Why not run Carlson Survey on C3D?
> In a mixed office situation (engineers/surveyors) I still think C3D would be my preference.
I think if the mixed office situation is reversed (surveyors/engineers) then a better return on investment would be obtained with Carlson.
Anyway, as the chap used to say "the best software is the one you know".
Most offices with engineers aren't going to change from what they know and like.
I tried to convince everyone here to go Carlson, but it's just a few of us surveyors running it, with all the engineers, designers, drafters, etc, running C3D.
> Most offices with engineers aren't going to change from what they know and like.
>
> I tried to convince everyone here to go Carlson, but it's just a few of us surveyors running it, with all the engineers, designers, drafters, etc, running C3D.
That works too, two software offer independent checks on each other.
C3D has a very pleasant interface, up-to-date looks which helps sells. Carlson could use a facelift in some of its looks, they are routines that still have Windows98 appearances. The product is very reliable and smart, but its looks could be revamped and standardized across the board to today's standards. They are improving but not there yet.
Volumetrics and 3D modeling are strong points in Carlson; it's a good thing survey department uses it, as it is often responsible for data prep and quantities calcs/payable items to contractors. I have seen guys with C3D (and LDD) often question their quantities calculations, as well as spend a lot of time on the process. Carlson is solid, quick and versatile in that regards, similar to TerraModel.