I am looking for feedback on Softplan or any other design software that is reasonably priced. I am also considering Autocad LT because I make custom cabinets in addition to general construction/remodeling.
Discussion Forum
Discussion Forum
Up Next
Video Shorts
Featured Story
Inspired by Larry Haun, this passionate framer is teaching a new generation of builders.
Featured Video
Highlights
"I have learned so much thanks to the searchable articles on the FHB website. I can confidently say that I expect to be a life-long subscriber." - M.K.
Replies
Chief Architect deserves a good look too
Mike Smith Rhode Island : Design / Build / Repair / Restore
The detailing in ACAD LT may serve you well for the cabinet work.
I use SP and it is a little comburesome for details, though it can be done. I love it - easy to learn and draw with.
It seems that I am transfering/sharing with a lot of designers who use Vectorworks. It does the building and the details.
Turbocad is worth a look - it has plenty of advocates.
If 2D is all you need, Turbocad and Intellicad have free versions for the download, search and ye shall find.
Try using the search here for "cad" and "design software" for a couple discussions
>who use Vectorworks
I just ordered that Monday! I finally ran into the limits of the polygon-based DenebaCAD for all the compound curves, and needed VW's support of NURBS. Read an article on the background of that--comparable to the ol' threads on the mathematics of a spiral stair handrail!
And being a Cloud, you have a lot of curves to work with!
Excellence is its own reward!
Cloud ,
Was any of that post in english?
Vroooooom(the sound of some thing going way over my head!)
TDo not try this at home!
I am a trained professional!
T, I said all that hoping off a chance to show off newly-learned knowledge! Ha ha ha! Once I get VW I'll post a before and after example. But till then here's that picture's 1000 words:
Draw a circle. It's smooth. But not all drawing packages can work with smooth objects. Many, as you extrude the circle into a wall, will draw that wall as a series of straight-lines segments rather than as a smooth curve. The difference between building a round stud wall and using 1' wide sheetrock nailed between each stud and plastering it smooth. Now extend this to a dome which also curves in the other direction, and you have a surface that is not smooth, like a balloon, but faceted, more like a cut diamond, or a geodesic. Those facets are bunches of polygons, and they hog a lot of memory and are awkward to cut through for windows and such.
Many drawing packages have a curved tool where you can click a bunch of dots and have them connected in a smooth line with something called a b-spline. Mathematically, it's getting up there in difficulty, using polynomial equations and such, and certainly harder than just the "connect the dots" straight line method. Now extend that to the contours of land, for example. To have smooth surfaces, you need the concept of b-splines, but in an entirely extra dimension. Thus the creation of non-uniform rational b-splines, or NURBS. Really complicated mathematics, but the payoff is renderings with smoooooooth surfaces, plus the rendering of more complex shapes. All of that makes a big difference in my work.
http://developer.apple.com/dev/techsupport/develop/issue25/schneider.html is as good an explanation of the deeper concepts behind it as I've seen. I especially liked the history that described the connection of this to shipbuilding.
When I want to draw a curve, I find something thats about the shape I want and run my pencil along the edge of it.
Neanderthal, but it works.
I actually understood what you explained!
I didn't kill all my brain cells in college!
Have fun w/ your new toy/tool.
Mr TDo not try this at home!
I am a trained professional!
Hey Piffin -
Had a thought which you might not know about.
Softplan can export stuff in DXF format. Most truss software can import DXF files into the layout part of the program.
That can be real handy for a couple of reasons. First - the DXF files can be emailed instead of printed out and hand delivered. Saves time.
Second - The truss designer can follow the outline of the walls and overlay the layout on top of the DXF file. Makes the input faster, and you can easily see the locations of sloped ceilings, etc.
Actually, I've had more luck getting DXF files from guys who use softplan than guys who use autocad.
Bigamy: One wife too many. Monogamy: Same thing.
I use both AutoCad LT 2002 and Vectorworks. Basically I use Vectorworks for the concept design and pretty pictures. I know that it is capable of much more, but a) I'm not an expert with it, and b) I don't think it is as good as LT for just plain old drafting. If I want to draw a custom cabinet for shop drawings, or draw a roof to within an inch or so to make sure it misses a window, I use LT. So the end result is that I draw all my actual plans in LT. Plus, I have to take my plans to a blueprint place to get them made (I don't have a plotter), and they can't read formats other than AutoCad.
