Professionals offering CAD versus PDF files

sydthebeat

This is a question to all professionals mainly, do you offer CAD files to clients on request as a matter of course, or do you offer pdf files and or paper hardcopies?

Under what circumstances would you offer CAD files if you dont mainly.

From a personal point of view we usually have no problem offering CAD files once we have been fully paid up on a project.

We always give hardcopies of everything as a matter of course, and will always give pdfs if they are requested in that form.

the only other time we wouldnt offer them is if we have tendered for a follow-on service (eg construction drawings) and did not will the tender. we obviously wouldnt let off the CAD dwg files to the client then as they could simply pass it onto the tender winner.

sinnerboy

I've had experience of CAD files being mis used by persons who did not understand how to use AutoCAD properly.

I don't mean maliciously mis used - but by failing to understand how to control layers and scales properly they produced an erroneous drawing themselves - and it cost them abortive works. Who did they try to blame do you think ?

To clarify I would have no issue sending CAD files on to other Architects , Engineers , window suppliers , plumbers etc appointed by a client. But to clients ? Mostly no.




















I might make an exception for Galwaytt

braftery

I can understand the hesitancy of some professionals about giving out DWG files to their clients, but I think this habit does not come without a reason.

I get drawings for pricing all the time and it so much easier to work with a set of CAD drawings to look at the details of a job.

PDF's are fine as long as all the measurements have been put on the drawings, but in well over half the drawings we receive there are measurements missing and we have to scale from the drawings. Which is fine but takes considerably longer to work with.

Autodesk offer a free dwg viewer. This allow people to view the file and to check measurements but not to alter the file.

I hope it is ok ot post the link as it is a free offering. I am not in any way related to Autodesk.

http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/pc/index?id=6703438&siteID=123112

In the end I suspect, there are bigger issues at play in this debate than that of DWG or PDF files.

No6

Normally for Clients PDF's are all that is required other consultants suppliers etc often look for some CAD files and this is generally no problem, Once I've been paid I am happy enough to send out Cad files if requested.

Penn

We tend to send out paper copies or PDFs. We'll send out the CAD file if requested, but we would generally purge the drawing and remove the layouts (with our page setup and title block) unless they were regular clients or contractors. If it's to an architect or someone who is taking over the job from us, reduce everything down to one layer.

Seems to be the most common way, we work with a lot of architects who have no problem sending us their full drawings, title block and everything. Then there are others who take everything but the bare essentials off, and only if we get the client to get them to send the drawings to us.

We always credit the person/company who made the drawings on our drawings if we re-used anything of theirs though.

galwaytt

Barrington wrote: »

.... but we would generally purge the drawing and remove the layouts (with our page setup and title block) unless they were regular clients or contractors. If it's to an architect or someone who is taking over the job from us, reduce everything down to one layer..

I have to say, I have a problem with that.

What you are saying, is that you are prepared to effectively sabotage, or render very unwieldy, something you were paid for, just to inconvenience someone else, because you didn't win some element of the contract following you........

I think that's analogous to a builder burying piles of rubble, or rubbish, in the ground, in the way of the landscaper, just 'cos he didn't get the 'whole job' of finishing the house.

It's petty and disrespectful of your paying client imho.


On the general subject of dwg files, you need to comprehend why people need them: they are required to deliver accuracy and quality - if that's not part of your own goals, carry on pdf-ing away - but be prepared for issues arising, as they say.

For pricing purposes, they are merely an informed photograph. But they are not engineering drawings - and in this day and age, where products and services, from buildings, to windows, to stairs and fittings, require accuracy not only of fit and finish - but also accuracy of estimation and pricing, then CAD is the way to do it. Sending a pdf will get you an estimate. An estimate is not a quote. And a CAD file is to someone pricing and calculating how to deliver your building, etc, what a trowel is to someone laying blocks: a tool. It is not the Oracle (sic).
For someone making your product-of-choice other than by hand (by machine, CNC etc), it is a fundamental, key, piece of information, required to deliver that which has been asked.

Paper plans were the method-of-choice of issue, for so long, like all those blueprints, because all the building was on-site and subjective. It's also because there was no other way to do it. When photocopying came along, no-one had any problem with it, and blueprint copying bureaux sprang up left/right/centre...........and life went on.

All of a sudden, CAD is accessible to the man-in-the-street and there's an issue with the method of delivery of plans, now ?

