Landscape software?
Bill
(landscaper) could use to help me design & layout my property?
Thanks...
Brett Howe
sitting right in front of me.
It comes with a pricetag - forget how much I paid, although I do remember
having forgotten to factor in duties/UPS broker fees at the border and got
burned for about $40 more than I had planned. It can do a fair bit. Allows
for aging plants, changing seasons, rendering scenes as snapshots or
walkthroughs, and a whole lot more. I like it, but it's the only one I've
used.
Hope it helps,
Brett
"Bill" <bs...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:T6bY5.1956$d62.1...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
sunflower
the job. Especially for a novice gardener. Too many variables to consider
unless you live on a perfectly level, perfectly square lot with perfect soil
and perfect drainage--and 100% sun. Your money would be better served by
getting a local landscape designer to come in and look at your unique
conditions and design you a long term plan that could be accomplished over
several years time. A local person has better knowledge of the plant
materials that will really work in your situations, and has the power of
suggesting things that you might not have thought of--which a softwear
program cannot do. It may cost more than the softwear in the short run, but
it's better than planting 15 of plant X only to find out that it really
prefers an acid moist soil in part shade, and you've decided it would look
perfect in full sun and dry limestone rock.
Mistakes are expensive. Good advice isn't.
Sunflower
MS 7b
"Bill" <bs...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:T6bY5.1956$d62.1...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
Brett Howe
can be tricky to downright difficult. The focus of the software is not to
be a high-end CAD, but to let the user explore planting a virtual garden in
a yard that 'resembles' their own, and to offer them related resources.
Also, soil types, depth of shade, zone considerations, latitude, and the
like can be entered in so that you can get feedback on possible problems
with plants or areas which you should be taking a more serious look at.
I use mine to keep track of what I have in the beds. If I forget where
something is, I can find it in a click. If I forget what something is -
click, "Oh,yeah." If I moved something, another click. Want to know how
many square feet of grass I have to cut - click. I don't tend to use it
much during the summer, because I'd rather work on the real thing, but I do
keep a written journal of changes. During the winter, I sit down with the
PC and journal and start moving plants around, putting in the new beds from
the spring, basically re-living the entire growing season. Once everything
is updated, I can start to play with new ideas, build lists of new plants,
shape new beds, and any other considerations for the following year. It is
a tool, not a substitute. Does it give me all of the answers? No, of course
not. That's where the books, catalogues, newsgroups, friends, family,
garden centres, courses, hours of research, endless pots of coffee, and
finally trial and error come into play.
In a perfect world, where everyone saw $80,000+ come through their home each
year, landscape designers would be a wonderful resource. In the real world,
where people are just trying to feed the family for another week, we have to
go with significantly cheaper solutions. In this world economic innovation
is mandatory, not a hobby. I'm certainly not going to spend several times
my annual gardening budget to pay someone to tell me what I should do with
the garden, then not have anything left to live on for the summer, let alone
garden with. Besides, when I 'm talking to someone about the gardens, I
want to be able to say that for good or bad it's all my inspiration,
dedication and perspiration, and not that I hired someone to figure it out
and tell me what to do. It would be like telling a cabinetmaker that you're
skilled because you can put together an Ikea bookshelf.
"I can always find the time, but I'm still looking for the money" - my Mom,
on Life in general.
Ooops! My wife has been reading over my shoulder and has informed me that
the previous paragraph may not be taken well by some people. My intention
is not to insult, but rather to express my slant on "software vs.
designers". Unfortunately, writing is not one of my stronger gifts. I
apologize in advance, to anyone this may offend.
That's enough ranting for now,
Brett
"sunflower" <sunf...@midsouth.rr.com> wrote in message
news:TUrY5.34652$7P6.4...@typhoon.midsouth.rr.com...
Pam
I do have some observations.
I think you may have some inaccurate perceptions of professional landscape
design. While its perfectly true that there are many 'high-end' designers that
charge an arm and a leg for their services, most designers - at least in my area
- are very affordable. My clients come from all ranges of income levels -
including both the rather well-heeled to seniors on fixed incomes to young
families just starting out in their first home. Certainly it does not require an
income of 80,000 plus to be able to afford a landscape designer. And many people
consider hiring a professional designer an investment that may (and should)
significantly increase the value of their single largest asset - their home.
