Michael (LS) : Query

On 18 February 2004 @17:58, you responded to Mark's 'New Versions of
AutoCAD' thread in alt.cad,alt.cad.autocad,comp.cad.autocad.

I agree with you that AutoCAD is a CAD program, not a rendering program,
with some rudimentary rendering ability, and you said :

I have been using ACAD and ACDLT for years on a contract basis in Scotland,
and the demand has always been for 2D (building services). When there has
been a demand for 3D, it seems that add-ons like CADDuct, ProPipe, and
CADPipe are popular. But I have seem problems with work done in
Architectural Desktop with CADDuct on top - which left me with an uneasy
feeling that without the right tweaks what I saw when I opened the file
might not be what was seen by the sender - and that it would be almost
impossible to know, for there're no error messages or anything!

My opinion of CADDuct is low - it is a monopoly at that - yet years ago I
did a 3D ductwork drawing using pure ACAD - and it was a doddle (ductwork is
basically boxes). I just drew a 'generic' 3D box and made it a block - then
I scaled it (x,y,z) to the right size on insertion. Being a block meant I
had one point to use to drag it into position. Transformations were done ad
hoc, and the hardest was the shoe piece spigot (a sort of cone with and
angled centreline such that one side was flat). It may be crazy, but I
think ACAD for 3D ductwork is better than the huge cost of CADDuct - which
also runs the risk of not generating a single line on opening a file. I
will admit that because of weird things like valves, that 3D Pipework is a
different story from ducts - but I had hoped CAD would become more object
based (instead of drawing complicated valves etc, we could download them
from the manufacturer etc).

Because CAD has not developed down the object based route for my industry,
and because I see and hear all sorts of problems with add-ons, I was
wondering if there was a better way.

You say you do your modelling with ADT (Architectural Desktop I presume) and
then render with Viz. But then again you said 'ADT (and in the future Revit)
now includes VizRender. This is why I won't be upgrading to any future
releases of Viz, I'll just use VizRender, since it's "free".'

Can you (or anyone else out there) explain - in simple terms and from a
'real' user's viewpoint, the 3D stuff out there? I am confused! What are
the advantages or disadvantages of each?

Inventor? Would you need Viz? does it interface well or would a recipient
have to download a viewer or patch to open or see the results? ADT - is this
not just for architectural stuff? If someone sent you a file done using
CADDuct or Inventor, would VizRender cope? etc.

Also - It would be nice to have walk-throughs or some form of animation, as
far as I can tell this involves slides and then it would be up to me to
write a bit of code...is there not an easier way?

Basically I want an add-on to do 3D, render good, and be stable and
compatible with those simple folks running 2D basic out of the box ACAD, and
it would be greeeeat to have a way of generating a walk-through animation.

You seem to know what you're talking about, so I just thought I'd be cheeky
and ask straight out (if you don't ask, you can't get - right?).

 

Well, I'll do my best to answer some of these questions but some are beyond
my knowledge. First off, there's some "miscommunication" on what you're
"rendering" versus what I "render". My work is 90+% residential (custom
homes, additions, and remodels). The rendering I do is "photo-realistic" 3d
rendering to show a client a pretty accurate representaion of what their
project will look like when built.

Here's an example of the rendering project I do (and I don't do a lot of
rendering but when I do this is a pretty typical project):
This week I'll be doing a 3D rendering (and photo-montaging in the actual
site/background photo) of a remodel project. The existing house is pretty
crappy but the site is real nice. The homeowner bought it and we're tearing
it down to grade (foundation & footing stays) and then building a new,
expanded house. This "remodel" is ~$600,000.00 which means there's money to
spend on rendering. A small scale project (say $300,000.00) wouldn't have
the budget for me to model and render it (especially if a perspective sketch
is enough to convey the design).

It sounds like your rendering is totally different. You're doing pipe/duct
type modeling where your rendering requirements are just to convey clarity
to the model, not necessarily getting lighting/shadows/paint/finishes
photo-realistic?

The closest thing I've done to what you do (or at least what I THINK you do)
is a pool project I did where I had to do 3d piping drawings (to show pipe
runs, connections, pumps, etc.) To do this I used Spears piping program (an
add-on to AutoCad). This program worked fine for my needs (even could do
materials lists and other functions I didn't need). This program was free
and includes all of Spears products built in (i.e. elbows, valves, etc.)
which makes it real easy to spec their stuff (that's why it's free!) but we
used it without caring the manufacturer (our needs wouldn't be effected by
the differences between Spears and someone elses 2"-to3" coupler).

From the sounds of your work 3D Viz wouldn't be the way to go (it's really
geared to architectural rendering). I have no experience with Inventor or
Solidworks but they'd probably be worth your time to check out. Also,
Mechanical Desktop is geared more towards your line of work (though probably
doesn't do much beyond rudimentary rendering).

If you do need more rendering "control" than you get from those programs you
could always do the rendering with 3D Viz. You can link a dwg file into 3D
Viz and then when you change the dwg you can update the Viz file (though it
doesn't do it automatically). 3D Viz is a stand alone rendering/modeling
package that really has been geared to architectal renderings and
animations. VizRender is real simulair but geared more to "beginners" or
the "basics" with the more advanced control features being more "optional".
VizRender now comes with ADT (and eventually will be included with Revit).
I don't think there's any plans to include it with Mechanical Desktop.

Will Inventor do renderings good enough for your needs? I dunno. 3D Viz
and VizRender will, though they may be way more than you need?

I currently model with ADT and then link the dwg to 3D Viz for
materials/lighting/rendering work. I'll never upgrade my 3D Viz. The
version I have does all I need and potentially my future CAD package my came
with VizRender. I'm considering upgrading/changing my CAD software and if I
go with a newer version of ADT (i.e. 2004 or 2005) then it'll come with
VizRender, if I go with Revit or any other package I'll just continue to use
3D Viz.

As far as Viz And VizRenders compatibility with Inventor or CADDuct, I don't
know. Never used either or them. It does work real well (at least current
releases, older ones did have some problems) with AutoCad/ADT dwg files.

Viz does a real good job with animations. It doesn't need to output slides,
it can output video files (with a choice of codecs). Or, you can output a
series of images (i.e. slides) and then put them together in Adobe Premier
or some such. The biggest reason to output slides/images is to allow more
control of transitions and editing in a video editing program. Another
reason for outputing slides/images is because 3D Viz allows you to network
render, but won't do it with video. A lot of firms will run there rendering
overnight or over the weekend because it can be processor intensive. Having
an office full of computers sitting idly overnight is a waste when you could
be using them to churn out renderings &/or animations. I'm not sure
VizRender allows network rendering (but I'd guess it does?). Setting up a
rendering "farm" can really make things render fast, which is very important
when doing animations with all the lighting/material calculations necessary
to get photo-realistic output.

Another possible option is just using ADT. While certainly the built in
rendering isn't photo-real I have used it to give clients a "quick & dirty"
look at there project. It saves them money versus the time necessary to do
all the lighting/materials work to output photo-realistic stuff.

If you need compatibility with other people software your potential choices
may be effected. I use Autodesk products not because I think they're the
best but because I'm comfortable/proficient with them and it eliminates
compatability issues with my clients (in my line of work AutoCad is THE
standard). What's compatible with PipePro, CADDuct, & CADPipe? I dunno.

Anyways, I really got to get to bed soon. Hope this was at least
mariginally helpful (I do tend to ramble though so who knows, it might not
even make sense to me if I read it!!)

Michael (LS)

 

Thanks. I suppose I shall have to keep looking about