that the architect can provide it as a direct result of having done all the modeling and design work in the computer instead of then having to go to a professional delineator to produce the rendering. The other thing is that the rendering can be easily changed as the work progresses. The architect can re-render from a slightly different viewpoint. The materials can change. The rendering can be done at a different time of day. As for being able to walk through a project, again, if the project is modeled in 3D, walking through a virtual building becomes simple. Already here at Autodesk University, both Artist Graphics and Matrox are showing new graphics boards with 3D graphics chips. Both have ADS routines that let you render a 3D model and then use a mouse to manuever your way through the rendered model in real-time. So, I don't think architects will be able to charge a lot of this capability back to the client, but they also won't need to because it will be an integral part of what they are doing. And those firms that don't do it will run the risk of not getting the work.
#61796From: ROBERT RITGEROct 15, 1993 1:47 AM
You're preaching to the choir with regards to computer rendering and animation. 🙂 >>> both Artist Graphics and Matrox are showing new graphics boards with 3D graphics chips. Both have ADS routines that let you render a 3D model and then use a mouse to manuever your way through the rendered model in real-time.<<< I'm counting on Jim Murphy to send me any and all info on Matrox but I have not heard of what Artist Graphics has to offer. Got a number? >>>So, I don't think architects will be able to charge a lot of this capability back to the client, but they also won't need to because it will be an integral part of what they are doing. And those firms that don't do it will run the risk of not getting the work.<<< I agree on the use of animation as a design tool in-house. Can't be charging the client for that, but for a final design presentation I disagree. If the final animation / computer rendering is effectively replacing the analog manual rendering then charging the client for this deliverabe is a matter of course. I suspect we're on the same page on this topic, maybe I'm misunderstanding your note. P.S. Is there enough attention to 3ds in 'CADalyst' to warrant a subscription for a non-Autocad user ? Know anything of a 3d Studio magazine?