I think its also important to realize that not everyone has the time,
inclination or experience to develop their own landscape design, even with
available software programs, should they even have or be comfortable using a
computer. And as sunflower has so accurately pointed out, there are few, if any,
software products available on the market that can accurately design for your
specifics of site, locale, plant availability and appropriateness. Trial and
error when it comes to landscape design can be a pretty expensive proposition
and can easily wind up costing way more than the expense of hiring a designer in
the first place. Also, many people do not have a creative bone in their body and
have no idea how to develop spatial relationships or pleasing and complimentary
planting combinations, yet still love to garden and want to have the beauty and
satisfaction of an attractive landscape.
Hiring a professional landscape designer does not have to mean that one loses
all ownership to the design. A good designer should be a facilitator - helping
the client to develop the ideas they already have about what they want their
garden to be, but providing the expertise to arrive at solutions the client may
not have the skills or knowledge base to develop on their own. Engaging the
services of a professional designer may not be the path for everyone, but then
neither is home landscape software.
Pam - gardengal
davi...@webtv.net
and landscaping is a long term proposition. It is _expensive_, wasteful
and painful to have to rip out your landscape in ten years because it
was done wrong from the start. Not to mention you have to start over in
some degree - plus we'll all be little closer to that light at the end
of the tunnel. Best to do it right and do it right from the get-go.
Thats where the that expense for a _competent_ garden/landscape designer
pays off.
Brett Howe
"Pam" <grdn...@home.com> wrote in message
news:3A33A2D6...@home.com...
> First, no offense taken by your post, but as a professional landscape
designer,
> I do have some observations.
I envy you for your career choice, thank you for not being offended. I can
think of very few jobs which would be as rewarding.
A little off topic: I can appreciate the 'investment' side of hiring a
Landscape Designer. Is it safe to assume that a person who hires an LD is
often also willing to invest the additional money for the plants and/or
other materials and labour involved in the plan. So they'd be looking at a
medium to large initial outlay, but then they can coast, except for ordinary
maintainence costs for the yard. Now, in order to realize on their
investment wouldn't they have to sell? And wouldn't an increase in Market
Value on the property also mean higher taxes if you aren't willing to sell?
If so, talk about a Catch-22 :-) Please, I'd like your opinion on this, as
our area is switching over to a market value based taxation system.
Back to the software issue: My education and working experience is as a
Cartographic Technologist (maps)/ Graphic Artist. I have worked with higher
end mapping software, graphics packages and the like, and you will not catch
me saying that any of the gardening software out there is going to produce
an 'accurate' representation of a yard (geographically or botanically). I
also agree with you and Sunflower that it will not "accurately design for
your specifics of site, locale, plant availability and appropriateness."
That is not, however, the focus of the software. It is only intended to
'assist' the user in planning and representing their plant choices and yard
design. It's basically a replacement for the pad and paper that most novice
gardeners do their planning on, with a couple of reference books thrown in
for good measure. I can't say I've ever had a piece of paper jump out from
under my pencil to notify me that I can't put tomatoes under Black Walnuts.
I feel that both of you are expecting the software to supply more than it
was intended to. That, quite simply, was my point.
The original poster (Bill) simply asked if there was software available to
"help" him layout and design his yard, the answer is yes. Some are good (I
think CompleteLanddesigner from Sierrahome is good), some downright suck,
but don't expect them to do it for you.
Until next time,
Brett
sunflower
who designs and installs everything in my yard myself. (I must be getting
it right, several friends have asked for my assistance in garden design.)
However, were I new to gardening like the original poster, I believe that
the hiring of an experienced landscape designer would hand down beat trying
to purchase some softwear that will be much too generic to give good results
to a novice. Heck, even the nursery employed "designer" who simply want to
sell plants would beat most landscape softwear that I've seen.
For an experienced gardener, who has knowledge of soils, plant materials,
spatial relationships, and size of plants at maturity (a real biggie for
most beginners), landcape softwear used as you are describing would seem to
provide a benefit. However helpful it is, I still find it deficient to
interacting with a live person that has an experience base that allows them
to suggest ideas that I would never have.
Sunflower
"Brett Howe" <brett...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:90ua0p$ssc$1...@mohawk.hwcn.org...
gardenfo...@my-deja.com
landscape designer as well as a life-long gardener, and I can state
with assurance that not everyone who purchases my services is able to
afford to install it all at one time. Most people spread out the
process over a couple of years, which means there is no initial large
outlay of cash. I am able to help them determine what should go in
*this* year, what should be done next year, and then next, etc. A
novice would not know how to plan a sequential installation. Another
interesting point is that not all my clients want or need a full-blown
set of landscape plans. For them, I offer a consultation-only visit,
in which they bounce their ideas off me, I can steer them in a
direction they need to go, and I can offer several suggestions on
plants or amenities that would work best to suit their needs.