Autocad is made for drawing lines.
Softplan is made for drawing blueprints. When you draw a wall, it's actually a wall, not a collection of lines.
I would imagine that there's also specialized cabinet design software out there that would serve you better than autocad.
"My mom said the only reason men are alive is for lawn care and vehicle maintenance." - Tim Allen
I just thought there must be a reason why so many architects use Autocad as well as quite a few cabinet makers and architectural woodworkers. Since I do re-modeling as well as the latter two things I was hoping to kill three birds with one software.
"I just thought there must be a reason why so many architects use Autocad"
I think it's kinda like "windows" software - It just has a monopoly on the market.
Guru: One who knows more jargon than you.
I used TurboCad for years, even beta tested for versions 6 and 7 -- a waste of time, they don't fix the bugs. Finally I had to exchange files with vendor companies, and that forced an upgrade to AutoCad LT. Turbo's .DWG and .DXF files just didn't work. After the months of un-learning and re-learning, I'm glad that happened. AutoCad is far more stable, and has a much better user interface. I get more done with fewer mouse moves and clicks. For instance, to make a line perpendicular to another, in Turbo you have to go to the tool bar and click on perpendicular mode. In Auto, you stay in plain old line mode, and when your cursor gets close to where perpendicular would be on the existing line, it gives you the option to click, and you're done. Likewise for endpoints, midpoints, etc.
The thing with CAD is that you'll end up using it far far more than you can ever imagine before you start. So it's well worth your while to get something good from the beginning. I wish I'd done it that way.
-- J.S.
"a reason why so many architects use Autocad..."
The full program with architectural addons is extremely powerful and almost infinitely full of options, but for many of us, that is like spending a hundred rand to get a work truck that will let you change the tires while you are driving down the road and not only haul your tools but build them on the way to the job. Un-necessary.
But half the reason that so many use it is their dominance of the market through acquesitions, mergers, etc. In the early years of Cad, they often bought out promising competitors and either incorporated their good points or shelved them to keep them off the market. They are now an entrenched, self-perpetuating market segment with extreme influence in the schools to gain advance ccontrol of the next generation market. There are hundreds of people who hate ACAD or more appropriately, Autodesk, but who cannot convince their superiors to change because, "Everybody's using it"
Guess what the salesmen use as their # 1 reason for why you should buy it or teach it in your school?
"Everybody's using it!"
Not,
"It's the best"
It may be the best for some, but there is a tremendous learning curve. How much time have you to invest? My Softplan was productive less than three weeks after I loaded up. Sold a $34,000 kitchen based on 3D renderings presented. Maybe six hours work to produce drawings that would've taken three days at the board with a pencil.Excellence is its own reward!
been using Chief since '97... brought in a new office person trained on Acad..
she's doing working drawings after one week.. the problem with ACAD is that it is CAD..
Softplan & Chief are 3D architectural tools....
as for exporting..3D DXF, & DWG, .bmp , .wmf....it's easier all the time...
and for a Design / Build company.......who are you going to export files to anyway ? We give our customers finish prints.. color or black & white..Mike Smith Rhode Island : Design / Build / Repair / Restore
I've had three nice ones where I designed the shell and interior designers did the interior design work so file sharing is a good feature.Excellence is its own reward!
Anyone use IntelliCAD and what do they think of it? AutoCAD ain't in the budget this year and for $100 I figured IntelliCAD was worth a look.
Edited 8/2/2002 8:56:15 AM ET by jc
Piffin and Mike make excellent points... there's no question that a powerful 3D program (Softplan, Chief, or Vectorworks) is a great asset for a Design/Build company. I'm working on a 250k project now that I might not have gotten without Vectorworks. It gives the customers a much better way to understand different alternatives and overall concepts for design. Want to see what it looks like with bigger windows... a few clicks of the mouse in VW can alter any characteristic of windows, doors, etc.
If I had more time to spend on learning the inner workings of VW, I'm sure I would find it even more useful...but I like AutoCad LT for sheer drafting power and precision. Maybe I'm brainwashed by the AutoCad propaganda, but it works for me.
