Who is using ADT 3.3 for production

[Anonymous]

I was wondering how many people are using ADT 3.3 to produce production
drawings for High Rise, Office etc.... If you are what are some of the pros
and cons?

[neoroarke]

who isn't using ADT for production should be the question. ADT is a great production program as well as a "design" program. there are certain issues you need to take into account when considering to use it in a construction documentation mode. Certain front end planning has to take place.

[Anonymous]

We use it for production. In fact, I think it's strongger as a production
tool than as a design tool - not that it's bad for design, just that it's
great for production.

The biggest con, in my mind, is that you have to break drafters out of the
"I will do it my way because that is how I have always done it" mindset.
ADT is different that ACAD. It isn't really hard. Many people, myself
included have commented on the steep learning curve. But, in fact, it isn't
really that hard, it just requires a mental paradigm shift. Stop drawing
lines, and start creating things. That's all there is to it.

"Ricky Valdez" wrote in message
news:5FE4517FF3EB8864D87D8B51BEDD478B@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> I was wondering how many people are using ADT 3.3 to produce production
> drawings for High Rise, Office etc.... If you are what are some of the
pros
> and cons?
>
>

[Anonymous]

Ditto on what Charles said but there are times when --especially when the 3D
model is just for in-house use -- that you have to ask yourself is it worth
the time to get the model to look right or should I just explode the thing
and get the construction documents to look right.

Certainly as you go along the learning curve, you don't need to ask yourself
that question as often. It's been a long 7 months but well worth the ride.

Annette @ SLaM

[neoroarke]

you should get "SLAM"ed if you explode anything in autocad....take no short cuts. learn the software and the work arounds. if you "explode" stuff...it will only set you back that much towards the end of projects........never, never, explode!

[neoroarke]

Agreed. you have to get those "drafters" out of that R14 mind set. As soon as you can convince those guys to start creating instead of simply drafting, they'll realize how much fun ADT really can be. Yes, there are certain frustrating learning topics but the process of drawing plans, well, I'm preaching to the choire here. it really does make designing much simpler and for construction documentation, all I can say is "wow".

[Anonymous]

On Wed, 3 Jul 2002 17:53:54 -0700, neoroarke wrote:

>you should get "SLAM"ed if you explode anything in autocad....take no short cuts. learn the software and the work arounds. if you "explode" stuff...it will only set you back that much towards the end of projects........never, never, explode!

But what happens when there ARE no workarounds because the software does not
produce graphics the way that is required? And the boss is sitting there
wondering why you can't draw a stinking bay window condition correctly?

I use ADT for design, production and a 3D modeling front end - and in my
experience, there are times that ADT is really, REALLY frustrating for docs
because the plan graphics simply don't work right. You spend a ton of time
tweaking settings and display reps, building complex endcaps and generally
jumping through hula-hoops on fire to get a plan to look just right.

And it gets worse if you are using ADT for both 3D design and documentation,
because you end up compromising both areas to get each side to work right. In
the end you trade one set of inconveniences (using lines as walls) for another
set of inconveniences (endless tweakage of graphics).

The good thing is that with experience comes the ability to apply that learning
(and, of course, the built up library of styles, layer standards, multi-view and
masking blocks, etc.) to the next project. So it takes a lot of time before
wrinkles in the product are worked around and production has a chance to take
off.

Matt
mstachoni@comcast.net
mstachoni@beyerdesign.com

[Anonymous]

It is ironic, I've spent the last several months virtually isolated in ADT,
so today I spent several hours in Microstation/J. What a miserable affair,

I was just whining to myself (no one to listen to me, they all love MS)
about some wall cleanups the other day. Now, I would rather whine about
cleanups any day, than work another day in Microstation or AutoCAD (plain).

But it is very true, sometimes two lines can be more practical than that
wizbang roof thingy!

