Garden design software - any good?
Stuart Shaw
Are they worthwhile?
Thanks,
Stuart Shaw
Andrew Leighton
Stuart Shaw <stuar...@zetnet.co.uk> wrote in article
<199807291...@zetnet.co.uk>...
I can't comment on the Fast Track software but I have used the Europress 3D
Garden Designer. I run a small landscape contractors business and do all of
the design work myself and although it is useful, I still find a pencil and
paper much more user friendly! And, personally speaking, it's quicker too.
Verdict: 3D Garden Designer, 5 out of 10.
Andy
paulw...@my-dejanews.com
(usual response from a Pro saying "not much cop")
I suspect that garden design software if much more useful to
an amateur. While someone with much experience can easily and quickly
visualise the result of various hard landscape features and plantings,
from a 2-D pencil sketch, the rest of us humble mortals cannot.
With experience (as has been stated) you actually do the
design in your head, and then commit it to paper just so other
people can see it.
With experience you can just decide on previous examples, what plant to put
where.
The ability with some of the garden software to put everything in place, and
then view it over seasons/years, and then move things around is going to
avoid costly/laborious mistakes.
There is a parallel profession/amateur argument in woodwork tool
sharpening. It is much *quicker* to sharpen a tool without messing
around with a guide - once you have the skill. Professional opinion of
guides is therefore *low*.
For us "weekenders" the guides allow you to get a good edge, every time.
Are guides good? It depends you you are. I believe it is similar with
design software. If you want to know if software will help
an amateur gardener, don't ask a pro. Ask an amateur who's used the
stuff.
BugBear.
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
Kathryn Friedlander
Stuart Shaw wrote in message <199807291...@zetnet.co.uk>...
>Has anyone used Europress 3D Garden Designer or Fast Track 3D Landscape?
>Are they worthwhile?
>
>Thanks,
>Stuart Shaw
>
I've used Fast Track 3D.
Good points: you can shift things around and view things in 3D from
different angles very easily; you can look at things 'through the seasons';
the graphics are OK; you can use it to check heights and spread of plants. I
tend to cheat on graph paper, and push things together too closely. This
actually puts the plant in with the correct circumference...(though you can
still alter it ;-) )
If you didn't know what plants you wanted, it helps you find plants (e.g.
red flowers, clay soil, shrub, flowers spring....<search>)
Seemed to have a fair range of plants, too.
I didn't find it too slow to set up the landscape....
BUT
* Flower colours are not subtle - pink, red, blue, purple, orange, yellow.
No facility to select 'coral-pink' or 'primrose-yellow'; certainly no black
or green flowers possible. No facility to change the pre-loaded colours of
dictionary plants (e.g. if it thinks a foxglove is purple, that's it. No use
trying to change it to apricot...and in any case you'd have to select
'orange')
* All deciduous bushes have red autumnal tints whether or not they really
do! And you can't change the setting. Forget berries.
* All green foliage is mid green. Don't contemplate buying this package to
design an interestingly textured shrub border with grey foliage....
* Things flower in 'early summer' OR 'mid summer' OR 'late summer' OR 'all
Summer' OR autumn....etc. Too bad if it starts flowering in July and goes on
till November.....
* The 'hard-landscaping (e.g. house types) seem to presuppose that you are
American. So your buildings look rather 'ranch-style'.
I did enjoy playing with the package, but when I recently got down to
designing a new border for the front garden, I drew it on graph paper THEN
transferred to the software package afterwards, to see how it looked & check
on heights.
Hope this helps.
Kathryn
Andrew Leighton
paulw...@my-dejanews.com wrote in article
<6ps7od$18c$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
> (usual question on Garden design software)
> (usual response from a Pro saying "not much cop")
>
> I suspect that garden design software if much more useful to
> an amateur. While someone with much experience can easily and quickly
> visualise the result of various hard landscape features and plantings,
> from a 2-D pencil sketch, the rest of us humble mortals cannot.
