I would like to ask the forum for on how to communicate
design ideas and concepts to the younger generation of Cad modelers
at some of the new companies that will produce a design from your
sketch in a CAD file then send you your choice of a casting with or
with out a mold or as a finished piece of jewelry.
Now that the basic question is asked please allow me to present the
situation. A number of years ago i studied drafting and mechanical
drawing, before computers took over the world with CAD. I then used
these skills a several jobs drawing plans for lots of things.
Several years ago I purchased a CAD program because some of my
clients like the precision of computer generated jewelry. I used the
program to create a number of design CAD files to e-mail over to the
people with the mills and 3D printers because I wanted to be at the
bench and run my business I did not want to spend my life learning
to manipulate computer files and getting mills and 3D printers to
perform . After encountering difficulties that became overly time
consuming I allowed the Cad modelers to convince me that it would be
better & more cost effective if they created the CAD files. This
method that i provide a simple sketch much to my dismay the CAD
modelers cannot seem to understand the sketches and that
i send complete with dimensions, isometric and sectional view s along
with surfaces identified with descriptions and or alphabetic letters
to indicate the exact areas of the drawing i would like them to alter
to meet my specifications. To further add to the problem when i use
words such as trapezoid, parallelogram or other words that describe
geometric objects and shapes I receive confused responses from the
modelers.
Now the CAD modelers want me to do a full hand drawing blueprint
complete with dimensions sectional and isometric views send it to
them so they can create a file then email the file to me to correct
the areas of the file that do not reflect my drawing for them and
still charge me? so in closing what are the new rules of the road
here has drafting and design changed this much ? - goo
I would like to ask the forum for on how to
communicate design ideas and concepts to the younger generation of
Cad modelers at some of the new companies
I think that the answer is to find a different company. Either that,
or start answering the dismayed responses with a simple question: “Do
you know how to use google to look up “trapezoid or parallelogram”?”
I too would be a little frustrated if it seemed that I knew more
than the people I was paying to do a task…
Now the CAD modelers want me to do a full hand drawing blueprint
complete with dimensions sectional and isometric views send it to
them so they can create a file then email the file to me to
correct the areas of the file that do not reflect my drawing for
them and still charge me?
This is a really interesting question. The situation arises because
of some calling themselves CAD/CAM designers, but in fact they are
just CAM interpreters, and simply do not understand how to use CAD
to design things.
CAD is a creative part, while CAM is an interpretive part. It is
like in literature writer writes a book, but if he wants to publish
it in another language, he needs an interpreter. Your problem is that
you are asking interpreters to write a book. They simply cannot do
it. You need to find CAD designer. Then simple sketch will be enough.
I don’t quite qualify as ‘younger generation’. I too date my cad
learning to triangles and straight edges, a drafting machine was a
real treat.
CadCam is a really delicate mixing of many variables. Send stuff out
(which I never do) and you will be surprised at the results:-) Let
it out the door part way through the job and you lose all control. I
do some work from client sketches to fully finished 3D models. Always
exciting and much e-mail and/or phone so that we are both thinking
the same things. And I am dealing with folks with at least some
bench time. A hot shit cad draftsman is just not going to make it
without real bench time.
Sounds like you need to shop around for a new Cad designer. They,
like every other trade professional, range from soup to nuts. The
good thing is that once you find someone you are comfortable with, it
can be a long and happy relationship. Just don’t settle for less that
first class service. You will pay either way, so work with someone
you are happy with.
CAD is a creative part, while CAM is an interpretive part. It is
like in literature writer writes a book, but if he wants to
publish it in another language, he needs an interpreter. Your
problem is that you are asking interpreters to write a book. They
simply cannot do it. You need to find CAD designer. Then simple
sketch will be enough.
Rare occasion… I agree with your thoughts. It is all in the cad
design stage. The Cam part is crunching numbers and knowing exactly
what your hardware is going to do and matching them. Sometimes a long
crap shoot but quite predictable.
The more hand offs between the jeweller and the cam place just mean
more blood in the water.
When you communicate with the cad modeler it is of utmost importance
to drive the measurements of what you want and have them send updates
to you regularly to give it your ok.
