Pete

What is the most common design sequence in an architecture firm nowadays?
The traditional design sequence 15 years ago started with a sketch, followed by a physical model. This process went back and forth until the architect was satisfied. After that sketches were given to draftsmen to draft plans, sections, elevations etc. Now, 3d software is common in most architectural firms, how does this changes the process/sequence? Are Physical models yet the primer design tool or has this been replaced with 3d software? When do adobe software like photoshop, illustrator and indesign come into play in the design process?

ihabkal

I worked with and visited many firms. physical models are used less and less as a design assistance tool. Even as a presentation tool some freelancers are quitting becasue of the cost. they make more money in doing renderings. Like my previous employer that I worked for for three years he's closing the physical models department, which have been running for 45 years, and they are very famous for it, because they can make more on renderings. it's a vanishing form of art in my opinion. sketchup use is on the rise. but some architects left out sketches and physical models and use Autocad only. which I think causes a decline in their design skills and affects the quality of their work negatively.

ecastillor

I Agree....I think there is nothing lika a pencil and a piece of paper in the design process...theres something about the use of free hand drawing that no computer will ever match.

Adehus

I've found that physical models are increasingly rare. Until recently I worked in a retail store design firm, and typically we'd kick off the process with a series of sketches and then refine the design in 3D. Depending on who was free to do the design development and construction drawings, these would either be generated from the 3D model, or they'd use 2D views from the 3D model as a template for finished 2D cad work (sigh). Most of the refinement to the 'design' of the store was accomplished with CG models that would start out very abstract and become increasingly detailed. Renderings from these models were, in my opinion, much more compelling than any foamcore mockup would be.

mskin

Any design firm worth its salt still uses physical models. Everyone needs to be able to hold it, rotate it, rip parts off and add things on. 3d tools are great for visualization and light studies, but are more of a marketing tool than a study/design tool. we use 3d alot to see what something will look like, but we use physical models to understand, create and design. My boss gets excited about 3d renderings sometimes, but at the end of a day, when i walk passed his office, its a physical model that he is studying.

John Dollus

Or adopt rapid prototyping tech. and have the best of both worlds...
Polymer arch. models have a high 'wow' factor

Adehus

The only measure of whether or not a design firm is 'worth it's salt' is whether or not it can execute good designs. How they get there is generally immaterial to anyone except for the designers themselves. If you're convinced that the only way you can generate a design is through physical models, then I'm glad it works for you. Make no mistake, though- firms do successfully develop top-notch designs without the use of physical models.

Maxer

I've always found it funny when people say that all good design has to incorporate hand sketching and physical models into the design process. This mentality is usually shared by the older generation of designers and Architects who learned in this way and don't want to change. The newer generation of designers who have grown up with computers sees design differently, and sees the inherent advantages of using programs like sketch up to do their "hand sketching". With the advent of 3D printers there's really no need to construct hand built models and renderings and animations are able to represent the final product in a totally convening and intuitive way. I think in the next 20 or 30 years it will be much harder to find someone designing on paper than it will be to see someone doing concept sketches on the computer.

Adehus

I agree, Maxer. I still tend to sketch in the early conceptual stages of design, but I've known other designers who can jump directly into 3D. Whatever works, y'know? It's funny- we've offered rapid prototype models to numerous clients based upon CG models we've executed for them, and the response is always the same- "The renderings/animations show us everything we need to see. What's the point of doing a physical model?"

Still, there are relatively few firms around run by principals who grew up using CG. As long the guys cutting the checks need physical models to feel comfortable, they'll keep pushing them on their clients, if only for their own peace of mind (note Mskin's comment about what impresses his boss...)