3D Mockup vs As-Built

Yes, personally, 3D (whether as a computer or a physical model) is certainly very helpful, if not essential in Architecture, whether we are designing and resolving at the interior scale; the building scale, or at the urban scale. It very quickly helps us to see what works, what doesn't, and to test alternative design solutions.

Recently, I have also found that it is incredibly useful to show and convince my apartment-reno clients outright, where they can't readily visualise in their mind, how certain potential choice of finishes, fixtures and furnishing could be very out of place in the finished space!

Yes. People have made horrible errors in the design process which would not have been made with 3D mockups. Not many of us are gifted in visualising in 3D.

Does it cost a lot more to do a mockup?

Some people have visual skills and do not need to see a detailed plan - however if it was free then yes it would help. For non visual people I think it would be essential.

We have come to rely on technology so much these days, why not? I think my skills are pretty high, but I just enjoy the mock up to validate my thoughts. I would say more people are visually challenged when it comes to imagining space, but even those who do have skills can often miss little things. It would make a huge difference for planning furniture arrangements, lighting and even correctly positioning power points.

However, there would still be people who would need guidance even with a 3D mockup so the assumption should never be made that this is the be-all and end-all to helping or guiding people. A person with low visual skills could end up worse off because of the mockup.

Exactly. In the days before 3D CAD, architects and architecture relied on physical models. And many of us still do!

When I worked for another architecture practice (then as an architecture graduate, not yet registered), I encouraged my younger colleague to model a proposed studio-garage building in 3D, which helped him to resolve a complex roof junction that would otherwise have been too difficult to resolve on 2D plan and elevation alone.

Even for apartment reno projects, 3D really helps me a lot to test out design concepts and resolve spatial, construction and joinery details especially in smaller apartments, where every millimeter, every square inch, every fixture positioning (especially for bathrooms), counts. So much so that the margin for uncertainty and potentially costly construction errors is minimised by the time I complete the 2D construction drawings and documentation.

In addition, the 3D also helps clients to test out their "wishlist options" of different material finishes, fixtures and colour schemes, thus helping them to finalise decisions more quickly.

Except, perhaps, interior styling and decorating, where I acknowledge that 3D may not be that essential. Still, one can quickly model up a massing to see whether that luxurious L-section sofa or king bed you really dig would fit into your room or space!

compcomp66 - depends on the practitioner, his preferred software, and his practice set up! I myself will normally include 3D (Revit and/or SketchUp, possibly moving onto ArchiCAD in the future) as part of the full-service, if not design-only package.

Quite frankly I think the 3D could be just as essential for styling and decorating - people hire decorators and stylists because they don't have the vision, so to see the finished product would give them confidence in their professional. It is not just whether furniture "fits" either, it is the bulk of the item and the visual space it takes up as well as physical space. A king size bed could fit perfectly, but add bulky timber or padded head and foot boards and you can instantly have an elephant. Even colour counts, white or pale colours don't take up as much visual space as a dark heavy timber. The rest of the furniture, furnishings and even lighting have to have depth then to create balance so the bed doesn't swamp everything in the room.

When people are going more and more to online shopping to find just the right pieces for a room, it is even harder to visualise a finished room from photos so to create a scale model from dimensions given is really becoming vital. I have a friend with this issue right now as she has limited shopping facilities and has to rely on on-line shopping for some variety and choice. Trying to find ways to mock up a pendant light for example to get some idea of whether the proportion is right in the room is very difficult, but so important.

olldroo, you are very right too. 3D definitely helps in finding balance and proportion in interior styling as much as it is in architecture. In fact, this is what exactly happened with one of my currently ongoing apartment reno jobs.

For quite a while, I was unable to convince the client to go for simpler, clean "timeless" pendant lights in his wonderfully-intact 1920s interior (mouldings, cornices, ceiling rosettes and all). It finally took me exporting the detailed 3D model into an animated video to convince him that heavy chandeliers, combined with his preference for Ralph Lauren-style of furnishing and the heritage interior that we are largely preserving, would make his home look and feel too heavy and oppressive.

These days modelling the design in 3D is the most efficient way for anyone in AEC (architecture/engineering/construction) to produce documents. The plans sections and elevations are generated from that. If the model is done properly the benefits of better visualisation are just an added bonus. Any designer that is still working in 2D is living in the dark ages and making life hard for themselves.

Renjie, IMHO Archicad has the edge over Revit in just about everything (I have used both) including cost and intuitive learning curve. Just google the info on release 21, as well as all the presentation possibilities with BIMx in Archicad.

We found it really helpful for an ensuite layout. On paper we thought we had it just right but with the 3D walk through we realised it had too much empty space. Helps my husband who is a very visual person.

