ARCHICATCHUP - Archicad 27 review, ISO 19650 and Site Context

[@fusionbim]

Hi Nathan, it's clear I missed a valuable & engaging live session, sorry man. Thanks for doing a great job of my ISO 19650 naming question. In a short segment you outlined very well the standards, different routes, their pros & cons and a workable best way to achieve the objective, while working within the limitations of our current Archicad versions. I like your approach of an "Index" to easily manage & manipulate the set of Layout naming fields in one place! 🤩 I can see that "Index" being extended with ie. fields like "Issued tick" & "issued Date" for even better management of older & new Layouts. Regards, Francois

[@SkewedBIM]

There will always be the next event Francois! I am glad that you enjoyed my ISO 19650 segment. Project Indexes is a powerful feature within Archicad. It would be an interesting step to see if tAPIr could access that data and it could populate it all based from details in a TIDP.

[@michaeljohl4669]

Hi Nathan, I just watched the full video. From an architects and BIM-manager view from Germany, the first topic has no relevance in professional work. What should it be good for ? Renderings ? The second topic the introduced naming convention is not very mature from a german point of view. Most german clients have way more detailed naming conventions. However the way you solved the naming convention is the right approach, which most ArchiCAD users in Germany go. I am just wondering, if this kind of naming conventions are new to you guys. About the third topic Design option I can say it is a problem that the GUID for different option of one wall is not identical. So it is hard to keep on track with changed that come out an option, but in general Graphisoft seems to be still on the right path. Would be nice if we as Graphisoft costumers could agree about which ideas from the idea pool of the ArchiCAD product-roadmap should be prioritized. Please get in contact with Lukas about that a the board.

[@SkewedBIM]

Hi Micheal, It is incredible how different regions deliver projects. I always find what we place importance on differs. The first segment was a process we developed for projects where we needed the context of existing built assets as a model. For visualisation, and documentation. The naming convention is the UK naming standard included in their ISO 19650 annex so it was a demonstration on how users can get those more complex naming conventions. As for design options, I won’t comment on functionality outside of what was presented as part of the building together event as I am currently under NDA for beta testing.

[@daviddelgadovendrell]

Hi, Nathan! Did you share that interesting workflow using Airtable + Notion within the Archintensive event?

[@SkewedBIM]

No I didn’t. Which specific workflow are you suggesting? I might add it to the list of things to present.

[@daviddelgadovendrell]

@@SkewedBIM The one that helps to demonstrate a temporary alternative to the need of using BCF within BIMx among standalone team collaboration.

[@SkewedBIM]

@@daviddelgadovendrell Thanks for reminding me. I will put it on the list.

[@pferrerp3]

Hi Nathan, we ended up with similar workflow for sheet/publishing strategy. For us works good but i think Graphisoft easily could do/have done a lot more. It won´t be a fancy feature but a useful one. They did good with revision manager in the past. This way we can´t set option lists to avoid misspellings, we have to fulfill level manually which is crazy since we are working with a BIM program, suytability could have an automated process just like revisions, we can't set rules to be followed...

[@SkewedBIM]

To be fair to Graphisoft the container naming is very complex, and most other naming conventions are cascading so it makes it easier to use sub folders to contribute to the naming. I don’t believe that automatic naming is even an option on the other side of the fence so as users we should be happy that we at least have what we have. That being said, you are right, with the workflow demonstrated as a process on how layout sheets have to be created manually it is something GSHQ can now see for themselves and potentially investigate a way to bring back automation into the process.

[@computationdesign]

man i don't see what they have updated on Archicad like feature option design who ??? can use option when making facade take the time , maybe if they have improved on parametric modelling that option could be needed in that case, man honestly Archicad need to open API like revit, can u i imagine they forgot to add AI features, about GDI is sh**t man it is required to read GDI documents and it is not even common programing language who need to learn GDI when there no use when only required in ArchiCAD Revit will always leading market

[@SkewedBIM]

I think they used the facade as an example to demonstrate the scale Design Options can work at. We will see the capability of the feature once it is fully released. There may be the ability to link design options to various parametric outputs from GH / Rhino or through GDL solutions that people create. Regarding API access. Graphisoft does have an API, you just apply to their developer program. There are many software developers out their creating tools to plug into Archicad. It isn't just something that Revit has. A lot more people have been developing add ons for Revit because of the areas where it isn't good enough (filling in the gaps I would call it). It is only now as the market matures that people are wanting more and more out of Archicad that they can't get out of the OOTB product. So there will be a movement by people to develop their own add ons through the Archicad Developer portal and the API kits. Here is a link to the page: archicadapi.graphisoft.com/

[@computationdesign]

thank u so much, i love archicad but I hate to see Archicad behind

[@fusionbim]

I agree with you @@SkewedBIM, the fact that majority of Archicad don't do custom API tools just shows how complete Archicad standard installation enable us to achieve all our deliverables with lots of flexibility & freedom. This makes Archicad a well rounded & full tool suite, while the Open API is there to go even further.

[@SkewedBIM]

@@fusionbim I think that Revit users understand the need to innovate to achieve what they need to achieve, while most Archicad users think that it should all be in one software, delivered on a platter for them.

[@fusionbim]

Yes that too are both true

[@PrzemN]

Hi Nathan, I am really glad I found your channel, there is not so much good quality content on youtube regarding Archicad. With every new version I am actually dissapointed with what Graphisoft is going for. I think for me in 27 search and design options are the only interesting features. I would like Gs team to take a deep breath, have a step back and repair a lot of broken stuff going back from version 5 or even 4, instead adding things that in my opinion almost nobody is using ( like structural features ). Archicad should be a tool made for architects and Gs should in my opinion to focus on data exchange with other programs that structural / MEP engeneers are using. Thay alread have expensive tools that they are using for years, nobody will start to use Archicad with it's limitations. I am not going also to do their job and taking a time to prepare for free structural models to make their lives easier. Graphisoft just prefer to pump Archicad with something that is easy to implement and just not useful for Architects. Yeah, some new things are nice but there is just so many things still working bad, so many features missing we could talk about for hours that sometimes it is just killing me how we have to find a ways around some things instead of focusing on using it's features to make projects we want

[@SkewedBIM]

I am glad you like the content and find it if value. I wouldn’t be disheartened with where Archicad is going. There are a lot of positive features on the roadmap that they will be implementing over the next few years and into the future. Some will be of value to me, and some not. It is all part of using a global software that needs to meet the needs of users from all over the world. Regarding structural engineering, I actually met a structural engineer that has been using Archicad for 17 years. So they do exist and the one I met had built some great tools to enhance their workflows even more. Regarding MEP that development is being dealt with by the DDScad team and their features don’t take away resources from the Architectural side of things, so I wouldn’t be concerned by that at all.