Whenever I researched VisualARQ, I found reports from architects who started using it and then gave up, claiming that a large number of bugs made its use ineffective. I would like to hear from VisualARQ 3 users about how the program has been performing. Are there major bugs that make it unusable?
My current use would be for residential architecture—would it be a good choice? I already use Archicad, but I don’t like its modeling approach at all, so I switched to Rhino for modeling and found it much more enjoyable. Having to transfer geometry between Archicad and Rhino with constant remodeling has been exhausting, so I’m very interested in VisualARQ as a way to work entirely within a single program.
Since I render in Twinmotion, and it can’t properly read a closed geometry with surfaces that have different materials, VisualARQ might be even more interesting, considering multilayer walls and automatic intersections.
Has anyone who transitioned from Archicad or Revit to VisualARQ experienced the adaptation process? How has it been using the program? Was it worth it? Why?
I use it as an exclusive design software from concept through construction administration. I do a mix of custom residential and small commercial.
I’ve never used Archicad, but know Revit backwards and forwards. Both Revit and Rhino+Visualarq have drawbacks and require workarounds, but I find Rhino+Visualarq to be a far better experience for both myself and my clients for small projects.
Here is bit of discussion about this topic from earlier posts. Some of the major drawbacks I mention in those posts have been addressed and fixed since then in the Rhino8/VA3 update. I can’t say that for any Revit bug of the past 10 years.
Do you work alone or would you like to work on a project with several people at the same time?
How big of a project would you like to work on? Multifamily housing? - How many windows can there be in your project?
You need to be aware that there are limitations, such as this:
I definitely wouldn’t jump into this with both feet if I were you. Try to recreate a project you created using Archicad in VisualARQ first.
One problem you need to be aware of, is that people on this forum (including me) like Rhino so much that sometimes solving crazy work-arounds gives them satisfaction and a sense of accomplishment. In the eyes of people for whom software is just a means to an end, this can be a very impractical approach.
On the other hand, other, more specialized software like Archicad or Revit can be so rigid that without a very good knowledge of it, you will be limited by its whims.
Comparing VisualArq and Archicad is a rather complex matter. As Jakub said there are many pros and cons. Here are some definitve ones:
Pro Archicad
Deriving 2D from the 3D scene is working very very well. Like in Revit, it does not matter if parts are selected/edited in 3D or those auto-generated 2D plan/section view. This is not possible in Rhino, wich still has quirks in the documentation/2D department. Where to place 2D extracted linework - model or layout space? In Archicad (or Revit), there’s a definitive space for just this, between 3D space and layout space, as it should be. Also, the whole linewidth/-style topic is much more straightforward in Archicad (there are no per-layer properties like in Rhino, which can lead to confusion).
A relatively new and strong feature: design options. Very well and logically integrated.
Collaborative work via a team server on one and the same file.
A prioritization system for the structural layers of building parts, which allows for granular control of wall/slab/roof etc. joints.
Scheduling is super poweful.
Full support for building physics parameters, structural data exchange with building engineers, contruction phases, etc. etc.
Pro Rhino/VisualArq
Modelling with NURBS, of course.
Most things are - just simpler, more intuitive, more direct.
(Much) cheaper.
Enough for now. All in all, Archicad is an absolutely professional software, which has grown around the needs of architects. Visualarq plays a game of catching up as it seems, but I honestly think it will be at least another decade until it plays in the same league as Archicad.
I mean, you’re not wrong. Rhino is by far my favorite software, from the way the software works to the business structure of the creator company, and it’s also incredibly satisfying to create a super versatile grasshopper style from scratch.
I’d agree with @arcus. VA3 is lightyears ahead of VA2 and seems to be picking up speed. But getting started is a labor of love. Unless you have some interest in tinkering and learning, I’d probably look elsewhere.
“Absolutely professional software” is a bit of a subjective phrase. True, compared to the competition, VA doesn’t offer as many fully functional, production focused features. But there’s probably a conversation to be had about the relationship between architects and the tools they use to draw their buildings.
In other words, I’ll frequently recognize the fingerprint of Revit or Archicad in a building or in a drawing set. When colleagues come into my office, they almost always remark on how my drawings are completely distinct. Some studios will find that to be valuable and worth the effort.
Also, VA has the most communicative and active developers I’ve ever worked with. They’re fantastic.
Hello Thomas, these links opened my mind. This issue of alternative solutions in Archicad has been taking away my peace and my desire to use it, both for modeling and documentation. And my feeling is that VisualARQ, being simpler, might fit well with the workflow of a small office that works with smaller architectural scales.
What annoys me about Archicad is that simple things, like a three-panel sliding door, only have the option of two movable panels and one fixed. If I want all three panels to slide, I have to use the Library Part Maker (an integrated Archicad tool that is not very intuitive) and model it from scratch.
Its base modeling also tests my patience and makes me a lazier architect because everything that is difficult to do there I end up avoiding. In Rhino, with its optimized modeling, it is much more practical and enjoyable to test new options.
To be honest, not very well. I started learning it during my architecture thesis, which was entirely done in Grasshopper. Then I went a year without using Rhino, and now that I have left the firm I was working at, I’m trying to force it into my design routine.
I’m working on a project that I started in Archicad, modeled in Rhinoceros, and now I’m bringing it back to Archicad for documentation, but this whole process has been quite discouraging… They are two very different programs, and every time I switch between them, I have to get used to their dynamics again.
I work alone, but sometimes I provide services for other architects. However, it’s always through file exchange. Here in my region, people use Archicad but do not use its collaboration system.