Most of my clients are "regular" people with "regular" salaries, by the
way.
Also, I think you're perhaps oversimplifying the benefits of a well-
designed landscape by only factoring in the monetary value. There is
an enormous, priceless value in a well-designed landscape for the
homeowner's soul. Being happy when you look out your window is perhaps
the most important benefit of all. It's even been proven to make you
healthier if you like your home environment. Having someone out
walking their dog call out, "Love your garden!" is of immeasurable
benefit. A person does not have to wait until they sell their home to
realize an appreciation in their home's value. Not all value is
monetary.
Another point to consider is that many novices innocently create
maintenance headaches for themselves, as well as set themselves up for
financial ruin at the checkout line of the fertilizer, pesticide, &
herbicide store. By innocently putting disease-prone, high-maintenance
plants into their gardens, they set themselves up for failure. By
putting plants with disparate environmental needs next to each other,
they set themselves up for failure. By filling their gardens with
plants that flower mainly during a certain period, not realizing that
period is when they are off on holiday each year, they set themselves
up for failure.
And on & on & on... A decent landscape designer saves the homeowner
money. A LD will make sure the right plants go in the right place,
lessening the risk that plants will die off en-masse. A LD will help
ensure that the homeowner can experience a sense of pride, not shame,
each time s/he pulls up in the driveway. A LD will work to ensure that
the homeowner's vision, not the LD's, is expressed in the most
advantageous way.
There are certainly many, many homeowners who are capable of creating
their own wonderful landscape designs, just as many people can arrange
their interior decor. However, I would have to say the the vast
majority of homeowners I work with confess to me (sometimes in quiet so
the "outside chore" spouse doesn't hear!) that they've tried for years
to get their gardens looking decent, and that they've spent hundreds or
thousands of dollars on now-dead plants.
Thanks for letting me express my .02 cents worth!
Judy
www.gardenfoundation.com
==================================
In article <910nn3$kdn$1...@mohawk.hwcn.org>,
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Pam
Brett Howe wrote:
> I envy you for your career choice, thank you for not being offended. I can
> think of very few jobs which would be as rewarding.
It is certainly not very rewarding financially and sometimes it can be rather
frustrating, depending on the client, but yes, it does provide immense
satisfaction.
>
> A little off topic: I can appreciate the 'investment' side of hiring a
> Landscape Designer. Is it safe to assume that a person who hires an LD is
> often also willing to invest the additional money for the plants and/or
> other materials and labour involved in the plan.
That's pretty safe to assume, although I have had clients who have gone through
the process to work with me to develop a design and have yet to implement it. As
Judy pointed out, a professionally prepared design is a master plan which can be
implemented in stages according to the time and budget of the client. Some
clients opt to have the entire design installed at once by a professional
contractor and they are usually looking at a serious outlay of funds to
accomplish this. Others may hire out more complicated construction items and do
the rest themselves over time. Others still may do the entire thing on their own
- these folks tend to have a very high degree of ownership in their landscape.
They have, in fact, created their own garden sanctuary.
> Now, in order to realize on their
> investment wouldn't they have to sell? And wouldn't an increase in Market
> Value on the property also mean higher taxes if you aren't willing to sell?
> If so, talk about a Catch-22 :-) Please, I'd like your opinion on this, as
> our area is switching over to a market value based taxation system.
Of course, in order to financially realize on their investment, they would need
to sell, but as has been already pointed out, not all of the investment or the
reward can be considered to be 'financial'. As to how the increased perceived
market value may affect their property taxes, I would have to say that would
depend on how their homes are taxed which will probably differ depending on
their municipality. In my area the tax assessed value bears little relationship
to market value - it is based more on land cost and some arcane determination on
the value of the structure - not market value - and then is factored by annual
increases based on sales in the area. We have recently gone through a several
year period of rapidly escalating real estate values - our home is supposedly
worth 3-4 times what we purchased it for 15 years ago, but the tax assessed
value has only increased in that period by about 50%.
Obviously this is likely to be approached differently in different areas of the
country and even as specifically as to different parts of the same metropolitan
area. And the added value of a 'good' landscape design will have different
impact depending on where you live. In the greater Seattle area which is
extremely gardening conscious, a 25% increase in value can be attributed to a
well prepared landscape design, but this may be significantly less elsewhere.