Is this the type of thing that went on when the telephone arrived, fearing it would rob society of it's ability to meet and and talk ? Or when the first PC appeared, and Xerox feared it would put their paper business in trouble ??

braftery wrote: »

In the end I suspect, there are bigger issues at play in this debate than that of DWG or PDF files.

Verily, You Speak The Truth

Mellor

galwaytt wrote: »

I have to say, I have a problem with that.

What you are saying, is that you are prepared to effectively sabotage, or render very unwieldy, something you were paid for,

That's not entirely true. They were paid for the work, and the drawings. Not the model. Unless the client specifically include a DWG model in the brief, then didn't pay for it.

Personally, I give out PDF copies, and hard copies. If the DWGs were requested, I'd generally have no problem sending them out in full.

The only exceptioss would be if there was a issue (fall out, lack of payment etc) or if I tendered for a later stage and wasn't selected. But oher than that i'm happy to give clients bound DWGs

braftery

In my opinion, this discussion really centres around a number of issues.

1. Clarity around the services being provided and the price for each part of these services.
2. Intellectual property rights
3. Level of trust between professional and client.

The client needs to be clear with the brief (and this does not only mean in relation to CADs or PDF's).
The professional needs to be clear about what the client will get for their fees.
This can often make the initial conversations more difficult and I have found in general in business in Ireland we tend to avoid this kind of clarity at the early stages of business relationships.

In most cases the client is hiring the professional for their ideas and their opinions. Not just their drawing skills.
If the client only wanted to draft up their own idea then the professional should be professional enough to tell them to go hire a draftsman.
The professional should not be shy about outlining the price for the idea in the fees and the client should not baulk at the idea of paying for the idea.

Now ... what is the value of an idea ?

The issues around trust are alot harder to deal with but dealing with the issues outlined above will be a start.

Penn

galwaytt wrote: »

I think that's analogous to a builder burying piles of rubble, or rubbish, in the ground, in the way of the landscaper, just 'cos he didn't get the 'whole job' of finishing the house.

I hardly think they're comparable situations to be fair.

We would only do it in situations where the drawing may contain several of our details, whether they are generic details or ones specifically for that project, and where we feel there may be a chance of those details being reproduced. All the required information is still there, and it isn't done out of malice at being removed from the job. If we gave full drawings to someone who underpriced us, we are effectively helping them cut their costs in order to underprice us.

I see it like buying a computer. At the end, you own the computer. You own all the parts in it, everything that came with it, the computer is yours. But you don't own the machines which produced the computer. You don't own the system through which the computer was produced. And you don't own the copyright of the computer model. Do you think Apple gave HTC all the blueprints to the iPhone so they could make a rival phone?

Basically, it's only in extreme circumstances we do that. Generally, we just purge the drawing and take our title blocks off it to remove liability if the drawing is changed by someone else. Most regulars we work with however, we have no issue with sending full complete drawings and even the plotstyle.

RKQ

galwaytt wrote: »

I have to say, I have a problem with that.

What you are saying, is that you are prepared to effectively sabotage, or render very unwieldy, something you were paid for, just to inconvenience someone else, because you didn't win some element of the contract following you........

I disagree with galwaytt. The Client has paid for a set of drawings, a design printed in a single layer of ink on paper. So I don't see the problem with purging a drawing. In fact I fail to see why the Client want a drawing file.

Most professionals will have their own style of drawing with their own system of layers. I'd be happier to receive a single layer drawing as I could then convert it to my system of layers, without a problem.

If I pay a Carpenter to build a wall unit, I own the unit but not the Carpeners tools!

picorette

As a matter of course, I give client's pdf files and / or paper hardcopies.

If they do ask for a dwg file (which is very rarely on the scale of domestic projects that I have worked on last few years), I am reluctant to provide and would want a very good reason (e.g. to supply to a trusted professional) and reassurances about how they will be used.

This is based on experience. I have supplied them before (for 3d visualisation purposes) and then had others use them without my permission, & ultimately usurp me on the project. It is very frustrating, and I would not want it to happen again.

Legally, my understanding is that the designer / draughtsman owns the electronic file, and so it is their decision on who they release it to. The client owns the pdf file or hard copies that he is given.

DOCARCH

picorette wrote: »

Legally, my understanding is that the designer / draughtsman owns the electronic file, and so it is their decision on who they release it to. The client owns the pdf file or hard copies that he is given.

Correct.

