Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Combine Autodesk and in-house revit libraries?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Combine Autodesk and in-house revit libraries?

    I get a lot of comments that people are sick of looking through three different directories to find a family. What are the advantages and disadvantages of combining the standard Autodesk library with our own in-house library?

    Major Pro: You can find ALL families in ONE place.
    Con: Upgrading and sorting through the new families every year would be a pain. They would all be limited to the earliest version being used in the office so no one could use the newest version...

    Trying to come up with more, because I think the cons are worth it at this point. Set me straight RFO.

    #2
    I won't put them together because I want users to find the office library first, and only when they don't find what they need do they go looking in the OOTB library. So... I have a folder for the office library, which is the location that is set up in the Revit.ini file for library access. And that content goes through an upgrade process each year. And in that folder, down at the bottom, is a link called OOTB Library (Use with caution), which links to the network OOTB library folder. This way, users get to the vetted content first all the time, but can still get to the OOTB stuff as needed. It also makes vetted content the easiest to get to, which helps maximize it's use. As long as there is enough content there to provide for most needs.

    EDIT: FWIW, I think 2-3 years of working like this should be the goal, at which point the link to the OOTB library is removed from general access, and perhaps that content is made available with access rights for a content creation team only. I suspect Aaron has long since reached this point and beyond. But for the first few years of Revit use, there can be value in allowing access, people just need to understand that you NEVER just use content from anywhere but the vetted library. You have to go through a process of making it office compatible.

    Gordon
    Pragmatic Praxis

    Comment


      #3
      I wont even install the OOTB libraries anywhere.
      Aaron "selfish AND petulant" Maller |P A R A L L A X T E A M | Practice Technology Implementation
      @Web | @Twitter | @LinkedIn | @Email

      Comment


        #4
        My issue, is that there are quite a few families that I would never spend time making our own in-house versions, and the OOTB families do the job. For instance, there are dozens of structural detail components. They work good enough for us, why spend time remaking them? I don't know when someone might need an OOTB family, and I think putting them somewhere separately(if they are used often) is an obstruction to the workflow. There are also dozens, if not hundreds of OOTB families that we will NEVER use, so I can see why a FULL merge would be counter productive.

        Would you suggest we just pick out the OOTB families we like now and put them in our library, then hide/archive the rest?

        Comment


          #5
          Thats exactly what i would do. Because a lot of those detail components, i wanted to at least change the line styles in them to match our standards, so i opened them, changed the lines, saved them to our library. Then tossed the OOTB ones.
          Aaron "selfish AND petulant" Maller |P A R A L L A X T E A M | Practice Technology Implementation
          @Web | @Twitter | @LinkedIn | @Email

          Comment


            #6
            Originally posted by Twiceroadsfool View Post
            Thats exactly what i would do. Because a lot of those detail components, i wanted to at least change the line styles in them to match our standards, so i opened them, changed the lines, saved them to our library. Then tossed the OOTB ones.
            Excellent. This will make some people very happy.

            Comment

            Related Topics

            Collapse

            Working...
            X