architecture4d's posterous

I get asked all the time about which 3D software and CAD packages are 'best' to use. There isnt really a specific answer. Its just whatever works best for you! I use Cinema 4D for any 3D modelling and Archicad for detailed CAD work because they both work (excellently mind you) on my Mac. They also work on the PC too and have no incompatibility issues with any other software packages at all. Plus the layout and GUI of Cinema 4D is much appealing compared with almost any other 3D app out there. For my needs (architecture, design and motion graphics) this coupling of software is brilliant. Oh I also use Sketchup now and then for quick and easy models.

Macs and PCs both have their pros and cons. However most creative industries (especially film and design) tend to use Macs because of their superior stability (in terms of OS and 'hanging') beside the fact that the top end Macs are generally better priced than comparable machines from different manufacturers. In fact not only was my Mac Pro significantly cheaper than an equivalent Dell at the time of purchase, it was surprisingly better spec'd! Plus with Boot Camp (click here for more info) there really isn't a need to buy a Windows based computer any more IMHO. 

PCs do have a strong advantage for 3D/CAD users, though, as AutoCAD and 3DStudio Max are industry standards and to this date only run on the Windows. (but obviously if I were required to use any Windows based software i'd just boot up into Vista/7 and go right ahead!) So in short, if you have an Intel Mac (post 2006/7) then well done. If not, I guess you're lumbered with Windows! (only kidding, Windows 7 isnt too bad!) Ok i'll quit with the Mac vs PC stuff now...

Going back to what I was saying about software... 

3D packages are generally very similar. A Maya or Cinema 4D user will be able to use Blender (a FREE application you should get if you want to get started!), Lightwave, 3DS Max and vice versa. The fundamental aspects of 3D software are interchangeable with any other 3D software - the only problem is learning the interface/command structure. When I first learnt how to use 3D Studio Viz, I found the layout and interface quite tedious and a bit too 'Windows' for my liking. The same went for 3D Studio Max. Plus having bought a new PowerMac G5 I wasn't able to use either. Thats what helped me make my decision to learn Cinema 4D. At that time Sketchup was in early development and (I think) only just came out! Again, it wasnt for Mac. I still had a Windows PC so I learnt both C4D and Max in parallel. 

My conclusion was that for me personally, C4D was a clear winner in the 3D category due to its easy(er) learning curve, instant results and cross platform compatibility. For CAD, namely plans/sections/elevations etc, Archicad is my decided software of choice. The top three reasons are, 1) cross platform compatibility, 2) numerous plugins/export options for rendering/3D software, 3) you can build in 3D at the same time as drawing plans - and often a LOT quicker than doing plans in AutoCAD. For me its all about workflow and ease of use. This combination works for me but it might not for you.

For the majority of architectural practices, however, the Autodesk suite of applications will tend to dominate - with few practices using less expensive software such as MicroGDS (which isnt too bad!) and perhaps Allplan or Vectorworks. Following closely will be Google Sketchup - as many practices will simply download the free version and will still be able to produce excellent results via render plugins such as VRay (industry standard), Podium and Maxwell Render to name a few. 

I strongly recommend using Sketchup if you haven't used any 3D software before, it is simple to use and you can generate excellent results. If you want better renders (for free) check out the trial version of Podium; a plugin for sketchup, or try Blender 3D - it will help you develop transferable skills that you can then pass on to any other 3D app you may choose to use in the future - and you dont need to find a 'crack' copy either. Its strictly legit. 

Sunny

So now its come out that the 2035 prediction of the Himalayan glaciers melting was based entirely on speculation of one man, 8 years prior to when the IPCC issued their report in 2007...  It was a phone call made by New Scientist magazine interviewed Syed Hasnain, Indian scientist, over the phone in 1999 for an article on the subject - he merely speculated that the Himalayan glaciers could melt by 2035. A few years later, the IPCC base a report which was based on another report, based on the New Scientist article, and say that the chance of it happening is greater than 90%. 

Looks like the global warming fiasco has yet another dent in its highly bullshined exterior. 

Read this article for more info: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6991177.ece

Any comments? 

Sunny

This seems like a very interesting endeavour to build a floating city.  Although it wont solve the overpopulation crisis (predicted to be very apparent mid-century) the design aspirations are nonetheless quite interesting. Golden rectangle proportions, plentiful green spaces and the use of 'floating concrete' make this project somewhat aesthetically pleasing as well as technically challenging. Definitely one to keep an eye on.

Click this link for more info!