I hate setting things up for people in Revit that are such obvious manual hacks just because they're used to seeing it that way.
-
Greg McDowell Jr
about.me/GMcDowellJr -
Example?
Personally; my (current) beef is an (unhealthy) obsession with modelling everything (too early). Don't get me wrong, I'm a big BIG fan of modelling minutiae when (it is) appropriate, but tying a model up in knots with overtly complicated modelling practices without even first floating an idea in rough sketch form beforehand just feels wastefully decadent. -
I like to ask people "Would you rather have it look the same and take longer, or would you rather have it work better that it did before?"
Sure, maybe you can have your Door Schedule have the same line spacing as it did 15 years ago by drawing lines and typing text.
Or you can have it generated automatically, be accurate, and require no effort whatsoever. Net even "additional" effort. NO effort.Dave Plumb
BWBR Architects; St Paul, MN
CADsplaining: When a BIM rookie tells you how you should have done something.Comment
-
In this case it was a desire to track old sheet issuance across a single Revit schedule. Dumb Text parameters that are bound to be wrong somewhere along the way.Originally posted by snowyweston View Post
I get the idea (convenience) but at what cost of relying on information you can't remotely ensure is accurate?Greg McDowell Jr
about.me/GMcDowellJrComment
-
Not to incite, but it might be a situation more like the warning on coffee cups - someone had an (expensive) issue in the past, and that's the remedy (carried forward to today).Originally posted by GMcDowellJr View Post
Comments about "ye olde days" aside, sounds like it might be time to Dynamo-metize things and ensure that accuracy yourself!Originally posted by GMcDowellJr View Post
Chris EllersickComment
-
Yes - I've just got to get them to the table for the discussion. Last time I showed something I was told it was "way too complicated." Not sure how since it's not much more than clicking a few buttons in the Dyno browser but that's what I'm up against. Change seems to equal bad for some.Originally posted by cellersick View Postsounds like it might be time to Dynamo-metize things and ensure that accuracy yourself!Greg McDowell Jr
about.me/GMcDowellJrComment
-
I don't think it's change itself that is bad, it's that the direction the change appears to be headed in looks very different than what they were shown during the Revit "sell". Dynamo has finally started to deliver on some of the more robust promises of Revit that haven't otherwise been included in the software.Originally posted by GMcDowellJr View Post
So that's good, but I never would have guessed you'd need to know 3 separate programming languages* to accomplish it. But here we are.
Software can't fix stupid, but at least it can automate it.
*: C#/VB - Revit API
DesignScript / nodes - Dynamo
Python - Dynamo (not all of the API is exposed to DesignScript)Chris EllersickComment
-
I think it's the direction of the change but as it relates to their skill set. I remember the days when hand drafters wouldn't learn AutoCAD and the days (now) when AutoCAD users didn't want to learn Revit. The change makes them obsolete (or so they fear).
Check out Emblemmatic — MarkMaker to see why designers ought to be worried.
3 languages, at least. Add in Flux and Grasshopper and you've got a few more!Greg McDowell Jr
about.me/GMcDowellJrComment
-
One better: Protofit—FlooredOriginally posted by GMcDowellJr View Post
It's looking like a waiting game until designers are replaced by algorithms. I'm waiting for the "Mid Century Modern" plugin pack, myself - I hear that one has the 'Mies' algorithm.Chris EllersickComment
-
Comment