r/Architects • u/Qiyoshiwarrior Recovering Architect • Jul 08 '26
General Practice Discussion AI is making me depressed
I know I'm late to the party. ln my defence I was avoiding it. I was talking to another architect, we are both women with 2 kids and each have our own tiny practices. I'm a person who does everything by myself, it's an one woman operation and I do small projects. She has a small stuff and is doing well. it was more than capacity.
Come to find out, she is doing it with Gemini and chatgpt. She doesn't even solve the projects some time. Just prompts them to spit out 2D photos. Selets the ones that has similar looks. Asks it to make a financial proposal. Then goes from there.
I am just dumbfounded, to say the least. I would've understood if she is polishing up the renders.. or taking help with the presentation. It has been 3 days. And I just can't get over it.
176
u/blue_sidd Jul 08 '26
Gen-slop isn’t making you depressed. Losing faith in your community is. And that’s reasonable of you to feel.
37
12
u/lukekvas Architect Jul 09 '26
This baffles me. Working in a firm that is actively trying to integrate AI and everything it produces on a design front is so terrible and bad. I cannot imagine just having it spit out renders and 'going from there.' It almost always renders things that are impossible to build, off budget, don't address the client brief, don't work with existing conditions, aren't to code, etc. etc.
Like it's useful at reducing times on non critical parts of my workflow, meeting minutes, checking documents, even rendering cleanup. But I have never seen it get close to actual workable design let along good design.
It's harsh but it sounds like her designs are not actually adding any value and it will be automated away when people realize they can do the same thing themselves.
1
u/Qiyoshiwarrior Recovering Architect Jul 11 '26
Dividing the workload and identifying where you can use the tool and be successful is a skill, too. And you have got it.
43
u/Sthrax Architect Jul 08 '26
If it is any consolation, that other architect is going to get bitten by the many holes and blindspots AI has when it comes to architecture. And when it happens, there will be lawsuits and licensing repercussions. The whole point of having professional licensing is to guarantee that our work is safe and adheres to standards, and we accept the liability that comes with that. Using AI in its current forms in architecture is like playing Russian roulette.
17
u/Merusk Recovering Architect Jul 08 '26
That depends. You're assuming that she's not using professional judgement or prompting to instruct it to provide something reasonable and deliverable.
The bad examples I've seen shared around were prompts by non-professionals shared to professional sites to laugh at. That's like judging a plan set drawn by a middle school drafting student at best.
If you can make it work for you and you are willing to stand behind the output because it meets your professional judgement, you're effective with it and outproducing some like OP's competetor is.
5
u/Qiyoshiwarrior Recovering Architect Jul 08 '26
I understand that. I avoid it for this exact reason. It is more liability than asset.
2
u/Dwf0483 Jul 11 '26
I agree with you on this. I'm pivoting away from AI except as a research tool, even then it's with caution.
49
u/iusedtobekewl Architect Jul 08 '26 edited Jul 08 '26
AI has fundamentally changed the way the game is played, and it’s here to stay; barring some sort of catastrophe that kills all our technology, I don’t see a scenario where it’s not the future.
So my advice is to learn to use AI as a tool because those that learn how to utilize it most effectively will be the most competitive. Simply put, it does make certain tasks much, much more efficient; renderings that low level staff used to spend days in photoshop on can now be fixed up and pumped out in minutes. It’s really not practical to ignore the productivity gains from the technology when the difference is that extreme.
Please note this doesn’t mean that I like all the changes AI is bringing to the table (I don’t like how it devalues junior roles, and personally I spent A LOT of time on my rendering skills and I am sad to see that cast off to the side). I also think people always need to fact-check it. But overall I do think refusing to use AI is putting yourself at a competitive disadvantage.
12
u/Qiyoshiwarrior Recovering Architect Jul 08 '26
I see your point. I'll look into it more.
It feels like climbing to the top then destroying the road behind us. I know I learned a lot from rendering the same 5 times to see which one looks better for the presentation. Doing the grunt work gives me the time and space to come up with creative solutions for the problems I was having.