I agree that home landscape design software can be a useful tool under certain
conditions - 1) that you are computer literate to begin with, 2) you have some
more than basic knowledge of plants and plants suitable to your area, and
finally; 3) you have some creative juices flowing - and for some people, that
may be sufficient. As I stated previously, its not the solution for everyone,
nor is hiring a professional designer. Just realize that you are going to get
two vastly different sets of results.
FWIW, I know of few professional LD's who use landscape software, even
professional CAD systems, at least not exclusively. They just don't have the
flexibility to address all the issues inherent in a landscape design, let alone
an up-to-date and fairly complete plant data base. They may use the computer to
generate final plan drawings for presentation, but only after working that paper
and pencil, numerous site visits and countless referrals to catalogs and
reference books.
Pam - gardengal
Jim Voege
the entire thing on their own these folks tend to have a very high degree of
ownership in their landscape." Says it all for me personally. I just
wouldn't get the same satisfaction from a garden designed by someone else
even though, in my more honest moments, I'd have to admit they'd likely do a
better job.
--
Jim Voege
"Pam" <grdn...@home.com> wrote in message
news:3A3503AD...@home.com...
Pam
clients who do ALL the implementation of the landscape design have a higher
degree of ownership in the outcome than those who hire out all or part of it.
Other designers may operate differently, but I work extremely closely with my
clients to formulate a design based upon their requirements, not my notion of
what I think they should have. In some cases - those who are serious gardeners -
all of the planting decisions are theirs. For the others, I provide a series of
options on the plantings rather than just specifying 'X' plant here and 5 'Y'
plants there. We tour nurseries together and they have as much or more input
into the final design and plant selection as I do.
I understand your point completely, Jim, but not everyone is working from the
same starting point. It is apparent, from your participation on the newsgroup,
that you are an avid and enthuastic gardener, whatever your level of experience
may be. For you, who is willing to put in the time, effort and research, hiring
a professional designer probably doesn't fulfill any purpose. But there are,
thankfully, a whole lot of others out there who still want a well-designed
landscape but don't have a clue how to arrive at one without benefit of
professional input or (and this is even more likely) know what they like and
what they want, but just can't seem to bring it all together.
Everyone's situation is slightly different.
Pam - gardengal
Jim Voege
Brett Howe
<snip>
> It is certainly not very rewarding financially and sometimes it can be
rather
> frustrating, depending on the client, but yes, it does provide immense
> satisfaction.
>
seem to have an innate ability to get under a persons skin in a million
different ways, and yet often in a manner that you can't totally fault them
for so you can't even get the release of knowing that they are just being
jerks. People are funny creatures :-)
<snip>
>In the greater Seattle area which is
> extremely gardening conscious, a 25% increase in value can be attributed
to a
> well prepared landscape design, but this may be significantly less
elsewhere.
This was a surprise, I wouldn't have thought that it could be so high. Now
I have to wonder if it would be even higher for things like Xeriscaping in
Denver. As I understand it there are already some forms of subsidization
for homeowners that convert their yards, but would it go so far as to
reflect in the value of the property (as opposed to a well designed, but
non-xeriscaped yard)?
>
> I agree that home landscape design software can be a useful tool under
certain
> conditions - 1) that you are computer literate to begin with, 2) you have
some
> more than basic knowledge of plants and plants suitable to your area, and
> finally; 3) you have some creative juices flowing - and for some people,
that
> may be sufficient. As I stated previously, its not the solution for
everyone,
> nor is hiring a professional designer. Just realize that you are going to
get
> two vastly different sets of results.
>
It seems we've come to common ground. We agree on the above points. Before
purchasing the software a person must understand that it is just another
tool, and by no means will, or can, replace any of the other aspects which
commonly overwhelm a novice gardener. If they wish to take it on
themselves, it will still be necessary for them to do the research, learn
the skills, put in the time, and yes unfortunately, make the mistakes
associated with designing, creating and maintaining their gardens.
And for those, who for any of a myriad of reasons (no time, no patience, no
creativity, a brown thumb, overwhelmed by it all) just aren't comfortable
with doing the design of it themselves, there is the option of hiring a
competent landscape designer, like yourself, to set them off on the right
foot (and hopefully avoid many of those pesky, too common mistakes).
> FWIW, I know of few professional LD's who use landscape software, even
> professional CAD systems, at least not exclusively. They just don't have
the
> flexibility to address all the issues inherent in a landscape design, let
alone
> an up-to-date and fairly complete plant data base. They may use the
computer to
> generate final plan drawings for presentation, but only after working that
paper
> and pencil, numerous site visits and countless referrals to catalogs and
> reference books.
