[ckcland]

What is everyone using for hardscape designs? I use Autodesk by ProLandscape and am not really satisfied but it gets me by OK. I don't really want to move to AutoCad unless I have to. Any suggestions would be great.

[papercutter]

I'm a little confused... Autodesk is a company that makes AutoCAD and Drafix makes Pro Landscape, so what are you using? What do you need it to do that it's not doing for you?

[eastern1]

Landscape Design Software - Landscape Management Software

Best there is but expensive.

[wogozaly]

I have used Autodesk AutoCAD Lt and I think that it is a really good program. I went back to school for electronics and I had a couple of semesters using it. It has all the power that you would need to draw in 2D and the price for it is around $900.00, but the biggest problem would be that there is no built in library for landscaping. That is where Dynascape is so much better, with Dynascape you don't have to worry about many of the symbols, line weights and layers. Many of those things are automated and that makes it much easier to learn. I have to say that Dynascape is very close to AutoCAD but only better when it comes to landscaping. Even if you were good at AutoCAD, I feel that you would be able to draw faster in Dynascape because many of the things are automated. Many of the tools are the same in both, it's just different how they do it.

Good luck!


Walter

[agla]

I disagree. The automation is a slow down once you have your lineweights down and a library of plant symbols built up. I have all of my 140 plant symbols on the tool pallet at 1' diameter. All I do is drag, drop, click on it (select), click the scale tool, and type the size that I want it at (2.5 for a 30" diameter, ....). I do my lineweights by color rather than by polyline. I've used the same lineweight and color system for nine years with only a couple of adjustments, so I see the color as a certain thickness as I draw, although it is not actually thicker on screen.

The trick to speed is to be consistant in how big you draw things and what line weights you use for what.It has a side benefit of building in a recognizable scale into your drawings as you zoom in and zoom out. That sense of scale is one of the hardest adjustments people go thrugh when transitioning from hand drawn to cad.

I use Acad Lt 2008 at my home office and acad land desktop at my full time job.

Having said all of that, I think Dynascape is a great program for people to jump right in with. They cut out a big chunk of the learning curve. If you have used acad and have gotten through lineweights and have built some graphic standards, the input in the "automation" is a burden rather than an asset, in my opinion.

[papercutter]

There's not really a right answer here, just right for each person; but I'm an AutoCAD person. While the interface may look a little daunting, there are actually only about 15-24 actions I use on a regular basis. Here are some of my reasons for using it:
1- it's a great value for the power- I'm always amazed by what I don't know, and I would consider myself a "power user" of AutoCAD
2- it plays well with others. The .dwg file can be brought in and out of SketchUp and other programs, and there are some great free plug-ins for AutoCAD. Techo-Bloc and Cultured Stone (Owens Corning) have free hatch patterns, and USP fasteners organizes their blocks into a nice little menu that shows up IN AutoCAD- I don't even have to go to "insert block."
3- The layer management is easy and clean, and blocks are pretty straightforward. I don't know if it's a user issue or a software issue, but every Dynascape drawing I've brought into CAD has been pretty bad- I usually just redraft the whole thing to save time.
4- Because I draw for other companies, I love how easy it is to create titleblocks. If my client sends me the .eps file of their logo, my staff graphic designer can convert it to a .dwg and drop it right in the drawing, already vectorized.
5- There are a lot of resources out there for AutoCAD. I have a free plug-in that allows me to open and edit newer versions of CAD; and there are thousands of premade blocks out there. I just finished a job for a client who made it really clear she LOVES her Miata. Since we redid the driveway as part of the project, I spent two minutes searching and found a beautifully detailed plan view Miata online. You know those stupid little details that get your clients excited? This was one of those. I may not have 140 plant symbols like Agla, but I have what I need.

[wogozaly]

I will agree that AutoCAD isn't that hard to learn, and the symbols can be made and saved. I am coming from the direction of someone who is new to the software. If you work with the software almost everyday, Then you will have a different understanding of the software then someone who does a couple of good sized jobs a year. I don't think Dynascape will slow you down even as a pro, but it will definately speed things up when you are a beginner or use the software occasionally. It would also be hard for someone just starting out to make all the symbols that they would need quickly. It isn't that hard when you know what you are doing but this kind of software has a learning curve and Dynascape tries to help, the other good thing about Dynascape is the tutorials, they are great and will get you up and running in a couple of days.

The biggest problem with Dynascape is that it is bundled with the Iris program, I don't see a need for this in a smaller business that is just looking to put out good designs. They had sold it seperately in the startup version and others, but they would take away some of the features and symbols. As a small company that isn't interested in Iris, it would be nice if they sold a full version of Dynascape on its own.

The direction that I am coming from is someone who is a landscaper and not a designer by trade. If you will be sitting at the computer 8hrs a day, 5 days a week my advice may not be good for you. I am speaking for the person that is a salesman, foreman, laborer, driver, equipment operator, businessman, boss. Someone who isn't going to be using the software all the time but still wants to put out a good design. The tutorials come on the DVD so you can always go back and watch them again if you forget how to do something.

I will say again that AutoCAD isn't really any harder then Dynascape but its the built in features, symbols and probably most of all the tutorials that will get you up and running faster. I think we can all agree that if we sat two people down that never have used either that the person with the Dynascape will be able to produce a drawing in a much shorter time because of these few differences.

I can see your point also, if you have access to a class or two and have the time to build your own symbols, the AutoCAD Lt version is also a good option. Some people may have the experience of CAD, and then it is also a good solution. Again, I am talking about landscapers that want to do their own designs on a computer.