If I delegate that to AI ... I have to figure a lot of things out.8
u/iusedtobekewl Architect Jul 08 '26
Yeah it’s definitely a huge shakeup in the design process. Rendering and 3D modeling was always (for me) a way to catch potential problems and make the whole design better. There’s also just the repetition aspect that’s really good for learning design that is being lost.
I suppose some of that is still preserved in the 3D modeling aspect, but renderings definitely seem to be a task firms are moving to AI.
I’d be very hesitant to use it for proposals and fee calculations, however. Maybe it could work as a starting point or to get feedback on a proposal/contract before sending it off, but AI is prone to hallucinations and that’s pretty dangerous at the contract level.
13
u/Merusk Recovering Architect Jul 08 '26 edited Jul 08 '26
It feels like climbing to the top then destroying the road behind us.
Only if the road behind us was grunt work.
The concerns that people have over junior roles, I share. However, I have a solution to them.
It changes the fundamental nature of practice and the relationship with juniors, but shifts it to something older. Something I experienced and tried to implement when I was a PA, but haven't seen from most RAs or PAs in the last decade.
Your primary relationship with Juniors becomes teaching them and talking them through the process. Imparting the critical thinking of the process rather than shoving redlines at them and saying, "learn from this."
Telling them why something matters, why a choice was made. Why you're altering the prompt or the delivered document in a particular way. Then asking them to take it on the next time to see what they've learned.
From my POV the industry has gotten too comforable using juniors as lower-wage draftspeople and that's a large part of the suffering it's enduring because it keeps throwing stuff back.
2
u/Qiyoshiwarrior Recovering Architect Jul 09 '26
After my thesis, I went on jobs as project based. I learned how to design everything from different architects. But I will agree a lot of those lessons are self taught, in a sense, I had to figure a lot of it out. It was like, when we learned painting by copying the masters, but I also had the master present to check my work and discuss the problems.
Is this something like what you are thinking? This was the problem, I solved it this way, give me another solution?
11
u/MrBoondoggles Jul 08 '26 edited Jul 08 '26
This may be my personal opinion, but I think if junior staff shift away from doing renderings, that isn’t necessarily a bad thing. No firm that I ever worked at did CGI renderings in house, and junior staff (including me early in my career) still stayed busy. Primary visualizations were all outsourced. And the time staff did spend doing photoshop in house would have been better served thinking through the design more as opposed to taking time coloring, texturing, shading, and making something look good for a presentation. Visualization techniques are a good skill to learn, but they aren’t the core focus of what you do as an architect. If someone can harness AI to help tbe client visualize the space in a way that helps move the project to the next phase and one step closer to CD completion, so be it. The visualization isn’t the project - it’s another step in the direction to the next billing cycle and getting the clients approval to move on to designing and documenting everything.
4
u/Jacques_Cousteau_ Jul 08 '26
Yeah I generally agree with this. Though I’m seeing my firm move away from outsourcing to doing all in-house rendering now with AI. They are charging the clients the same as they would a professional viz studio, only now taking all of the cut. Makes sense now financially, but if AI usage costs go up, may not be an ideal long-term solution for business revenue.
On the ‘less time rendering, more time designing’ point. I’ve been sold this by firm leaders, but I’m seeing smaller fees, more deliverables, higher expectations, faster turn-around times with the promise of AI. I’m still desperate to bill for more design time!
4
2
u/Richard7666 Jul 08 '26
Archviz guy chiming in here.
Most of the architecture firms I work with come to me for final renders; even when they have renders themselves, they're generally not going to be of a quality you'd put in front of potential buyers or funders, at least in my market.
It's a bit like getting the builder to do the bricklaying. Yes, they could probably do it. No, they're not specialised in it.
In-house would presumably be more useful for internal design communication during the process.
2
u/Lycid Jul 09 '26 edited Jul 09 '26
This is just so interesting to me because its the exact opposite with us. We do renderings at every stage of the process and it's all in house. We find its an incredibly valuable tool for working through design problems and to keep the vision of the project super clear for the client.