Steve


"Matt Stachoni" wrote in message
news:ase7iu8odj12qc4mm44iaqs89cs62q56rs@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 3 Jul 2002 17:53:54 -0700, neoroarke
wrote:
>
> >you should get "SLAM"ed if you explode anything in autocad....take no
short cuts. learn the software and the work arounds. if you "explode"
stuff...it will only set you back that much towards the end of
projects........never, never, explode!
>
> But what happens when there ARE no workarounds because the software does
not
> produce graphics the way that is required? And the boss is sitting there
> wondering why you can't draw a stinking bay window condition correctly?
>
> I use ADT for design, production and a 3D modeling front end - and in my
> experience, there are times that ADT is really, REALLY frustrating for
docs
> because the plan graphics simply don't work right. You spend a ton of time
> tweaking settings and display reps, building complex endcaps and generally
> jumping through hula-hoops on fire to get a plan to look just right.
>
> And it gets worse if you are using ADT for both 3D design and
documentation,
> because you end up compromising both areas to get each side to work right.
In
> the end you trade one set of inconveniences (using lines as walls) for
another
> set of inconveniences (endless tweakage of graphics).
>
> The good thing is that with experience comes the ability to apply that
learning
> (and, of course, the built up library of styles, layer standards,
multi-view and
> masking blocks, etc.) to the next project. So it takes a lot of time
before
> wrinkles in the product are worked around and production has a chance to
take
> off.
>
> Matt
> mstachoni@comcast.net
> mstachoni@beyerdesign.com

[Anonymous]

In our office, we use, AutoCad, ADT, AutoDesk VIZ and even have manual renderers. Let’s face the facts. In our profession we provide service, NOT sell products. Our time invested in a project is our service and ultimately that time invested is money. I agree computers and softwares help us draw and edit quicker, but I strongly disagree that we should be restricted to only using ADT for production. Surely, if all our clients were like Donald Trump, with multi-million dollar budgets, then we would all use ADT for production, and spend the time fiddling and tweaking with certain details right in order to be viewed correctly in all views, but for most of the cad drafters and employers, they just want to get the drawings done on time, on budget, and most importantly have a life and not be the last one to leave the office at night while trying to tweak a bay window when it would have taken minutes 2D drawings. Bottom line, get your drafting priorities straight and use whatever it takes to get the job done right and quickly, unless of course you are a CAD MONKEY and have no life, -Cheers. E.F.

[Anonymous]

Did he imply that being a "CAD MONKEY" was a bad thing?

--

David Koch

[Anonymous]

And was he drawing the conclusion that CAD MONKIES have no
life or do we have to meet two separate conditions? What about CAD MONKIES who
do have a life?

style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">

"David_W._Koch" <
href="mailto:dkoch@ewingcole.com">dkoch@ewingcole.com> wrote in message

href="news:f0f2264.8@WebX.maYIadrTaRb">news:f0f2264.8@WebX.maYIadrTaRb...

Did
he imply that being a "CAD MONKEY" was a bad thing?

--

David Koch

[neoroarke]

Matt, I hear all that you are saying. and I agree with it all. but ask yourself this question....would you want to go back to drawing with lines, arcs, and circles to represent what ADT is doing now?............I'm confident that your answer will be a most definate "NOT". ADT "IS" frustrating to learn, yes. ADT is horrible to try to make work "exactly" like you want to see the graphics display, yes. But I have to say, I never want to draw a 2 line with hatch representation for a wall again...........never. that alone is worth the price of the endless tweeking we must do to get our graphic to look right.

[neoroarke]

hear, hear, mate. Cad monkies or not, yes, get the project out with the tools you have available at hand. what happens is that being a design/cad monkey, we tend to want to "understandt" the program down to it's basic programming. down to it's "how does it do this" or "how can I customize it to do that" issue. I know. I've been there, done that, and moved on. Again I state, would you prefer to being drawing lines, arcs, and circle and having to rehatch an area of wall every single time you moved or put a door or window in? No..............ADT is hard but not impossible to master. Now, Viz4...........sheeeshh...talk about sub-sub-sub-levels of material/object/whatever manipulation........now that's an intense software to master but I guess if you are doing it all day long...it becomes second nature.......just like ADT will be.........just like vanilla autocad was.

[Anonymous]

I think for some jobs, there is no recourse but to do it "the old way", if
nothing else because of a tight schedule.

But once over the hump, so to speak, ADT gets easier to control. But the dumb
problems with, say, wall cleanups is terribly annoying and if tweaking times are
actually measured, would probably be less efficient that doing it with lines and
manual hatching in the long run.

Let's just say it's not an easy sell.