It really helps, particularly if you have site lines and views to make use of. We took panoramas of our views and used them to check the views we'd have from various positions in our planned renovations, it helped to lock in on our design. I also calculated light angles at different times of the year to see where the sun would reach. We did most of it ourselves and our architect only supplied us with geo and renders, we did the more involved visualisation. If I was in architecture it would be a default.
Take a 360 panorama from the site so you can see out of the windows when visualising the home, and I would also be pushing to use ar in extensions, renovations or new builds , so you could walk around with a table and see what the space will become.

3D mock up renderings have become the norm these days and do help to win over most of clients.

Its become part of our work process. Its all about what the market is used to. We manage to convince our clients with hand sketches and 2D drawings sometimes. However as society advances technologically, as designers we have to keep up with what our clients want.

Most of our clients receive a 3D animation walk through video like this.

Some clients are still not able to visualise and demand to show them even more.

The point i am trying to make is, when do we show enough?

Maybe one day we will have to print 3D presentations? One never knows what technology is going to bring tomorrow and how our world changes.

Enjoy the video and tell me if you are able to visualise the space as we designed?

Sugarbakers, 3D presentations are here already. ArchiCAD can easily produce BIMx presentations where you can use a Google Cardboard VR headset with a smartphone to walk through and explore a building model in full 3D.

At the end of the day, I think the take-home message is, no matter which software(s) and process one uses, 3D (or physical models if the practitioner prefers) is very helpful, if not regarded as absolutely essential by many practitioners, in conceptualising; designing, testing and resolving the proposed built environment to prepare for the built-realisation, be it at the urban, building or interior scale.

Then there comes the added bonus of helping the client visualise too, whether photorealistically rendered or not. We are 3D beings who have evolved to perceive the world in 3D afterall!

(Well, it will be a different story if we are thrust into a 2D or 4D world... :P)

Good discussion to raise though.

I had my plans converted to 3d, used a guy on Fiverr dot com. Didnt cost me a fiver though, it was $32 AUD but it really did help for a full house build and the results were quite good. For clients that are having trouble visualising space its of benefit.

The friend who lives with me and is male has a hard time visualising my descripitons of the reno and what it will be like. He would be the sort of person a 3D model would help. Actually, it would help ME coz I am tired of drawing pictures for him to say, "Oh, so you want the shower next to that wall." D'oh.

junipergirl: lol! But surprisingly yes, a lot of people and clients I met actually find it difficult to visualise in 3D. We architects (and design professionals) are trained and drilled to think in 3D such that we take it foregranted - that's where visual communication skills to convey ideas to clients become critical.

P.S. I had a classmate back in Architecture School who admitted to me that she found it difficult to visualise in 3D (when we were jointly building a 3D model of a large-scale building from 2D plans/sections/elevations), and asked me how I did it. That is when I realised I took my "natural" visio-spatial ability very foregranted.

I think a full 3D walkthrough and visualisation package is MORE than worth the cost. Get an architect or design company to do it for you and you wont regret it. It makes a huge difference actually seeing the flow of your house when you walk through it, the light changes at different times of the day/year, (all adjustable in the 3D package). Incredibly important for solar gain etc. Also gives you the ability to really visualise where your furniture items are going, where the lights look best. We are thrilled we did it and the print outs or actual 3d file can be used to show builders/tradesmen to relay the look youre after and the setup. Even for some of those qualified people it can be a help to fully visualise the end result. If youre spending soooo much money building, factor this cost into it. Well worth it.

antoro88: Well said. :)

I did mine in Maya more because it's what I know and could sort out panoramas for BGs, if I was in the architectural side of 3d I'd be all over AR so people could walk around their home or site with a tablet and see everything. No need for a pano.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQeO1r9UIzQ

Rubbish screen-grab from a working file with a BG included that I sent to my Wife mid working, excuse the no fancy rendering it was just to illustrate the site line off the side deck to the neighbors' where a glass balustrade would have been a tremendous waste.

Dave Short: Yes, it doesn't have to be photorealistically rendered. Even with such a "sketchy" model, you can already get a sense of the space and guess the potential natural light quality and views.

Funny that you mentioned Maya. When I did a semester of overseas exchange at TUDelft, I noticed most of the architecture students modelling in Maya! By that time I was already using Revit and SketchUp, and I couldn't understand why the faculty was teaching them to model in a software that doesn't allow them to readily test and resolve details...

I measured my arms span (across body) and used it whenever I was in a space I liked, to measure that space! Then linked that to our plans - bedrooms and living rooms worked a treat - I 'knew' the space because I had measured it in display homes and other people's spaces. No 3D required!