This surprised me more than the earlier 25%! Having seen a few of these
packages and using the one a fair bit, I would have thought that all of the
LD's avoided them like the plague, let alone using them when interfacing
with the clients. I don't expect that you'd know which package they would
be presenting with, but I'm curious.
These posts keep getting longer :-) Anyway, this has been an interesting
discussion/debate/whatchamadinger, I've learned a few things. Like mama
aways said, "A day is only wasted if you didn't learn something."
Thanks,
Brett
Tom McWilliams
> I have to wonder if it would be even higher for things like Xeriscaping in
> Denver. As I understand it there are already some forms of subsidization
> for homeowners that convert their yards, but would it go so far as to
> reflect in the value of the property (as opposed to a well designed, but
> non-xeriscaped yard)?
What is xeriscaping?
-Tm
--
* . * '^
,.. " . *
,
' Tommy Mac
Brett Howe
"Tom McWilliams" <mcwi...@msu.edu> wrote in message
news:3A361FB2...@msu.edu...
> What is xeriscaping?
>
It is a gardening technique, focusing on water conservation and
droughtproofing your yard, allowing you to survive water shortages and to
landscape in areas with naturaly low precipitation totals. It is not,
however, totally dry gardening, but rather a way of designing to make good
use of water, and thereby requiring less of it.
Developed in 1981, in Denver, Colorado, by the Denver Water Dept. They
designed, and succeefully created a few large 'test beds', then released
their findings and issued a "Xeriscape Plant Guide". I have also read
(online, but I can't recall which sites) that the City of Denver and their
Water Dept. were issuing subsidies, apart from the lower water bills, to
homeowners which converted their yards/gardens to utilize the Xeriscaping
technique. If I'm not mistaken, The City of Denver has also trademarked the
name 'Xeriscaping', so some people have been referring to the technique as
'xeric landscaping' in order to avoid problems.
It is relatively easy to find info and examples online, but here are a few
I've had tagged for one reason or another -
http://www.coloradocollege.edu/environment/research/watershedproject/waterco
nservationguide/xeriscape.html
http://www.colostate.edu/Depts/CoopExt/4DMG/Xeris/xeris1.htm
http://www.cahe.nmsu.edu/pubs/_h/h-707.html
Pam
Brett Howe wrote:
> "Pam" <grdn...@home.com> wrote in message
> > FWIW, I know of few professional LD's who use landscape software, even
> > professional CAD systems, at least not exclusively. They just don't have
> the
> > flexibility to address all the issues inherent in a landscape design, let
> alone
> > an up-to-date and fairly complete plant data base. They may use the
> computer to
> > generate final plan drawings for presentation, but only after working that
> paper
> > and pencil, numerous site visits and countless referrals to catalogs and
> > reference books.
>
> This surprised me more than the earlier 25%! Having seen a few of these
> packages and using the one a fair bit, I would have thought that all of the
> LD's avoided them like the plague, let alone using them when interfacing
> with the clients. I don't expect that you'd know which package they would
> be presenting with, but I'm curious.
The only LD's I know that do use a software package pretty much restrict it to
an AutoCAD system and most of those are working for small to medium size firms
as opposed to being self employed. Even the most basic CAD systems are pretty
pricey and also require a large printer. And they are nothing like the home
landscape software that is currently available. Personally, I see no need to
invest $800 and up for a software system that just draws plans for me - I do
fine with my drafting board and T-square - but not all LD's can be bothered with
the time it takes to prepare manually drafted plans.
>
> These posts keep getting longer :-) Anyway, this has been an interesting
> discussion/debate/whatchamadinger, I've learned a few things. Like mama
> aways said, "A day is only wasted if you didn't learn something."
Yes, it has been an interesting discussion - thanks for participating. Even in
the mild PNW, its too darn cold right now to do any real gardening :-))
Pam
Brett Howe
<snip>
> The only LD's I know that do use a software package pretty much restrict
it to
> an AutoCAD system and most of those are working for small to medium size
firms
> as opposed to being self employed. Even the most basic CAD systems are
pretty
> pricey and also require a large printer. And they are nothing like the
home
> landscape software that is currently available. Personally, I see no need
to
> invest $800 and up for a software system that just draws plans for me - I
do
> fine with my drafting board and T-square - but not all LD's can be
bothered with
> the time it takes to prepare manually drafted plans.