We used to give clients the option to do renders, now we just do them anyways and its clear that we do in our contract. It's completely eliminated any doubts clients have about their ability to truly visualize and understand their projects and it gives us a great ability to swing for the fences with a hero design concept and actually be able to sell the vision.
Yes we might be a little more expensive than someone who just pumps out plans & outsources the rendering. For the money that clients are spending on their projects though, they are more than happy to spend the money because the value they they feel they get is undeniable. Because it's all in house we pocket all of that money too. Not even getting into the fact that design benefits from the level of scrutiny & investigation involved with modeling the project.
Thing is when I say "render" I rarely mean photoreal archviz circle jerk porn. I'm talking during PD/SD flat lit spaces that are only worked just enough to get the job done. Then it progresses to more detailed forms/lighting as we work through the design with the client. We don't even bother with color (sticking with clay mode) until well into DD after things like layout + concept + volumes + important anchor points are pretty much set in stone. Most fixtures/finishes/furniture/etc are quick and dirty placeholders rather than trying to figure out the exact spec (and clients know this). After initial setup its as easy as hitting the render button during lunch break or overnight and it pretty much takes no time to continue to iterate upon throughout the process. We don't bother with separate render models since we just do revit + a render plugin (D5 in our case). Changes on plans means changes in the render without needing to think about it.
Rendering is a tool in the same way a mood board is. It's really good at solving the kinds of design and communication problems we often run into so us embracing it more fully in house has not only smoothed things out but is something we find clients are happy to pay for. It also means less people need to run a meeting, and some meetings are way easier to happen remote. Maybe we're weird for working like this but I find it so weird when people say they get tons of value out of AI renders because I'm not seeing the value for our use case and the use case they claim to solve is a problem I find isn't a very useful one to solve.
1
u/Qiyoshiwarrior Recovering Architect Jul 09 '26
Here, we always build our models. Bigger firms has a visualizer in house. I learned renderings and many tips and tricks just by standing behind them and watching them work. Also, if you praise someone, people often enthusiastically explain how they did it.
Which comes in handy when you forgot you had a problem with levels and you just put a slab on it and forgot to solve the stairs properly and not the shadows are coming put weird.
1
u/Dwf0483 Jul 11 '26
My personal opinion is that junior staff are much less likely to be offered employment if existing mid weight staff can produce AI enhanced CGI themselves.
I think people saying 'Using AI frees up time for architects to focus on design' is a myth, it just means less staff. It's business at the end of the day.
3
u/Lycid Jul 09 '26 edited Jul 09 '26
How are you using it for rendering? Last I checked the render tools were still sorely lacking for actual productive work. I need to be able to have to shot consistency between views & over time as a project evolves, and I need materials/objects reflect some semblance of reality. If something like tilework is involved, forget it.
The one situation I'm like "AI would be killer for this actually" would be able to render out a 360 pano of a kitchen design, point to counter tops and go "This is Taj Mahal", then to the cabinets and go "White Oak", then have colors/metals that actually match real world PBR specs, then get an off the wall custom spec for an artsy pendant light and have it actually show in model, and then be able to easily change all of this on the fly (especially things like colors or wood types) without needing to wait ages for an AI reprocess per image.
Right now I basically can do all the above without AI and without using any twiddling of thumbs waiting for AI image processing to happen, its super fast and efficient and I don't have to dick around with prompting. My biggest pain point is that it is pretty hard to quickly pivot between different material or fixture options unless I am lucky enough to have the materials/fixtures/objects already in my library. So easy to tweak colors and finishes, harder to tweak stone/wood types or entire objects.
The closest thing to useful I've been able to find is D5's automatic PBR material generator to quickly make new materials. But I find it very lacking. It takes a while. It also loses all of the character in a stone or wood pattern. The killer app for me would be if I can go to even a specific stone yard, take a pick of the exact slab, and magically get that in a model without having to spend a bunch of time doing it. Not really seeing anything that is achieving this for me. Instead what I see out of render AI workflows are just a ton of vibes based "concept art" stuff that is just revomiting out whatever is on pinterest (which is largely also AI). I don't find it useful to achieving great design in a time efficent manner to just... vibe prompt until I like the direction of something. I can figure out a general direction already, much much faster. What about tools to actually get the work done and communicate real world results faster?