I checked this/got advise from the RIAI in the past, the electronic files are intellectual property.

sydthebeat

galwaytt wrote: »

I have to say, I have a problem with that.

What you are saying, is that you are prepared to effectively sabotage, or render very unwieldy, something you were paid for, just to inconvenience someone else, because you didn't win some element of the contract following you........

who does it inconvenience?

if its for pricing a job off, then taking measurements can be done irrespective of layers, actually problems arise the more layers you have.

if its for a mech and elec or other specialist to design on, again, having one layer, or very few, actually suits and speeds up their delivery. They can produce their own design on their own layer.

if its for the client to 'look at' then fine.. they can use the free dwg viewer and again its immaterial what layers, blocks etc exist.

so who exactly does it inconvenience? It would certainly inconvenience someone trying to augment or alter the original drawings, which is exactly the point. If an altered version of the original drawings ended up caused financial issues because someone other than the designer changed it, then that becomes very messy.

To give another analogy, when you buy a book, you buy the paper hard copy, or on a cd.... you do not purchase the word document, authors notes, hand written ideas, previous drafts etc.

To be honest that issue doesnt really affect me anyway as i purge drawings on competion as a matter of course, and i use a minimum ammount of layers anyway.

@braferty
In the end I suspect, there are bigger issues at play in this debate than that of DWG or PDF files.

im interested to know what you might mean in this?

DOCARCH

sydthebeat wrote: »

If an altered version of the original drawings ended up caused financial issues because someone other than the designer changed it, then that becomes very messy.

This is pretty much the nub of the reason why CAD files should not be provided, generally. The mis-use of the file.

sinnerboy

Galwaytt can you suggest why a client i.e. not his windows supplier , UFH guy ,Timber Frame supplier , Structural Engineer etc would require a CAD file ?

No6

If you are doing any dept of education work it clearly states in one of the tgd's particuarly relating to the PSDP role that they require a full set of CAD files to be included in the safety file. Purgeing for those who anr't that CAD savvy is only cleaning out the rubbish that you arnt using in the final drawing, it may be different in BIM systems not familar with them!!

sinnerboy

Well in that case presumably the client or his agent employs staff competent to use and not mis use the CAD files.

db

I'm not an architect / technician but I am a software developer and I see construction drawing as being very similar to software. Any software I have written to a customer's specification and fully paid for by the customer, I would have no problem handing over the full source code. After all the customer has paid in full for thie development. If there were any generic libraries used only the compiled version would be provided. As a customer who requisitioned a building design I would expect to get the dwg files if I asked for them - I have asked for the files and received them in the past without question.

Where this would be particularly useful as a customer is if I wanted to build an extension. The original architect may not be used for the later work but I should still be able to pass on the files to someone else and not pay for the drawings a second time.

I understand that some professionals may feel that they retain some ownership of the work but as I see it, it is the person who pays for the work that owns the results.

DOCARCH

db wrote: »

Any software I have written to a customer's specification and fully paid for by the customer, I would have no problem handing over the full source code.

All well and good db.

What would happen if somebody then fiddled around with your source code or made a couple of minor changes/tweaks to your software whicj resulted in the software producing some sort of incorrect result? It's still your software (albeit somebody has meddled with it) and fingers may point back to you for developing the software.

I'd suggest you would not be too happy?

I know that probably would not happen with software but I don't think your comparsion of software and CAD files to be a good one. One problem being that there are far many more people able to meddle with CAD files (with all levels of expertise and experince).

BTW, handing over CAD files to a client on completion of a job is a different matter to handing over CAD files during the project.

sinnerboy

@ db Have you ever had the experience where an end user thought they could alter your code - even though in reality they could not competently do so , then created a mess for themselves and then tried to blame you ?

Well I have had an analogous experience of that - see post 2 .

sydthebeat

db wrote: »

I understand that some professionals may feel that they retain some ownership of the work but as I see it, it is the person who pays for the work that owns the results.

actually thats not correct.

copyright law says the the designer owns the work, and patron has permission to use the works under the designers license. So basically, the architect retains the rights to the design, but allows the client use the design for planning, construction whatever... and is recompensed as a result.


see article 15 here as typical

db

I have had one client who modified software after we gave them the source code and this was covered by warranty - any changes to the source code voided the warranty. It was clearly stated in the contract and easy to detect that the software had been changed. The client paid for their mistakes to be corrected.

sinnerboy

So it seems you have the procedures possible which we don't then.