The gemstones usually drive the end result, so I would work with
that premise first, with design built around them. Think of the x,y,
z measurements that will “box” your design if possible.
I work with several designers/business owners who are required to
give a rough sketch with measurements of what they want. From that
point on, they get step by step updates on what I am doing.
It is a “must” do in communication for the modeler and the designer.
The process will more than likely end up with a successful product
and less time wasted on both parts.
The new rules with Cad designers is the following…“Keeping It
Simple” try not to use university language on them. Not everyone has
gone to school for engineers, trust me!
My newest and now my only cad fellow is…a Yeshivah student up here
in Toronto. His father ( wholesale jeweller) assists him when
necessary. He went through the G.I.A. training program…but he has a
taste for designing.
I would just never try using those multi-syllabic words on him. He
knows what I demand and I totally respect his computer skills. Our
language we both use is basic, but we do work well together. Because
of this, I have sent him many clients…:>)
CAD Designers are becoming easier to work with. At first, as recently
as last year, I was paying way too much for simple CAD pieces. Many
more service shops are now available, and pricing is becoming more
fair for B to B transactions. I have found that the shops that are
not operating as a one-man-show offer much better prices. As always,
clear communication and concise instructions will mean satisfied
customers!
Margie Mersky
relocating my studio with much anticipation and excitement mmwaxmodels.com
The gemstones usually drive the end result, so I would work with that
premise first, with design built around them. Think of the x,y, z
measurements that will “box” your design if possible.
Some constructive criticism here, Any jewelry built around
gemstones usually ends up like the piece looking like an after
thought. BUT , after talking with a number of folks I think a huge
problem is the computer does so much that the driver is just an
after thought. Many CAD operators quit thinking about beauty and
focus on what the computer will only allow them to do not the other
way around. The CAD operators must not be forcing the tool to do what
the mind can creatively imagine, and furthermore the company i am
dealing with has an intermediary job coordinator person the does not
do CAD or benchwork.
To magnify the FUBAR effect you are forced to discuss the job with a
person who has little connection to the end result, they tell the
CAD person instructions they dont understand the meaning of.
I am not so sure that most CAD operators are required or pushed to
really pursue an education in drafting and design which compromises
my ability to communicate an idea. When something is drawn by hand
it has a different look than a CAD drawing. Responses i recieve tell
me the CAD operators dont want to take the time to look at a hand
drawing because it requires them to use a viewpoint that is
unfamiliar, it does not look like a CAD drawing, so it is difficult
for them to interperet and thier attitude shuts down the desire to
produce the piece i want CAD designed.
As someone with both classical training as a modelmaker and as a
goldsmith who uses a CAD/CAM system to produce models, I feel an
obligation to weigh in.
Right tool or wrong tool?
CAD/CAM is just a tool in the box for me. Sometimes it is the right
tool, quite often it is a complicated way of doing something simple.
I’d never bother to use it to make a plain half round gold band. At
times, however, it is just the ticket for producing a complicated
texture or lettering that would take a very long time to do
otherwise.
It does not replace bench experience.
I do models for designers and individuals with little bench training
on occasion. I have literally worked from sketches one step up from a
cocktail stained napkin. I’ve worked from 2D images that have far
too little resolution to be more than a guide. I compensate by asking
the right questions, e-mailing images and using common sense. I cut to
the chase, it is the end product that is important, not the brand of
shoes worn during the intermediate steps.
I am not so sure that most CAD operators are required or pushed to
really pursue an education in drafting and design which
compromises my ability to communicate an idea. When something is
drawn by hand it has a different look than a CAD drawing. Responses
i recieve tell me the CAD operators dont want to take the time to
look at a hand drawing because it requires them to use a viewpoint
that is unfamiliar, it does not look like a CAD drawing, so it is
difficult for them to interperet and thier attitude shuts down the
desire to produce the piece i want CAD designed.
You have really lost me here. CAD image can be exactly as natural.
There is no limitation. None. Instead of waisting words, take a look
at this website.
Take a note of The Last Guardian, and the next one The Wet Bird. All
is 100% CAD, no photos, no backgrounds. Everything is computer
generated. All images on that website are computer generated, even
if they look like a photographs. May be you should contact some of
those guys next time.