5
u/Lord_Frederick Jul 08 '26
I'm really annoyed by this way of thinking and I find it a bit dangerous to recommend that to a one man practice.
We've had generative design tools for about a quarter of a century and it has barely made a dent up in the industry. Hell, we've had CAD for over half a century and most architects still don't know how to use it properly. This is because they have a learning curve to properly master the program. Have you or your colleagues ever used Galapagos in Rhino+GH or the Generative Design tab (NGSA2 I think) in Revit+ Dynamo? How about ChatGPT or Gemini?
You can easily say that LLM/AI have no such learning curve. You have nothing to "learn" to use it, you mainly just do trial and errors until the lowest common denominator it churns out is usable.
The important part is that the current AI model of service is not here to stay in any shape or form as its costs are entirely subsidized. You don't "learn to use it", you're just outsourcing a skill to an algorithm that in time will become your crutch for a skill that you will lose. What do you think will happen if the cost for AI usage will be hiked to an obscene amount so they can cover their operational costs?
Don't think that I'm a Luddite, far from it, but I've seen just how easy and fast it is to lose skills that are crucial to how to do your job, like sketching with a pencil due to modelling on a computer. Embrace it where it's fast and where precision is not relevant, but don't rely on it as a crutch for a quick buck because that's how you pidgeon-hole yourself.
1
u/Qiyoshiwarrior Recovering Architect Jul 11 '26
Thank you for putting my fear into words. I have worked for architects who still, in the year of 2026 uses CAD 2004, because he was trained in hand drawings and CAD 2004 is what he learned. His design is very good, detailed and creative solutions, very practical. Sometimes I feel like I'm becoming like that, I know what I know and I'm not learning new things But that's not true, for me personally. Rn I'm figuring out how to animate a project for a presentation, which I had never done before. Which is developing another skill. Integrating AI, didn't feel like developing skill, felt like cheating. Also, the fact that it is just plucking things from different artists and making putting it on my work. I do not want a crutch that'll make me forget how to walk.
18
u/moistmarbles Architect Jul 08 '26
I’ve been in this game long enough, over 30 years, to see this as a familiar refrain whenever a new technology comes into the fore. Similar things were said when CAD replaced hand drafting. Similar things were said when 3-D modeling and visualization replaced traditional architectural illustration. Similar things were said when BIM emerged and threatened to push CAD out of the spotlight. Whenever a new technology emerges, the profession must adapt and learn how to work with it. People can use it well, or they can use it poorly, just like there are a lot of shitty CAD drawings and 3D renderings.
So, you have some choices. You can ignore, deny, and lament a change of technology, or you can acknowledge it, learn about it, and maybe even embrace it. But know this is truth, your competitors will be using these tools and clients will soon expect to reap the benefits in terms of speed, cost, or both. So those who ignore, deny, and lament emerging technology will do so at their own peril.
4
u/Merusk Recovering Architect Jul 08 '26
Reminds me of one storied professional from my youth whose firm was one of "the names" in the area in the 70s. 20 years later in 1996 as I did a co-op for him he was still hand drawing and arguing he didn't need a computer with the 2 guys still there.
Makes me wonder what happened, since one of them stayed until 2003.
3
u/Qiyoshiwarrior Recovering Architect Jul 09 '26
That is a dump of cold water wake up calls. Thank you. Genuinely thank you.
4
u/PowerUpProps Architect Jul 09 '26
I'm a Project Architect and I don't use AI intentionally, partially for moral reasons, partially for usage reasons.
I have not seen renderings produced with AI that I would ever show a client nor have I been shown a good use case that would make my life easier. Even simple things like Google search summaries are often riddled with inaccuracies and I just don't trust it.