Walter

[agla]

I don't disagree that Dynascape is a good choice for someone who has not had a rigorous training in Autocad. ProLandscape seems to be really good as well, although I know less about that one.

I stand by my assessment that a very well trained and experienced autocad user will be slowed down by Dynascape.

It is also a complete misunderstanding to think that autocad is an easy program to learn. Sure, it is easy to draw a line or a circle. There are over 500 commands and countless variables that can be set on top of those. I've been forced to deal with a lot of the commands and variables because of the various offices I have worked in and what other design professionals have intrduced into the mix with joint projects. I am by no means close to understanding everything about the program, but I thought I knew a lot when I got out of school. They had great classes, but we barely scratched the surface. It is an incredibly complex program.

Autocad does play well with others as was mentioned. But, it is very easy to get tripped up if you have to work with others because their drawings are likely to have ben drafted with other variables that you might have a really hard time dealing with. It can be a real pain in the butt especially if you don't have a bunch of other experienced users in your office to get you through it.

All that I'm saying is that the best program is the one that matches your experience, your skill set, who else you may need to exchange files with (or not), and your budget.

I think that Dynascape or ProLandscape are going to be best for most design/build landscape companies.

[papercutter]

Originally Posted by agla

Autocad does play well with others as was mentioned. But, it is very easy to get tripped up if you have to work with others because their drawings are likely to have ben drafted with other variables that you might have a really hard time dealing with. It can be a real pain in the butt especially if you don't have a bunch of other experienced users in your office to get you through it.

Ok, true enough. I've been working with a civil engineer in RI and I still have no idea how she set up her CAD file, but it just doesn't behave right for me.

I know some people love Dynascape for the color rendering abilities. Autodesk has a stand-alone program for AutoCAD called Impressions (I think). I've been playing with the trial, and while I'd still rather hand render a drawing, it seems fine. Not quick, but a decent output.

[Hank]

Has anyone tried VectorWorks. I saw them at MANTS in Baltimore. It seemed like a very good program, similar to Auto Cad. I have also looked at Dynascape. I also need to get my design work into some software package, but with the prices what they are I would like to make the right decision (for us) the first time.

[tfld]

Originally Posted by papercutter

Ok, true enough. I've been working with a civil engineer in RI and I still have no idea how she set up her CAD file, but it just doesn't behave right for me.

I know some people love Dynascape for the color rendering abilities. Autodesk has a stand-alone program for AutoCAD called Impressions (I think). I've been playing with the trial, and while I'd still rather hand render a drawing, it seems fine. Not quick, but a decent output.

HAving worked with civils, I bet I could guess the problems you're having...

1. The linework probably is NOT "flat" ie if she gave you contour information those contours probably have real elevations. Run the command "flatten" and select all data to make it 2D.

2. Another common problem is drawing scale, ie she was drawing in decimal scale and you are using architectural. If so, select her line work and sclae it up by 12. Go to format>units>architectural, or vice versa.

Hope that helps..

-n

[tfld]

Originally Posted by Hank

Has anyone tried VectorWorks. I saw them at MANTS in Baltimore. It seemed like a very good program, similar to Auto Cad. I have also looked at Dynascape. I also need to get my design work into some software package, but with the prices what they are I would like to make the right decision (for us) the first time.

Theres a new office in town taking projects in Dubai and all across the US. They are using vectorworks from what I've heard, so it must be okay, right?

[papercutter]

Originally Posted by tfld

2. Another common problem is drawing scale, ie she was drawing in decimal scale and you are using architectural. If so, select her line work and sclae it up by 12. Go to format>units>architectural, or vice versa.

Hope that helps..

-n

Scale it up by 12? Son of a... you know, it's always the obvious solution tapping you on the forehead, isn't it? I switched my units every place I could, but didn't do that. Bet it works. Thanks!

[agla]

Yes, engineers work in decimal feet. I have to scale architects drawings down by 1/12 as I did this morning. The entire drawing was all done on the "0" layer - a case of an older architect using new technology, I suspect.

Another thing that might be happening is that the civil is using something like land desktop that makes some entities that are not lines or polylines. That happens a lot with contour lines. They usually associate with some kind of shape file that it won't be finding in your computer. You could ask her to explode the things that give you trouble prior to resending them. That might help with some things. Do you ever get pop up dialog boxes looking for shape files when you open a drawing (usually "AECCLAND.shx")? Then there might be another one that asks if you want it to show Proxy Graphics.

[tfld]

Originally Posted by agla

Yes, engineers work in decimal feet. I have to scale architects drawings down by 1/12 as I did this morning. The entire drawing was all done on the "0" layer - a case of an older architect using new technology, I suspect.

Another thing that might be happening is that the civil is using something like land desktop that makes some entities that are not lines or polylines. That happens a lot with contour lines. They usually associate with some kind of shape file that it won't be finding in your computer. You could ask her to explode the things that give you trouble prior to resending them. That might help with some things. Do you ever get pop up dialog boxes looking for shape files when you open a drawing (usually "AECCLAND.shx")? Then there might be another one that asks if you want it to show Proxy Graphics.

Some times those contours may have been generated from a dem in arcGIS and then imported into land desktop. Often, these contours are stored as shapefiles (shp) in GIS and carry realtime elevation data into CAD. As a side note-this can come in quite handy for larger landscape visualization projects as these contours can be used to create 3D terrain with a little work.

I always thought .shx files that I hit "cancel" to alot at work when opening complex cad files were just missing font maps...I don't know...at this point who cares, just hit cancel and move on right?

Hank-

How did that work out?

-n