So, Nick,
If I want to design a special cabinet with custom details, which would do me better, ACAD LT or Vectorworks? Which is easier to learn?
Now if I want to view the same cab in 3D, which program is my better choice?Excellence is its own reward!
I'm assuming this is a rhetorical question... it sounds like Softplan works well for you.
As far as the learning curve, I can't really compare. I learned AutoCad out of necessity, and I was upgrading from TurboCad to AutoCad LT... which seemed like a huge improvement. So I was just happy to be using something better. Then when I upgraded to LT 2002 I was blown away by the improvement. One thing I absolutely love in LT 2002 is the ability to zoom using the scrolling wheel on an Explorer mouse. That alone sped up my drafting hugely.
I think VW is a good program, but I just have never invested enough time to wring out it's full potential. So when I'm confronted by the need to make a quick shop drawing for something, I tend to go to AutoCad first. And the shop drawings I use are generally very simple, just enough to get the point across and get what I want built.
Not rhetorical at all. I'm happy with my SP but still looking for the Holy grail of CAD. I just spent tweeeenty minutes typing what I think that is but lost it in cyberspace....Oh well.Excellence is its own reward!
View Image
View Image
Well, I could do that in my roof truss layout program. But I'm not one to show off.....................(-:
Hey Joe - did ya get the email I sent you about the web page? Never got a reply back........
Ever wonder what's wrong with people who spend $2 or more for a little bottle of Evian water? Spell Evian backwards.
Boss,
Piffin,
View Image
Edited 8/3/2002 2:33:57 PM ET by J Fusco
Joe -
I clicked on your name here at this site, and sent an email that way. Don't know where it went. The best email address to use for me is [email protected]
As for the CAD/ Truss software thing - I was just kidding. Figured you'd seen enough of my posts to know that...........(-:
"When cheese has its picture taken, what does it say?"
Joe, how good is file compatibility between IntelliCAD and AutoCAD? Can't afford the price of admission for AutoCAD 2002 this year and am hoping the work I've started doing in ICAD can be brought to 2002. Thanks
jc,
View Image
Edited 8/5/2002 10:33:12 PM ET by J Fusco
Edited 8/5/2002 10:39:52 PM ET by J Fusco
> For that price if you don't already have cad, what the hell.
Though the dollars out of pocket may be zero, the larger investment you make in any CAD program is your time and effort to climb that learning curve. The freebie program sets you up for unlearning and re-learning and file conversion if you ever have to move up to something better.
-- J.S.
IntelliCAD claims file compatibility with ACAD .......... .dwg and .dxf file extensions. We shall see. Just don't have the $3000 plus it takes for ACAD 2002 at the moment.
> Just don't have the $3000 plus it takes for ACAD 2002
How about ACAD LT for $350 - 600? Moving up later would be lots easier from LT than from anything else.
-- J.S.
Started off in R12 for DOS and have used R13 (a dog imho), R14 and 2000. I've done some solid modeling and a little bit of animation importing 3D drawings into 3D Studio Viz. I've had access to AutoCAD at school and work till about a year ago. I figure that $650 could be saved towards ACAD 2002. I tried it out and it seems to be the best version yet. I like 3D ......... pretty rusty at it at the moment. I've found it useful. I was working with precast concrete ........ solid models made it easy to calculate volume. Use it or lose it ........ IntelliCAD seems the best bet at the moment to keep doing CAD work. Ed McMahon still has hasn't shown up with that check he keeps promising on tv so 2002 will have to wait for awhile.
If somebody wanted to test compatability slightly, I could send you my e-mail adress and you could sendme a couple (one 2D and one 3D) files that I would open and play with in intellicad, maybe add a note or line, and resave and send back to see if anything was corrupted by the activity.Excellence is its own reward!