What I suggest then is to make your sketch and then make the piece
without the dimensions or stones to be used.
You will end up making all kinds of edits to make the gems fit. By
the way, I can make the computer do lots of tricks…not only from the
tools it hands you, but from an applied 35 years of manufacturing.
It’s funny, I get “rough sketches” all the time and turn them into
beautiful pieces of art attested by my clients. There is one thing
that I totally agree with here. If you haven’t had any bench
experience you are in for a rough ride designing with CAD.
For anyone to do CAD modeling for another, the collaborative effort
is of utmost importance. Try step editing with your CAD modeler(s)
for you to get a better result or what you want.
Do you ever have a central theme to your designs? What is that
central theme? Should the piece be modeled around the theme or
driven by stone sizes to fit the design? Just some things to think
about when you design the next masterpiece in your mind. Sounds to me
like you should change cad modelers. By the way, does the designer
ever change their mind?
Leonid those POV-Ray images are amazing. I remain a metalworker and
will cut, paste, and edit straight into the metal by hand. Hammers,
saws and files achieve the same as keyboard, tablet and scroll
wheel, much quicker including preparation for mass-production. To
achive any of those POV-Ray images in metal requires a huge
organization. Doing a one-off will challenge the keyboard artists
when it comes down to a single item, that really works, is 100%
wearable, at a reasonable price.
Rough sketches and vague ideas are the beginning. The maker has a
responsibility to blend images and desires into a finished product
that delivers in all respects as far as possible.
A good result comes from effiency of communication. Communication is
the key, and a solid artifact conveys more data than an image.
Leonid those POV-Ray images are amazing. I remain a metalworker
and will cut, paste, and edit straight into the metal by hand.
Hammers, saws and files achieve the same as keyboard, tablet and
scroll wheel, much quicker including preparation for
mass-production. To achive any of those POV-Ray images in metal
requires a huge organization. Doing a one-off will challenge the
keyboard artists when it comes down to a single item, that really
works, is 100% wearable, at a reasonable price.
I did not refer to those images as something to be made in metal. The
subject was CAD operators and their ability to work from rough
sketches.
PovRay software has no user interface. One creates a text file where
graphic functions are called like inside the “C” program. Than
graphic engine is called, passing this text file as a parameter. So,
in a sense, PovRay is a programming language, and not a software.
The realistic images are obtained by using mathematical functions
which describe natural forms and processes, and what is possible to
achieve using dry and boring math is displayed on that site.
Considering that most images were started from nothing, but one’s
imagination and not even a rough sketch - for a professional CAD
modeler to complaint that drawing does not have enough details is
utterly ridiculous. And that was my point.
Considering that most images were started from nothing, but one's
imagination and not even a rough sketch - for a professional CAD
modeler to complaint that drawing does not have enough details is
utterly ridiculous. And that was my point.
Wrong again.
As a professional cad modeller I can work from a clients crude sketch
or even just a verbal description. My interpretation is submitted for
approval, maybe a couple of times with feedback. Sometimes an easy
process sometimes not
On the other hand if the model is supposed to represent an album
cover or signature logo from an anal rock music band and all they
send is 100 X 100 image !!! I will always request bigger and better
art. It is much better if I decide what is in excess than
to make up missing
Not ridiculous, just my make/break point in taking on a job. If they
don’t care why should I.
MoRay is a nice add on that provides a graphical interface, and
you see it in the download section with PovRay
There are modelers if you are a window user, but non of them have the
full power of PovRay language. Using graphical modeler is a trade off
between power and convenience.
Considering that most images were started from nothing, but one's
imagination and not even a rough sketch - for a professional CAD
modeler to complaint that drawing does not have enough details is
utterly ridiculous. And that was my point.
and you said
Wrong again.
I would like to know what is “wrong” and why “again” Can you
elaborate on those 2 points.
There are modelers if you are a window user, but non of them have
the full power of PovRay language. Using graphical modeler is a
trade off between power and convenience.
Totally agree, but it’s better than nothing, regardless Lightwave is
my poison.
