The Global ARCHICAD Community

Stay informed. Get help. Share your knowledge.

Topics related to the Grasshopper-ARCHICAD Connection and the various tasks that can be achieved with it.

Moderators: Karl Ottenstein, LaszloNagy, ejrolon, Barry Kelly, gkmethy

the other reason that is important is because Vectorworks already has that.
And their graphical scripting tool is part of the program, not just an add-on for some other program.

Graphical scripting is certainly going to be a game changer in our industry.
ArchiCAD will have to get a better modeling kernel or they will not be able to
compete with what will very soon be an industry standard. ... TADIUM.jpg
Last edited by Steve Jepson on Thu Jan 07, 2016 6:32 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Graphisoft had better be working on connections for more than just Grasshopper.

Also, I hope they are working on something like this that will be part of ArchiCAD, the way Marionette is part of Vectorworks.
All of this is a futile endeavor for Graphisoft unless they implement a new kind of modeling kernel.

Morph? pfff!

Just out of curiosity: are you guys fully familiar with the capabilities of Marionette, Dynamo and Grasshopper? Do you know which one is the most capable? Do you know that Dynamo is more mature than Grasshopper and not the other way around?
Do you know exactly what Dynamo can (and more importantly, can't) do in Revit? And how it compares to Grasshopper? I would be interested to hear.

(Marionette is a new entry and its graphical scripting capabilities are not yet fully implemented. For example, only Service Pack 2 which came out not long ago started to have nodes that enabled you to create Walls and Slabs and Roofs, but there are still no capabilities at the moment to create a lot of stuff in Vectorworks using Marionette).
This sounds like marketing stuff which Autodesk is very good at. :wink:
I am aware that Dynamo can do a lot of great stuff. But can you tell me specific about which area Dynamo is better than Rhino+Grasshopper? Which Dynamo can do that Grasshopper can't?
I really would like to know. Can you give me any examples?
Lazlo, start here, start with this guy.

Andreas is a friend and a wizard with this too, and, as a teacher, knows something about smarting his knowledge of the technology. Other material available on Youtube and on the AU websitel: ... al-design/
Aaron Bourgoin wrote:Dynamo was designed to be a superior version of Grasshopper.

You stated the above. But did it manage to become a superior product? In what regard? Can you tell me examples? Like: Dynamo can do this, Grasshopper can't do that.
Grasshopper is welded to Rhino whose NURBS definition is compatible with most others. so at it's heart, Grasshopper has nowhere to go other than strapping itself to Rhino and it's NURBS definition.

Granted, Dynamo is tied to Revit and it's horrendous under-the-hood architecture, but it goes a long way to making Revit a usable tool.

Grasshopper is adept with geometry primarily whereas Dynamo can be scripted to generate, analyze and audit BIM as well.

As I recall, one of the first things Andreas wrote in Dynamo was a script to assist with his grading of his students' BIM projects.

More recently Dynamo is at work designing structural, mechanical and electrical systems inside buildings.

Unless I'm missing something, the ArchiCAD / RHINO / Grasshopper tool is currently limited to a geometry generator. This is great, but its just the geometry.

Lazlo, this "superior" product thing sounds like a red herring to me. One thing it has going for it is the fact that its is open source and is being built by users. Users built something powerful enough that it dominated the instructional workshops at AU this year.