This stuff about compatability has to be taken with a grain of salt....the implication is Autocads .DWG is a constant...it's not. They change it all the time, and that's one of the big complaints from Autocad users (and check out the user boards....not everyone loves the program. To put it mildly). Even using the same version, drawings change from computer to computer, and between versions, it gets worse. Same as all the other programs. At one point, I had Autocad 14 and 2000, Turbocad Pro 7, and Intellicad all on my computer, and I did a fair bit of testing just to see what the results are, using drawings (.dxf and .dwg) I had done, and drawings sent to me from a buddy using Autocad. It wasn't scientific, and I don't claim to be an expert on this stuff, but I found going between Acad versions and between different programs to throw up about the same level of difficulty....some stuff changed, some didn't. The biggest issues I ever saw were related to text, which sometimes took some cleanup. The actual drawings and dimensions interchanged pretty well, but these weren't extremely complex drawings either. The other issue I found was that 3d objects drawn in Turbocad or Acad didn't translate well to Intellicad....sometimes they were there, sometimes not. That was the free version of Icad available a few years ago, and I'm not up on what is current there. John Sprung has had bad experiences with Turbocad; I haven't with the later versions (I'm not at the most current level though, and for various reasons, I'm concentrating on Autocad now),and it still gets a lot of recommendations from some serious CAD/CAM types on the pro woodworking boards.
I'm pretty interested in file compatability; right now I have Acad, Acad Mechanical Desktop, Cabnetware (cabinet design software), and Autodesk Inventor (solid modelling software; I'm only taking baby steps with this, but it's very cool and will probably replace Mechanical Desktop....you have to .dxf to Autocad though) on my work computer. I also have a CAM program to put on next week when they upgrade my machine, and another one will go on later...in the next couple of years, if I'm here, I'm hoping to automate this shop with CNC equipment networked to a dedicated CAD/CAM lab, using all the software mentioned...so compatability and linking is big on my wish list, because I'm not a computer whiz and I like it when things work right. But as far as the current state of things go, Autodesk hype is still Autodesk hype.cabinetmaker/college instructor. Cape Breton, N.S
For remodeling work that you want to be able to show drawings of to clients, I don't think I would bother learning a 2D only package, if that is what LT is. I work in 3D only.
I've used Vectorworks for several years and am now using Chief. Some things I like about Chief very much. It automates a lot of things, which is great. Some things I really hate...it automates a lot of things, which sucks...if you get my drift. The things it automates well are real time savers. The things it automates poorly are big headaches to work around. The interface is very clunky and not intuitive. But once you use it enough to understand it, you can do things extremely quickly in it.
I found Vectorworks to be better for customizing stuff and for creating your own symbols and stuff, but slower for the repetitive things.
Having been on Chief for about 6 months now, I've nearly forgotten how to use Vectorworks, which is a bummer.
I want to design, not draft. Object-oriented programs are the most productive way to that end, IMHO. If 3D is at all important to you, I would heavily investigate all the object-oriented programs (Chief, VW, SoftPlan, Archicad, ???) you can. Find places you can watch the pros use them. See how long it takes to do the kind of things you need to do. Take a class, whatever. But think long and hard before you commit to anything, as changing horses midstream is really a pain in the ####.
Steve
>. Object-oriented programs are the most productive
What's your understanding of the term "object oriented"? Back when I was getting out of programming, it was just coming in, and it was a sort of mystical philosophy behind a new language called C++. The older languages, from assembly to C, were called procedural, because it was all about what the machine should do. Object languages dealt with, duh, objects, which were basically procedures and their associated data bundled together. Then they got into things like inheritance and polymorphism, it all got very airy-fairy, and I got out of programming. But to the end user, there was no way to know if a program was object or procedural.
-- J.S.
John
Basically the same thing.
In a basic cad you can draw a line or you can draw 2 parallel lines for a wall. But it is still just a couple of lines. If you break the lines to show a door you now have 4 lines.
In object orientated you draw a wall. That wall has certain properties such as width, height, interior finish, exterior finish, and construction methods. If you add a door the door has certain properties such as height, width, and swing. You don't break the wall to add the door. You now have a new assemble which consist of a wall with a door. For example you might changes all of your exterior doors from 32" swinging doors to 72" sliders. Do that one place where you define the exterior door properties. And all of the will change and the the walls will adjust for the change. Of course this was just an example. You could have more than one exterior door property.
Bill -- It sounds like you mean the difference between a dedicated architectural program and a generic drafting program. This is a very different thing than the difference between C and C++.
-- J.S.