That clears up my concerns about what was being presented to the clients. I
had visions of a client sitting down to look at the kind of images Sierra's
products would show, and couldn't see being able to sell it without a whole
lot of explaining on the designer's part, and imagination on the part of the
client. :-)
CAD systems can be costly. AutoCAD is among the most popular, being
powerful enough to produce accurate plans, detailed renderings,
cross-platform well, and a whole lot more, and at a price tag that may be
considered high, but not unattainable. The software run by our area roads
and planning departments (Intergraph's Microstation) runs into the thousands
for a single user licence, and then requires high-end hardware
(workstations/plotters/scanners/digitizers/etc.) to drive it. But it's
extremely powerful in the hands of an experienced user. The only benefit to
any CAD package over manual drafting is the ease of data manipulation. Big
changes can be made quickly and efficiently.
I'm all for the manual methods, they can be done almost anywhere, they don't
depend on the PCs to create or view (nothing worse than trying to huddle a
group of large men around a monitor), the drafter is aware of every piece of
information in the plan, and when your finished a plan you have something
that you can hold in your hands and say "I made this". There is more of a
personal connection to the work. However, the digital form is the only way
that the extreme amounts of data, high number of users/editors, data
editing, error checks (or in my experience, error verification),
cross-references, programmed simulations, renderings, complex calculations,
etc. which our society believes that it requires to thrive can be handled at
an economically viable level.
Wow! Way off topic.....making a bridge back to gardening :-) Where I find
the landscaping software most useful is in keeping an inventory of what I
have in the beds and roughly where I put them, so if things haven't come up
yet, I can avoid digging them up while planting the new purchases. I'm also
terrible with names, but I can find out which plant my kids played lawnmower
on very quickly. So, I guess I use it less for design than as an
up-to-date reference on my yard. Design is still being done, at the kitchen
table, on the back of the shopping list (or whatever else was handy), behind
a stack of catalogs, reference books, and coffee mugs :-)
gardenfo...@my-deja.com
severe tendonitis and can no longer hold a pencil longer than a few
minutes. I use DynaScape, and it cost me a pretty penny, let me tell
you! However, now that I'm past the initial learning curve, I am
thrilled that it hasn't hampered my creativity one whit. In fact, I am
now much faster in creating my drawings, and because of this, I'm able
to explore several different ideas in a design, if the spirit so moves
me, without wasting hours of time drawing & redrawing. This program is
flexible enough to address all the details & intricacies inherent in a
good landscape design. I shopped around extensively before settling on
DynaScape, because it was critical that the program be able to create a
finished drawing that came close to the ones I used to be able to do by
hand. At the risk of bragging, I used to do beautiful renderings and
precise construction drawings by hand, using the traditional pen/ink,
pencil, triangles, templates, and drafting table. There was no way
that I could commit to a CAD program that didn't measure up to my own
standard of excellence. I am very comfortable with DynaScape, because
it meets my expectations. (Sorry, not trying to sound like an
advertisement!!!)
As for the plant database, I rely on my knowledge & experience, books,
& personal photo library. To do otherwise would be a disservice to my
clients. However, there are several plant database packages out there
which I am interested in obtaining, because I would like the photos,
and I understand that at least one of them is capable of creating a
maintenance schedule that I can offer to my clients (for an additional
fee). Naturally, I still do the site visits, photos, measurements, and
all the other traditional things a landscape designer does. It's only
the way my drawings are created that has changed.
I have a blueprinter/printer business that I've partnered with. I send
them my drawings via email, at my convenience, and then can go pick
them up, again at my convenience. This means I can send my drawings
over at 2:00 am, if necessary, rather than have to drive somewhere in a
sleepy daze. Not that I'm young enough to do that anymore, that is!
Doing designs by CAD isn't for everyone. But for people like me, it's
a Godsend!
Cheers!
=============================
In article <3A364691...@home.com>,
Brett Howe
let you all look up the price yourself if your curious.
http://www.gardengraphics.com/products/DSInfo/
From a novice gardener's point of view, that pricetag works as another
arguement for hiring a landscape designer, let you guys buy it and learn it
:-) This software looks to be targeting professional Landscape Designers
and related fields. I wouldn't mind getting my hands on it to play around a
bit, though :-) Looks like it could be a lot of fun.
<gardenfo...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:91666a$51u$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
<snip>I use DynaScape, and it cost me a pretty penny, let me tell
> you!
<snip>
> Judy
> www.gardenfoundation.com
>
> =============================
Tom McWilliams
Thanks for the update. This sounds like something the folks in Nevada
and California (just to name a couple places) could really benefit from.