>
> With experience (as has been stated) you actually do the
> design in your head, and then commit it to paper just so other
> people can see it.
>
I understand what you are getting at, however I think that the arguments
for and against garden design software still stand whether used by amateurs
or professionals. I have used some professional design software costing
several hundreds of pounds and in my opinion it isn't any better.
From a purely personal point of view I find it much easier to produce a 2D
design on paper than on a computer, this would be the case whether I was a
professional or not. The fact that I need to produce large scale drawings
for my clients is irrelevant.
With regards to Europress 3D Garden Designer. I do own a copy and I do use
it. I find it useful tool when trying to visualise a design from different
view points, but my verdict still stands: It's good, but not "that" good.
:-)
Andy
Janet Tweedy
<stuar...@zetnet.co.uk> writes
>Has anyone used Europress 3D Garden Designer or Fast Track 3D Landscape?
>Are they worthwhile?
I've got the 3d landscape 2 deluxe and the Garden Encycolpaedia 2
deluxe, they're supposed to run togteher but they don't and they are
very heavily American orientated on the plant side. Can't master the
garden planning stuff, found it muche asier with a pen, pencil and then
going out to stare at the area anyway!!
They did say that there would be a follow up of Britiah plants this
autumn and if that's the case then the encycolpaedia bit would be useful
for selecting planys by various criteria and giving a break down of the
pests and disease asscoiated with it. I used some of the plants in my
RHS exam course work and those that are British are quite well written.
janet
--
Janet Tweedy
paulw...@my-dejanews.com
"Andrew Leighton" <alei...@claranet.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
> paulw...@my-dejanews.com wrote in article
> <6ps7od$18c$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
> > (usual question on Garden design software)
> > (usual response from a Pro saying "not much cop")
> >
> > I suspect that garden design software if much more useful to
> > an amateur. While someone with much experience can easily and quickly
> > visualise the result of various hard landscape features and plantings,
> > from a 2-D pencil sketch, the rest of us humble mortals cannot.
> >
> > With experience (as has been stated) you actually do the
> > design in your head, and then commit it to paper just so other
> > people can see it.
> >
>
> I understand what you are getting at, however I think that the arguments
> for and against garden design software still stand whether used by amateurs
> or professionals. I have used some professional design software costing
> several hundreds of pounds and in my opinion it isn't any better.
In my post I followed the normal "jargon" that others have used in these
discussions i.e. a distinction between "amateur" and "professional".
<PEDANTIC DRONE ON>
I actually have a hobby horse about these words. In modern (especially
advertising) parlance "amateur" means part-time dabbler, while "professional"
means full-time competance. This is (of course) not correct.
Those legendary cowboy builders are professional (they are paid). Roger
Black was an amateur athlete.
The *real* contrast is simply between degree of experience/skill/talent.
Often (but not always) a professional has more.
<OFF>
Personally (as a long standing computer programmer) I can write software
without putting much design on paper before I start. The early design
stuff is done in my head. Fast. Correct. But I have been doing this lark for
a hell of a long time. I would suspect the same applied to
you. I believe it would be difficult for ME to judge the value
of systems/programs/techniques intended to help one program. I suspect
the same applies to someone who finds garden design second-nature.
BugBear.
>
> From a purely personal point of view I find it much easier to produce a 2D
> design on paper than on a computer, this would be the case whether I was a
> professional or not. The fact that I need to produce large scale drawings
> for my clients is irrelevant.
>
Stuart Shaw
from Janet Tweedy <j...@lancedal.demon.co.uk> contains these words:
> In article <199807291...@zetnet.co.uk>, Stuart Shaw
> <stuar...@zetnet.co.uk> writes
> >Has anyone used Europress 3D Garden Designer or Fast Track 3D Landscape?
> >Are they worthwhile?
Thanks for the advice everyone but I think I'll stick to a pencil and
paper. I suppose I was really hoping to get something fo nothing,
ie. have the program do the work for me but as everyone knows,
there's no such thing as a free lunch.
Stuart Shaw