You can think of a objects as sort of "high falutin" functions (or subroutines or procedures). The object performs certain functions and you give it input parameters and then get some type of output that you use in the rest of your program. Objects are supposed to be able to be widely shared, so that people don't have to reinvent the wheel each time, so to speak.
I haven't done object oriented programming, but it seemed to me that there wasn't that great of a revolution in going from "C" with shared function libraries and "C++" with shared object libraries. There is a quality known as "inheritance" that allows for small modifications of objects more easily than was the case with functions.
Maybe I missed something, but I think all the hype about a revolutionary way of programming was a bit overdone...
If I remember correctly, one of the first demonstration programs of object oriented programming was the famous Microsoft Solitare program. I think it used the cards as objects so they could be easily manipulated. Supposedly would have been much harder with other types of programming.
I think you're right, it was mostly hype. Anyhow, my real skill in those days was optimizing assembly code, squeezing every last clock tick and byte out of 8086 code. When that went away, I lost interest.
-- J.S.
I've run into it before with AutoCAD, at one point bouncing between R13, 14, 2002, and LT.
This stuff about compatability has come up many times in the truss business. Why isn't there a standard format for saving drawings in that would work across all major platforms?
Think about it - The architect could save the drawings, an email the file to a customer. The customer could open them up in something like adobe acrobat, and print them out for review. When they were done, they could be emailed to the lumberyards, plumbers, electricians, etc. for bids.
We could do truss layouts and sealed drawings and send them back to the builder/architect/engineer in the same format. A lot of stuff could be done this way - HVAC layouts, electrical plans, etc.
Seems like it would save a ton of time for everybody, but no one has attempted to do this. I wonder why?
I can levitate birds. No one cares.
Thanks to Adrian fort that realistic assessment. Feedback I hear is even less complimentary and more critical from many users.
Boss, What little history I have implies that it is Acads attempted dominance of the field tha impedes progress to universal formating. There is a council of some sort for the software developers but it is as effective as the UN is at creating peace.
3D renderings are invaluable to me. I can let customers view the proposed projet without giving away specifics so I am implementing a sales aid while protecting my copywrited work. Softplan sample attached, converted to *.jpg. The customer needed to see what the back wall of a garage would look like when converted to a living space.Excellence is its own reward!
>Why isn't there a standard format for saving drawings in that would work across all major platforms?
People HAVE attempted this. In fact, there are probably 15 standard formats! <G> The problem is that no format does well at anticipating the future. And each was invented by a company who has an interest in keeping their product better than the next. And each thinks they need features that are unique to their special capabilities, so no format but their own can possibly suffice, and it would be revealing confidential information to open their format for scrutiny. And they'd claim it would hurt innovation to commit to a standard format. And they'd be at least half right.
> Why isn't there a standard format for saving drawings in that would work across all major platforms?
The main reason is that once such a format was carved in stone, all programs would be limited to doing only the things that the format supported. .DXF (drawing exchange format) was an attempt to do that, it's pretty much a clarified version of .DWG, easier to read but not as compact. In practice, people seem to use the latest version of .DWG rather than .DXF, whether they actually use all the bells and whistles or not.
-- J.S.
I think IntelliCAD was/is an attempt at an open source CAD program- along the lines of Linux in operating systems. If I remember correctly Visio was the main driving force behind it ........... at least till Microsoft bought them. No question that Autodesk is the Microsoft of the CAD world.
Intellicad will do it. I'm not fluent in it but I've ended up with a practice drawing similar. Intellicad is just a free imitation of Acad, a little behind.Excellence is its own reward!
I work with autocad everyday for a few hours at least. I work with people who use it everyday. There are classes available for autocad within an hour of my home. There are also books on autocad, alot of them. I am relatively productive with this software. I think it is a good 2d software. There maybe better cad programs out there, but I don't know, I've only worked with autocad. Most program do not have the level of support that autocad has, which maybe is a good reason to go with it. With any software, you will get out of it what you put into it. If you use it alot you will be productive with it, if you use it a couple hours per month probably not. All the best.
Here are some thoughts which hopefully, will be helpful. I use the full blown AutoCAD in my engineering business because it does everything I need and I can communicate readily with other engineers, fabricators, etc with it. LT is a 2D version of the full blown program and does everything in 2D identically (I think). However, it does not have LISP. I have never used Softplan but did look at it on their website. It costs about $995 for their LITE version vs. $725 (maybe even less) for AutoCAD LT.
