vectorworks vs allplan

[XCAD]

Thank you for the zetadierre explanation, excuse me!

last (for the moment): Does anyone know if prices are + or - in line with those indicated on the site for online purchase (or are they very different? ).

I could contact the distributor, but it was just to be able to "orient" me a little.

Bye.

 

[zetadierre]

starting from 1600 euro + VAT

we have international and Italian versions here. I don't want to advertise but the one in Italian really has an extra march

 

[Arch.Salv67]

hi, viewports in vw are views (plans, sections, prospects, construction details ....) of the 3d model that is realized. These are associated with the model, so any modification made to the model will find you in the views you make. You can also explode these by turning them into lines or polygons, I personally do not recommend it.
viewports are very powerful and very useful in drawing up a project, with them you can control your work.
in many programs such as allplan, archline, archicad, before proceeding to the layout of the project "explode" the views obtained, thus losing communication with the model realized.
I think this is not a right way to go through a program that wants to be called bim.

Except... .

 

[Tristan]

in many programs such as allplan, archline, archicad, before proceeding to the layout of the project "explode" the views obtained, thus losing communication with the model realized.
I think this is not a right way to go through a program that wants to be called bim.

I'm a revit user, so I don't have much to do with the discussion but I wanted to ask confirmation from allplan or archicad users if the one mentioned above corresponds to the true...no because if so I get the goose skin! I can only agree with the conclusion of arch.salv67! !

 

[Ramaja]

1) vw rendering engine is c4d.
it is not simple and immediate to get optimal results, but studying it is possible, without exporting to other software. personally, for reasons of time (always restricted) I prefer to use artlantis for rendering.

hi lory.b eventually bought the architect version as you had suggested to me and, at least to look at the manual, it seems complete, both for a modeling of the ground in reduced areas and for lighting and lighting in building, so I am pleased to not have invested more for the designer version.
I am curious however to know how you use artlantis for rendering instead of the renderworks engine. I tried a little artlantis 3 with archicad but it didn't particularly impress me. I didn't seem to be up to vrays and other more advanced engines, but do you think it's better than renderworks?
I am still agonizing trying to convert myself to the philosophy of the program (coming from autocad) and that I have vw 2012 for too little time to compare artlantis and renderworks.

 

[Arch.Salv67]

"tristan" I can confirm that for these programs this is the philosophy of bim.
until 2008 I worked with bows xp.
After modeling everything, to get a good graphic and technical representation, I was touched to explode sections or prospectuses and work on it. The problem arises every time we had to proceed to the drafting of the variants, it was my duty to redesign almost everything.
a colleague who lives and carries out his professional activity a few kilometers from me, works with archicad 14. I assure you that he too must proceed, for the drawing of the press boards, to explode the various views obtained from the architectural model. I remember that when I showed him the potential of viewports in vw remained open.
as far as allplan wrote "xcad" describing the pre-printing process.

I ask you, revit (I don't know) how it works?

Save.. .

 

[Tristan]

I ask you, revit (I don't know) how it works?

as vw from what I understand, in the sense that the 2d is nothing but a two-dimensional view of the 3d model; a change made in the model immediately affects all views 2d and vice versa. same thing applies to abachi, which are nothing but seen in table format but connected with model 3d and related plants, prospects and sections. 2d views then you can "dress" with annotations, detail elements, sampling etc...

 

[MirkoNEO]

be from old allplan user I can say that contrary to what you think, it is very powerful, you just have to understand it and domesticate it! I also had a vector license and to tell the truth is a great cad, but does not do what it does allplan. you put the do in 2d disconnected from the 3d (specs and sections) while the plants are managed directly from the model. for a "normal" use vector is fine, but if you do special works, it is better to allplan which is also modular (I add what I need from the modeling of the roads to the modeling of the armor and carpentry until the management of the energy certification). then one thing I regret allplan (are on revit) are the lists... is the only one who can make me demonstrations of the measurements on computed in a human way (the rectangles are rectangles with his formula, the trapezi idem...). the horrible thing that I still dream of allplan are the macros (the symbols of the architectural elements in vector, the families in revit) as they are from asylum!
However vector is a nice choice, compliments for choice, as put on the table has almost no rivals, perhaps illustrator.. .

 

[lory.b]

hi lory.b eventually bought the architect version

Nice choice!
architect is perfect for our work.

I am curious however to know how you use artlantis for rendering instead of the renderworks engine.

The reasons are two.
question of timing. we are always with the minutes counted on various deliveries.
artlantis is very fast and interfaces perfectly with vw.
other reason. We don't care about forced photorealism.
we have our "style" that characterizes the work of the study and that previews a massive postproduction in photoshop, which takes us very far from photorealism.

I anticipate that I am still agonizing trying to convert to the philosophy of the program (coming from autocad)

courage! think that in a while you'll wonder how you used autocad;-)
I do.

 

[lory.b]

It was my job to explode sections or prospectuses and work on it.

viewports are not perfect, but this is absurd
Me!

 

[Tristan]

viewports are not perfect, but this is absurd

in revit it is not possible! 2d views cannot be exploded; you should export to autocad...