Mellor

db wrote: »

I have had one client who modified software after we gave them the source code and this was covered by warranty - any changes to the source code voided the warranty. It was clearly stated in the contract and easy to detect that the software had been changed. The client paid for their mistakes to be corrected.

Very different situation, its easy to detect if coding has been changed. We are talking about handing out files that are usable with lots and lots of programs. how they use them might not edit anything. However;

sinnerboy wrote: »

So it seems you have the procedures possible which we don't then.

This isn't true either, its very easy to include a clause that CAD files are included for reference only. Any editing, printing, opening of the files is outside the control of [designer] and done so at the clients own risk.

You could also lock the whole drawing so that they have to actively undo this to make changes.

fclauson

sinnerboy wrote: »

I've had experience of CAD files being mis used by persons who did not understand how to use AutoCAD properly.

I don't mean maliciously mis used - but by failing to understand how to control layers and scales properly they produced an erroneous drawing themselves - and it cost them abortive works. Who did they try to blame do you think ?

To clarify I would have no issue sending CAD files on to other Architects , Engineers , window suppliers , plumbers etc appointed by a client. But to clients ? Mostly no.


I might make an exception for Galwaytt

So there are a number of ways of protecting your data
1 - access to the file contents - called digital rights management or DRM - used by the likes of itunes movies etc - search for DRM for more references

2 - confirming integrity (making sure you can tell if its been altered) - and this is what I think you are on about - prior to release you can create an MD5 hash code for it - see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MD5 or prehaps http://www.winmd5.com/ - This creates a unique code which is like a fingerprint of the file - if its altered the MD5 hash code will not be the same - this is used by many download sites to show you that the original file has not been tampered with

PM me if you want more help with this

Mellor

fclauson wrote: »

So there are a number of ways of protecting you data
1 - access to the file - called digital rights management or DRM - used by the likes of itunes movies etc - search for DRM for more references

I don't see how DRM can help here? Maybe i'm missing something, but I don't see how its relevant.

2 - confirming integrity (making sure you can tell if its been altered) - and this is what I think you are on about - prior to release you can create an MD5 hash code for it - see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MD5 or prehaps http://www.winmd5.com/ - This creates a unique code which is like a fingerprint of the file - if its altered the MD5 hash code will not be the same - this is used by many download sites to show you that the original file has not been tampered with

That's not relevant either. Checking if the file being altered isn't the issue here.
It's the file being misused and unaccurate drawings being produced, the file doesn't need to be altered for this. Or it could be altered with out being saved etc. The use of these drawings leading to errors on site which is the issue.

fclauson

Mellor wrote: »

I don't see how DRM can help here? Maybe i'm missing something, but I don't see how its relevant.
.

This will allow you to only allow those you want access to the file

Mellor wrote: »

That's not relevant either. Checking if the file being altered isn't the issue here.
It's the file being misused and unaccurate drawings being produced, the file doesn't need to be altered for this. Or it could be altered with out being saved etc. The use of these drawings leading to errors on site which is the issue.

ok - agree - I had not thought of editing, printing but then not saving

I supposed we are back to placing a nice wax company seal on drawings and if this is not present then it should not be used

RKQ

db wrote: »

Where this would be particularly useful as a customer is if I wanted to build an extension. The original architect may not be used for the later work but I should still be able to pass on the files to someone else and not pay for the drawings a second time.

Now thats a dangerous assumption!
The 1st architect has been replaced by architect 2. You expect architect2 to trust architect1 work?

If you are given the drawing files, why do you assume that the files are exactly what was built on site, perfectly accurate to mm. Thats the danger - assuming the drawing files are accurate.

If I was architect2 I'd consider a very small discount for drawing files, considering them as nothing more that general layout sketches until I've surveyed the existing building.I'd still have to survey the existing to ensure my drawings are accurate, especially in the extension area - levels, manhole positions, services etc.

The Client has always expected drawings and pays for designs not computer files.

If I go to my Doctor to get a letter for a Hospital appointment - do I expect him to give me the original Word document?

Do I expect to get Word files of all letters, contracts or Wills from my Solicitor? No, I accept them on paper.

pixelFX

Purely from a customers point of view.

I requested the CAD files so that I could build the required 3d models and then imported them into a game engine.

I sat down with my partner infront of the telly and walked through the house in realtime in the game engine. With the house, garden etc all mocked up with decent lighting and hi-resolution textures.

