May I add references to thebuildingcoder's blog posts that describe how they make Revit's modelling the way it is:
BIM versus Free Geometry and Product TrainingA Couple of Recent IssuesIn summary, parameters drive how geometries are created. Parameters are linked among objects. IMHO that's a reasonable approach when we want to create an Information Model. That may be considered when finding alternatives.
<p>I read a few thing here, he is a reaction from one civil engineer trying to do 3d. <a class="atMention" data-username="yorik" data-userid="9" href="https://community.osarch.org/profile/yorik">@yorik</a> statement </p><p>"The only area where Revit is very, very much better than both Blender and FreeCAD is generating complete, annotated, beautiful and manageable 2D drawings. I know this will horrify more than one, but to me Revit is mostly a very good drawing board, not a very good modelling app."</p><p>I agree particularly. The mindtwist in good " bim software' is the ability to produce readable 2d drawings. .. say what??!! That really is happening. If you ask me the drawing that i see from revit are very low quality. Only if your model is square you get decent drawings. </p><p>As dion mentioned i am more thinking of bim as a set of data and models. Drawings DO NOT have to cone directly from the model. If we let loose of this insane thought the industry and software development in 'BIM' can make progress much more easily. Fusion of data!</p>@yorik @Moult @magicalcloud_75 I think it'd be good have a look at this, 3D Associative Text, from STEP AP242: https://www.cax-if.org/documents/3D-assoc_textRPGv4_a4.pdf
That's a great document, @ReD_CoDE - I will be sure to reference it when I get some time to work a bit more on annotations.
It looks a bit boring academic :P the title suggested something more wild and pratical. Love to see ifc examples
Thanks for sharing
hi everyone, I just found out about this forum via a Webex few days ago where Dion talked about Blender BIM/ Free Cad. I am not a coder/ programmer but rather power user of applications such as cad, revit, navisworks..(sadly a lot of autodesk tools ;) From what I heard and followed the last few days ( and correct me if I am wrong), Dion and a few folks here have been developing tools / workflows with open sources tools like Blender / FreeCad to offer AEC firms an alternative ways to "BIM" their projects rather than these commercial tools such as revit, archicad, allplanes...? And more importantly, you want to promote these tools/workflow because you liked these tools yes ? I have a few comments here:
Some one mentioned Blender/FreeCad is way better than Revit when it come to modeling. I believe you. And I also believe that Rhino can do much better job too. Clearly everyone know Rhino is quite cheap and solid 3D modeling software for architectural firms worldwide. So the question of the thread is really about Blender/FreeCad vs Revit or Rhino ?
Someone mentioned documentation and models are not needed to be in the same software, which is fine as long as the export / import is seamless...etc one can model in xxx software then import to Blender BIM to get IFC registered then somehow extract there IFC models for documentation ? That sounds a bit like an old day when we used to extract Rhino models to get plans/sections and import them in autocad for documentation. Sadly they are not bidirectional linking to the 3D model. Am I missing something here ? There are design firms are modelling in Rhino and bringing the geometry into Revit for documentation, collaboration and coordination successfully (However, the larger details (1:20 or 1:10 scale) is often the disconnection between 3D and 2D detailing). Perhaps I would like to see if there is an open source tool that can be a data collector (more like Naviswork) that can be collaborate, coordinate and produce drawings from.
Would love to hear your opinions on the above comments. thanks guys.
Hi guys, I introduce myself: i'm Edwin Cámara, architect by profession, I'm a user of Archicad (advanced), autocad (intermediate) and 3dsMax (intermediate) with 20 years of experience in each of them.
I read all the comments and I think they are all correct. Obviously if we see them focused on the perspective and needs of the person who published it.
Being that out of necessity I have used payment software all my life, since the companies in the area focus on such programs (in a pirate way by the way). Since last year I lost my job so I decided not to incur piracy, learning to use only open source programs for my personal projects. With what I have been a big surprise, good surprise indeed. There are alternatives for practically everything and with excellent results.
Obviously if we compare Freecad with archicad, librecad with autocad and 3dsmax with blender. Coming from the commercial side I will say: "The opensource is still lacking things to get to the commercial level".
But for example: If I compare 3dsmax with Blender, speaking only and specifically about the interface and user experience part; Using blender feels like using 3ds max 10 years behind. But the results obtained with no, these are as good as those obtained with 3dsmax.
And it is that, really between payment software there are also differences and depending on the area that we compare these will be bad or very bad. Example: Archicad vs Revit
Archicad is super easy for the architectural design process, you work as well as if you were doing it with a paper, Revit on the other hand is bad to design directly on it. Instead, revit for Mep design work is excellent and archicad is not bad, it is lousy !!! for these tasks. Archicad regenerates its views faster, but consumes more memory than Revit ... and so we could continue with different examples.
I think the biggest problem in general is the lack of commitment or time to dedicate ourselves to learning new things. And definitely staying with what we know and handle best is always the easiest. And that is why we are looking for alternatives that resemble the software we use, and we think that this new program does not reach or reach the level of what we already have.
I think that everything is simply about knowing how to do it in the program that we define as a tool. After all, between software there are always pros and cons.
@NgocNguyen my response to (1) is I don't see it necessarily as versus, but an addition. Tools have strengths and weaknesses. Tool lock-in is bad, tool diversity is good. In response to (2), the BlenderBIM Add-on is getting some powerful annotation features extracted from IFC and has increasingly powerful partial exchange. There are more coordination features being built too including BCF management and clash detection to replace Navisworks.
Welcome to OSArch, @Darth_Blender ! Good to see more architects here! There is a huge issue with the lack of commitment and time to learn new things. We often just learn whatever we're told to in the office and stick with it. However, I see Blender increasingly making its way into the education space, so that could change.
Go to page:
Login or Register to reply.