Matt
mstachoni@comcast.net
mstachoni@beyerdesign.com


On Sun, 7 Jul 2002 16:17:05 -0700, neoroarke wrote:

>Matt, I hear all that you are saying. and I agree with it all. but ask yourself this question....would you want to go back to drawing with lines, arcs, and circles to represent what ADT is doing now?............I'm confident that your answer will be a most definate "NOT". ADT "IS" frustrating to learn, yes. ADT is horrible to try to make work "exactly" like you want to see the graphics display, yes. But I have to say, I never want to draw a 2 line with hatch representation for a wall again...........never. that alone is worth the price of the endless tweeking we must do to get our graphic to look right.

[Anonymous]

Fine. Let Adesk put out a product that covers all
conditions and displays properly. I agree about dimensions, though.

style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">

"neoroarke" <
href="mailto:neoroarke@hotmail.com">neoroarke@hotmail.com> wrote in
message
href="news:f0f2264.3@WebX.maYIadrTaRb">news:f0f2264.3@WebX.maYIadrTaRb...

you
should get "SLAM"ed if you explode anything in autocad....take no short cuts.
learn the software and the work arounds. if you "explode" stuff...it will only
set you back that much towards the end of projects........never, never,
explode!

[Anonymous]

Sometimes 2 lines is best, however produced. ADT
drawings in general are difficult to read with default settings. Think from the
contractors POV for a change-or do you not do CDs?

style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">

"neoroarke" <
href="mailto:neoroarke@hotmail.com">neoroarke@hotmail.com> wrote in
message
href="news:f0f2264.10@WebX.maYIadrTaRb">news:f0f2264.10@WebX.maYIadrTaRb...

Matt,
I hear all that you are saying. and I agree with it all. but ask yourself this
question....would you want to go back to drawing with lines, arcs, and circles
to represent what ADT is doing now?............I'm confident that your answer
will be a most definate "NOT". ADT "IS" frustrating to learn, yes. ADT is
horrible to try to make work "exactly" like you want to see the graphics
display, yes. But I have to say, I never want to draw a 2 line with hatch
representation for a wall again...........never. that alone is worth the price
of the endless tweeking we must do to get our graphic to look
right.

[Anonymous]

You're NOT creating-all this stuff about no paper
drawings is a pipe dream for at least a decade. Therefore, you're representing
an abstraction in 2D, ergo, drafting.

style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">

"neoroarke" <
href="mailto:neoroarke@hotmail.com">neoroarke@hotmail.com> wrote in
message
href="news:f0f2264.4@WebX.maYIadrTaRb">news:f0f2264.4@WebX.maYIadrTaRb...

Agreed.
you have to get those "drafters" out of that R14 mind set. As soon as you can
convince those guys to start creating instead of simply drafting, they'll
realize how much fun ADT really can be. Yes, there are certain frustrating
learning topics but the process of drawing plans, well, I'm preaching to the
choire here. it really does make designing much simpler and for construction
documentation, all I can say is "wow".

[Anonymous]

I for one, see no substantial improvement over S8
for CDs, given the incompatibility problems. Many clients and consultants will
not accept ADT files OR OE, and the explode routine is a miserable mess. Not to
mention, ADT is more prone to bloat and file corruption.

style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">

"neoroarke" <
href="mailto:neoroarke@hotmail.com">neoroarke@hotmail.com> wrote in
message
href="news:f0f2264.11@WebX.maYIadrTaRb">news:f0f2264.11@WebX.maYIadrTaRb...

hear,
hear, mate. Cad monkies or not, yes, get the project out with the tools you
have available at hand. what happens is that being a design/cad monkey, we
tend to want to "understandt" the program down to it's basic programming. down
to it's "how does it do this" or "how can I customize it to do that" issue. I
know. I've been there, done that, and moved on. Again I state, would you
prefer to being drawing lines, arcs, and circle and having to rehatch an area
of wall every single time you moved or put a door or window in?
No..............ADT is hard but not impossible to master. Now,
Viz4...........sheeeshh...talk about sub-sub-sub-levels of
material/object/whatever manipulation........now that's an intense software to
master but I guess if you are doing it all day long...it becomes second
nature.......just like ADT will be.........just like vanilla autocad
was.