Design Computers Finally Living Up to Expectations
In the early ‘80s, advertising hype primed architects for a computer revolution. They were led to believe that CAD--computer aided design--would make them faster, more creative designers.
Today, many architects in San Diego and across the nation have a much better idea what computers really can and cannot do. They’ve learned a few lessons, sometimes costly ones. After several years of development, the computer software and hardware available to architects is only beginning to fulfill the early promises made for it.
“There is a whole lot of ballyhoo about CAD and what it will do for the profession,” said architect Richard Sullivan, who chaired a computer interest group for the local American Institute of Architects chapter and helped the staff at SGPA Planning and Architecture implement computers while he was working there. “The first car looked like a horseless carriage without a horse. That’s the stage CAD is in, using the computer to emulate what can be done by hand.”
But it’s not just the equipment that has kept the use of computers from becoming more widespread among designers. There’s been resistance to the computerized way of working, especially from older architects weaned on pencils and drafting tables. Sullivan said it takes genuine faith and a long-term commitment to training before architects get friendly with computers.
Austin Hansen Fehlman Group learned how to implement computers the hard way. In 1982, the architects paid out $200,000 for a system called RUCAPS, designed to run on expensive “mini” computers in the days before the affordable, powerful desktop machine, or microcomputer. The equipment proved so complicated that many staffers gave up on it.
Old System Scrapped
“You had to put in so much information about each piece of the building, the process got in the way of designing,” said architect Don Hansen, one of the firm’s partners. “Not that we didn’t get anything out of it. We used it to visualize buildings, even land forms.”
Today, Austin Hansen Fehlman has scrapped the old system in favor of software called AutoCad, which runs on the less expensive microcomputers. AutoCad, originally a simple drafting program, is now used by about 6,000 designers in San Diego, according to Focus Computer, a local distributor. Since 1982, the software has been updated 11 times, to the point where it is now extremely powerful and rapidly becoming the industry standard.
“It’s quicker and easier,” Hansen said. “It has 3-D capability, but we don’t use it much. It’s not 100% accurate.”
Hansen said the computers are especially useful for preparing presentation drawings, like the one they made of the new Scripps Clinic building in Rancho Bernardo.
“The view we chose was the 11th or 13th one we looked at on the computer. We fine-tuned the perspectives until we got exactly what we wanted.”
Besides architects like Austin Hansen Fehlman, other San Diego designers are finding ways to put computers to work.
Landscape architect Steve Estrada thinks computers enhance his creativity.
“Among some of my people here, if I ask for a design, the initial reaction is to get the pencil and sketching paper. There’s initial resistance to using the computer. They think it’s rigid, that it takes away creativity. I’ve found just the opposite.”
Estrada got so hooked that he equipped his 16-person office with $100,000 worth of computers and software.
For some of the large planning projects he’s tackled, he bought aerial surveys of the sites in computer disc format, loaded them into his computer and laid out buildings and landscapes on the terrain displayed on his screen. Details like brick patterns or the shape of a swimming pool can quickly be changed until the result is pleasing. Estrada finds this much more efficient than hand-drawing each alternative.
Different Combinations
Landscape architects can even buy libraries of plant materials on videotape, feed these images into their computers and experiment with different combinations, displayed on the computer monitor in color. Estrada takes pictures of what’s on the computer screen, and uses these slides in presentations to clients.
Even though AutoCad is much less cumbersome than first-generation packages like the one Austin Hansen Fehlman started out with, some designers feel it too is unwieldy.
“I found that the more basic you can get, the better,” said architect Kotaro Nakamura, a partner in RNP Architecture & Planning. His office uses several Apple Macintosh computers, known for being “user friendly,” and two basic design programs: McDraw II and Schema. Staffers take quickly to the systems. They don’t have to learn the complex commands required to use AutoCad, he said.
Nakamura especially likes the system for creating three-dimensional perspective drawings of buildings, and for quickly adding stock items like windows and doors to plans. These architectural “parts” are stored and can be pulled into a drawing by the push of a button.
Even with all this enthusiasm, though, architects seem to agree that the most creative aspects of their work still occur using the old-fashioned methods.
“My idea is that creativity shouldn’t be limited by the tool,” Nakamura said. “Computer generated lines are so crisp and precise, they’re the antithesis of creativity and pure expression. In my mind, nothing is better than drawing freehand.”