So far, I have only worked on small residential and commercial projects. I would like to take on larger projects, but I haven’t had the opportunity yet. Maybe something with about 30 windows…
I understand, indeed, there are some small issues that can really disrupt certain workflows. Maybe this particular issue is not that relevant for me right now, but there will probably be others that will affect me.
I’ll follow your advice and try testing it by recreating a project first… With Rhino, I already made the crazy decision of doing a project while learning how to use it at the same time, and it hasn’t been very pleasant lol (I love Rhino, but the learning curve is quite steep… and there are always some issues. For example, I finished modeling, and when I went to render in Twinmotion, I discovered that Twinmotion doesn’t recognize Rhino geometries with different materials. So now I have to remodel everything so that each object has only one material…).
Even with so little time using it, I already like Rhino so much that I’m pushing myself to make this crazy full migration…
This is exactly the point I mentioned above to Thomas…
You made me curious about yours distinctive drawings.. Are they on any platform where we can see them, or is there any way you can share them with us? It’s always good to see new references.
I’m walking a project all the way through with VA/R8 and I’m planning on sharing some drawings once I’ve got it off my desk. I think these forums would benefit from more work sharing to show what the platform is capable of and also to grow the population of users.
That sounds really interesting! I’ll be looking forward to seeing your posts. Sharing this kind of work really helps enrich the community and inspires other professionals. If possible, let me know when you publish—I’d love to check it out!
I am curious about this problem you describe. Changing material assignments in Rhino should not involve any remodeling time at all.
For material assignment my strategy is to assign by layer. If you are rendering in Twinmotion, the game is to work in Rhino in a way that best takes advantage of how Twinmotion is working. Meaning if Twinmotion groups objects based upon material than assign materials in rhino to make that process most efficient. In general, it’s best to work in the material environment of the rendering software rather than rhino’s material environment.
Hello,
I have been using Rhino / VisualARQ for several years. The range of projects is from small to medium ones, let’s say from 200 up to 3000 sq. m. I’d say you are limited by the power of your hardware. There were projects I did myself, there were also those that several people worked on. I don’t use any other programmes at all, ie. I do all modelling, rendering and documentation exclusively with VA. And all stages of design, starting with conceptual designs up to technical and workshop drawings. It took me about a year or even more to adapt both programmes to my needs. I have written quite a lot of scripts, mostly with Python, but also with Grasshopper. All my contractor, I mean structural or civil engineers use various software: most of them still working with AutoCAD, some of them working with Revit. There were some issues with compability, but quite easy to fix.
And, as it has been already mentioned, be warned: you are either a follower or a hater of Rhino / VisualARQ. Nothing between. Get ready for some blood, sweat and tears, maybe in some time you will be able to fit the programme tailored to your own needs.
Cheers, Jaro
As of right now, VisualArq is unable to generate a correct window reveal in section and plan view, if your wall consists of more than one layer. Not sure how people use this in a professional setting. I wish it were otherwise..
When comparing these software - I think here needs to be taken into account the amazing fact that the version number of VisualARQ is 3! According to internet sources, Archicad has been in development since 1982 and Revit 1.0 released in 2000.
So, in that sense I think that the title of the question is a bit missleading. Instead of asking “Is it worth it”, we should be asking ourselves “how could we support VisualARQ more”. I mean they have developed a rivaling environment to AC/Rvt in a short period of time. With a lot smaller company.
I seem to have bought my first license of VisualARQ 1 in 2014. And even though version 1 was not yet for serious work, it offered the first BIM design implementation to Rhino. VA2 became usable, and VA3 seems to offer a lot more maturity. Even though we encounter small stuff in usability and bugs, I still think this is an amazing trajectory they are heading.
VA listens and corrects shortcomings in a fast pace, and I sincerely believe that in a few years time, they will chip away some market share from the big players in the BIM design field.
I’m used to the modeling approach of SketchUp, meaning I apply different materials to different faces of an object. From what I see here on the forum, people really do use material assignments “By Layer,” just like you described. So, if I have a wall that has one color on one side and another color on the other, in SketchUp I would simply paint each face of the wall with a different color. In Rhino, this also works, although it’s not as intuitive as in SketchUp, but Twinmotion doesn’t recognize these different material assignments on a single object coming from Rhino, unlike its integration with SketchUp.
Check out this topic: Objects with more than one material not working. Help?
@jerry.bakowski I’m glad to hear that you were able to adapt them to your work, I hope I can too. From what I’ve read here and elsewhere, you really either love or hate the Rhino + VisualARQ workflow Lol, and I really want to love it.
I’ve been worried about issues like the ones @mich.platter described. Does anyone have a solution for this situation? I think it won’t be a problem for now (for me off course), since I’m working on small projects and we don’t use multi-layered walls. But it could become an issue if bigger business opportunities come up.
Hello, @Toni_Osterlund . In some ways, I agree with you, but we can’t forget that there’s always a context. And my context right now is that of a broke recent graduate living in a developing country in crisis, like Brazil. If business keeps going the way it is, based on my calculations, I’ll only be able to afford the VisualARQ license by the end of the year. Everything has been losing value here, and even in the Architecture and Civil Engineering fields, piracy has unfortunately become very common. Not agreeing with that mindset, I’ve been looking for affordable or free software to do my work honestly. That’s when I discovered Rhino and, later on, VisualARQ. It took a lot of effort to save up for the Rhino license while I was still a student, and I’ve been using it ever since. That’s why I asked if it’s “worth it.” You can be sure that as soon as I’m more established in the market, I’ll be more than happy to support software created with such care, like VisualARQ.