It helped get a scale and flow of the house, as well as how it would look in the end. Most of these game tools are freely available now and require little effort to get up and running.

Obviously this is a very special case for needing the CAD files, but it was the reason I requested them.

sinnerboy

Mellor wrote: »

This isn't true either, its very easy to include a clause that CAD files are included for reference only. Any editing, printing, opening of the files is outside the control of [designer] and done so at the clients own risk.

..... you would think so , wouldn't you .....;)

Mellor

fclauson wrote: »

This will allow you to only allow those you want access to the file

Just to clarify, you are talking about reserving the rights so that only the client has permission to use the CAD file.
Doesn't really prevent the issue, if you give them the file, they may mess up which can cause you problems down the line.
The idea that others get the file and then piggyback on your work can happen too. But the simple fact is that you'll never be aware of this once the client has the file. Further more, its possible to recreate a file from a digital PDF, and as you are working with an existing design or structure, it doesn't breach copyright ot DRM. So they could ofcpy the file and claim to have recreated it.

pixelFX wrote: »

Purely from a customers point of view.

I requested the CAD files so that I could build the required 3d models and then imported them into a game engine.

I sat down with my partner infront of the telly and walked through the house in realtime in the game engine. With the house, garden etc all mocked up with decent lighting and hi-resolution textures.

It helped get a scale and flow of the house, as well as how it would look in the end. Most of these game tools are freely available now and require little effort to get up and running.

Obviously this is a very special case for needing the CAD files, but it was the reason I requested them.

A 3D cad program would be a lot easier than a game engine I imagine. but hat is one reason why they mgiht be needed

miss-bored

My house was designed about 3 years ago by an architect that my dads choose. This was the second house he designed and submitted to the council for me. The first one was one I picked out from a magazine and he designed and put into Planning. They refused and stated the Architect should have known this would have been refused as the shape is completely unacceptable. Next time I picked a simpler house model, he designed it without any input from me and I went into planning. My parents were paying the architect as a gift and were eager for me to get in plans at home as I may want to build in the future. They paid for the two plans fully and believe me, he knew how to charge!

Three years on when I knew I wanted in life I decided to build. I contacted this Architect and asked for a quote for amending drawings by rotating house as requested by council; I also wanted to change the layout of the house inside. He gave me a quote of 5k (excluding VAT) for changing the two items and re-submitting plans then another 5k (excluding VAT) for issuing certificates (if we had a project manager onsite). I couldn’t believe it! I looked for other quotes and found an excellent architect who was charging me about 2k altogether!

Without telling him I had found another architect I requested the CAD drawings that we had paid for, but he refused saying he owned them and there was a copyright on them. My new architect had to re-draw whole house but that didn’t put me off going with me as he was still miles cheaper!

I was angry that after my parents paid him such a huge sum that I didn’t even own the CAD drawings.

Mellor

He designed the house, he owns the copyright, he owns the files etc
You decided to go with somebody else to make the changes to your drawings and submitt plans so he's under no obligation to give you the plans, few peoplw would.

braftery

I have been reading this thread with a considerable interest and I am wondering to myself is the provision of CAD drawings really the issue here.

Initially one principle needs to be established here;

All parties accept and agree that the originator of the CAD drawings (architect, engineer, etc) retains the copyright of the material and has the right to refuse any other parties to alter the CAD files.

If this can not be agreed then I think the issue is not about CAD files.

If this concept is agreed, then we move on to discussing if every thought / concept that the architect puts on to the CAD files is the property of the client.

This is usually dealt with in the terms of the contract.
If the architect agrees to supply a concept for a house and a set of drawings to complete a planning application then that is all he has to supply. Nothing more .. nothing less.
Should the client want full access to the CAD files then the time to establish this permission is when the parties are agreeing the terms of contract.

Where the first principle is established and the permission to access not agreed. I can still see it possible for a client to hire an architect, have drawings prepared by them but after some time parting ways. The client likes some aspects of the original drawings and wants to bring those ideas to another practioner.

If the new practioner feels it will save him time and therefore reduce his fees to have the old architects drawings then it should be possible to agree a fee with the old architect for the CAD files. If not the new guy will have to re-draw. Either way someone will get paid for the work.

If a client wants full access to the CAD drawings, upfront this at the initial meetings or after you have read the terms of contract issued to you by the practioner. They then have a choice, to agree without a cost, propose a fee for such access or refuse access.

Am I missing the point with all of the above ?