 

[XCAD]

be from old allplan user I can say that contrary to what you think, it is very powerful, you just have to understand it and domesticate it! I also had a vector license and to tell the truth is a great cad, but does not do what it does allplan. you put the do in 2d disconnected from the 3d (specs and sections) while the plants are managed directly from the model. for a "normal" use vector is fine, but if you do special works, it is better to allplan which is also modular (I add what I need from the modeling of the roads to the modeling of the armor and carpentry until the management of the energy certification). then one thing I regret allplan (are on revit) are the lists... is the only one who can make me demonstrations of the measurements on computed in a human way (the rectangles are rectangles with his formula, the trapezi idem...). the horrible thing that I still dream of allplan are the macros (the symbols of the architectural elements in vector, the families in revit) as they are from asylum!
However vector is a nice choice, compliments for choice, as put on the table has almost no rivals, perhaps illustrator.. .

with allplan frankly I think I have left us "the soul" on the macros and on other things that with this sw is really tough to manage (especially for the macchinocity), moreover I think it is little supported by exhaustive manuals and tutorials or videotutorial that make it able to exploit better the potential.

when you talk about "special jobs" that you can do with allplan and not with vw what you're talking about? after hearing the previous comments I am curious: in allplan I have always suffered the "disconnection" between the model and the perspectives/sections/prospects, etc.. and then the nurbs in allplan do not exist (the curved surfaces are "discretized" in triangles (which hangs in the calculations to render, shadings, etc.).

Finally, it has been 20 years since the rendering engine is not revised (you have to resort to c4d for acceptable renderings): so much to make others understand what I mean, the top possibility for an allplan rendering is the "raytracing", but besides being very slow does not even allow the calculation with the radiosity.

then every sw has its own qualities and its defects, but vw seems to me a step ahead of allplan.

Mirkoneo, why do you feel more powerful allplan? having tried them both you can definitely clarify it!

Thank you.

 

[Arch.Salv67]

Good morning, I can only add this.
a colleague who has been using allplan for many years (1995 or 1996), complained about this product. He told me that the innovations in terms of functionality and productivity are very modest, and the upgrade costs are rather fearful. this colleague, intrigued and amazed, of the graphic representation of the design boards I present, asked me what product I used.
he himself confirmed that many old allplan users have gone to vw, and the same thought several times to touched him too.
when, at my study, I showed what in a short time you can get with vw, you know what exclamation came out of his mouth.
"and I still dare to use allplan."
I must say that every cad or bim also has limitations or small imperfections, there is no perfect product. I believe that the choice of a product is very personal and linked to the way we work.
personally I don't think that vw can't do what he can do allplan (as writes mirkoneo).
there are great architecture studies using vw, with profit (in Italy study 5+1aa).

Save.. .

 

[zetadierre]

there are great architecture studies using vw, with profit (in Italy study 5+1aa).

Save.. .

Yes, you're perfectly right. But I admit my limitations and "confesso" that all the times I used the bim completely I had to use the viewport section as a reference converted into group and then do the definitive 2d sections. that however is a great saving of time.

but how sure we are that in Italy the studies that use vw lean on the bim not only for modeling but also for ordinary elaborates (plan ready sections)? I admire you except because I've seen some of your work talking on my own, you know how to do it a lot apparently. I would also really like to use only bim, but in my study when I do a section and I see that a sole for a millimeter breaks me the continuity of the section style, when my boss tells me that the veins of the beams that I shaped with parasolid must be gray while the edge of the beam must be black.. In short, when you make these sorts of adjustments on the detail I say it clearly because I spent precious time trying: I can't make the viewport section the final instrument of representation. but I repeat: It's almost certainly my lack. to the study where I work I make 2d drawings and pattern to get render, I can not integrate everything. in any way I will not desist: also because with a bim modeling that really works open the doors of efficiency without comparison in the changes, the interchange with ifc file, the possibility to dialogue with programs like ski engeneer..

Unfortunately to see that reality is that colleagues who use vw from "when it was still minicad" (I would add a nice ooohhh...) do not even use categories but change line by line with the palette attributes and pass you files in which under the category "retino" there are doors walls windows furniture floors and separate quotas... and to defeat the resistance to innovations by people there is no software that wins, at least as far as I see! :frown:

 

[XCAD]

I fear that what arch.salv67 says corresponds to reality for many allplan users (the fact that they dare to use it maybe is because learning another sw costs time and often you do not have it!).

I myself feel part of this deployment (I'm sure if the speed of vw learning is good, maybe it would be worth changing: you probably earn time later, in the use of sw!).

plus the cost of vw updates (but also of the same sw) is much more affordable than allplan.

a onor of the real allplan assistance is very helpful: for vw the assistance is efficient?

Is there anything in vw that would have to be changed or improved?
(contributory request to understand the possible limits of vw compared to allplan)

Hello and thank you.

 

[lory.b]

Is there anything in vw that would have to be changed or improved?
(contributory request to understand the possible limits of vw compared to allplan)

in recent years vw has evolved radically.
I use it since '96, when it was still called minicad, and I was fortunate to participate in the first person in this evolution.
everything is better. but the work behind this software, the efforts you make to bring the user to a smooth design path is more than appreciable.
parametric objects, in some respects, are still a little rigid and often use modeling to customize an element.
as then writes zetadierre, it is not so obvious to get the right architectural representation from model 3d.
definitely there is still to work on this aspect... but working ;-)
I do.

ps.
every day I see dwg designed to "...", with half drawing in paper space or all a mix on a few layers. The point is to rule.
we here have strict because interfacing with the outside we can not afford poorly structured designs. :

 

[Tristan]

But correct me if I'm wrong. now vw is nemetschek, as it is allplan and archicad...so the assistance, if it is valid for allplan, should also be for vw...hypotizzo

 

[zetadierre]

archicad is of the graphisoft distributed by cigraph that distributes artlantis allplan is of the nemetschek while the nemetschek vectorworks fawork vectors from what I understood

 

[XCAD]

. . .... I assume yes, assistance I think is efficient,

but a presumption is not a certainty (this can only give me vw users).:biggrin:

 

[Tristan]

archicad is from graphisoft

on the graphisoft site, below, there is written:
graphisoft is part of the nemetschek groupedit: I also find that nemetschek has acquired maxon...