If you need the 3D, ACLT won't work for you and Softplan or other will have to be investigated. If 3D is not that important and you want a top notch drafting package, ACLT might be the best. I have used older versions of TurboCAD which were downright cumbersome but have not looked at anything from them in the last 5 years. What I found back then was that while TCAD might have only one way to do something, ACAD had several ways to do it. We looked at IntelliCAD at the office and kind of liked it too. I do not know what their pricing structure is these days.
Good luck!
Mike
>. $725 (maybe even less) for AutoCAD LT.
$600 retail, if you look at computer fairs, I've seen it as low as $350 for a legit copy.
-- J.S.
John,
The $600 sounds a lot better. I was in a CompUSA mall store the other day when I saw the $725 and couldn't believe it! I had bought an LT a few years ago from a mail order house and it seems like it was only $350 then. I updated my copy of LT about a year ago, it seems like for $150+/-. However, I have not updated to 2002 LT yet as I now use the full version of 2002. Thanks for the better information!
Mike
$594.99 at Amazon ........... occassionally they will have an online coupon for more savings.
I'm a Residential Designer/Builder that has been using AutoCad since 1984. I have been using AutoCad Architectural Desktop 2 & 3 for the past 2 yrs. in my own personal residential design business. I also have been using Autocad R9-R14 with a third party architectural package for the past 18 yrs. at my place of employment for residential design.
I have tried other Architectural programs such as SoftPlan R11, because I could not see spending the money on AutoCad, but ended up going back to AutoCad. I tried SoftPlan Rel. 11 through their 30-day trial program. There were a lot of things that I liked about Softplan but there were equally a lot of things I didn’t like about it as well.
The things I did like about SoftPlan compared to AutoCad ADT. 1. I think it is easier to learn for a first time user. 2. Creating perspectives where less involved, 3. The ability to do material takeoffs. 4. Its more setup to do residential work. 5. The cost is less.
The things I did like about AutoCad ADT compared to SoftPlan are, 1. I feel comfortable using AutoCad since I have used it for so long, 2. The flexibility and how customizable the program is, 3. The 3D elevations can be more exacting and lifelike with software packages like 3d Studio (but it is more involved), 4. It has more drawing tools, which makes it easier to draw custom details, 5. I like the way the grid and snap work compared to SoftPlan, 6. Building product companies seem to make sure their CAD Libraries work with AutoCad, such as Andersen’s Window Studio and USP Lumber Connectors to name a couple, 7. Its ability to create a walk through movie. 8. The different formats to plot drawings such e-transmit and plot to web. AutoCad ADT also seems to be getting a little more residential friendly.
I do think that AutoCad is one of the harder programs to learn, but once you get it figured out, I believe you have one of the best and most powerful programs out there. That’s probably why it’s one of the most popular programs made today.
I think the most important thing when buying a new program is find something that will do what you need it to do, and what you feel comfortable using. Who needs a long and hard learning curve to get productive with the software? This is what got me to go back to AutoCad, it is a program I’m familiar with and it does everything I need it to do and more. Good Luck in your search for software.
P.S. checkout my website if you want to see some 2D samples. I don’t have any 3D samples on my site yet.
Jim
Bay Shore Building & Design, Inc.
http://bsbad.tripod.com
Bay Shore Building & Design. Inc.
Residential Building & Design Services
http://bsbad.tripod.com
I was/am a Softplan user although the nature of my business has changed so I find myself using it very seldom now. I found it very effective for home design/remodel but for designing custom cabinetry, it doesn't. I am selling my Softplan v.10 with Softlist at a very reasonable price. (Because I'm not using it.) If your interested, email me at [email protected] or call me at (403)710-3739.
Kevin Bartsch
Cherry Creek Woodcrafters
Calgary AB
Not trying to hurt a potential sale but v.11 is twice the program that v.10 was, especially for roofs and 3D work.
Basically, v.10 was an attempt to take v.9 and make it Windows compatable. V.11 is a whole new game with more toys. I think they have comparison charts at the website. Everybody who went from ten to eleven is impressed.
I would go for Acad lite at 300 - where?Excellence is its own reward!