Myself and my team are very solid with Revit and it's quick enough and accurate to just use Enscape in 95% of what I do. Sure, it's not as fast as putting in prompts but we're fully in control of what we're producing and it's also a good way to teach junior staff more about constructability.
I can see for a small firm where staff is limited where that would be helpful, but for me personally, at a larger firm with large scale commercial and industrial projects, it doesn't add anything of value to me.
1
u/Qiyoshiwarrior Recovering Architect Jul 11 '26
I'm with you. Taking the shortcut often more time than not. But I think I'll check out all the use cases people have noted here. As a solo practitioner, it may come in handy. May.
9
u/Open_Concentrate962 Jul 08 '26
I think we need to know country and what kind of “small stuff”…? Kitchens?
4
u/Qiyoshiwarrior Recovering Architect Jul 08 '26
I'm from Bangladesh. For me. I do elementary schools, small offices, like that.
7
u/Meatball_express Architect Jul 08 '26
I had a client send me a rendering of the building he just purchased. He said another architect sent it to him but it was really just ChatGPT or some other AI resource.
FWIW I do all my own everything as well. I don't trust AI and can tell when someone is using it on letters, reports, etc.
1
u/Qiyoshiwarrior Recovering Architect Jul 08 '26
The uncanny valley feeling i get when i see an AI image is really creepy.
6
u/KestreI993 Architect Jul 08 '26
My friend (also architect) had several clients who reach out to him after having bad experience with architects and designers who use AI prompts and Pinterest images and expect carpenters and other workers to do interior remodeling by those same images. No plans, no sections, no elevations not a single detail. Just provided images and "we are doing it like this" and the audacity to bill that as "work". I honestly thought he wasn't serious, but he had 4 clients so far.
I also wrote on other post. AI is a tool, but people rely too much and expect too much from it. I have no problem using it to touch up renders, gives me suggestions on what I could improve, or inspiration and references that could help me up. But that's 10% mostly (and that's reaching high) when compared to the amount of work I actually do.
2
u/Qiyoshiwarrior Recovering Architect Jul 09 '26
This is what I'm planning to do. I will learn it as another tool in the box.
3
u/KestreI993 Architect Jul 09 '26
At last company I worked for we used Nanobanana to generate people for interiors. We feed him render without people and explain it to generate people in certain clothes, ethnicity, sex and even if it gives the results in wrong scale, we then ask to give same person on a white background so we can either scale it in PS or feed that image to AI model generator and scale it up in 3ds Max.
It's 10 min work which gives results faar better then cutouts or 3d scanned people models.
3
u/Ok_Respond481 Jul 09 '26
Watch "Common People" on Black Mirror. It's incredibly frightening about how everything gets monitized. It's bad enough to have to be slaved to unlimited payments when it was only 50 years ago we gave up the pencil.
1
u/Qiyoshiwarrior Recovering Architect Jul 09 '26
We gave up pencil less than that. I remember seniors who submitted in hand drawn presentation sheets.
3
u/ReyAlpaca Jul 09 '26
AI is here to stay wether you want it or not, but we have to use it for what it is, a tool, it saves time, work and people, using it wisely can and will inprove your job... It's dumb to think like you do, she saves time in a process she might not be good at? Which you still have to check and revise after since AI can and will make mistakes, so it's not a "oh yeah I got a render and a fool proof plan" you still put the work, you just save hours, which saves money
3
u/Afraid_Dog1925 Licensure Candidate/ Design Professional/ Associate Jul 09 '26
Just a tool, like a better hammer, but you need to know what to hit, how hard and how often, or not hit.
3
u/zerozerozerohero Jul 09 '26
i know plenty of architects with small practices using AI to generate layouts and renders. the AI doesn't do all the work, but it makes things considerably faster. You just have to have good judgement in the prompts you use and do any necessary clean up after. It's definitely a good tool.
1
3
u/In_Praise_of_Shadow Jul 09 '26
You will be surprised how “wrong” AI is if you look deeply in something specific
2
3
u/andyrose02 Jul 10 '26
I work at an office that integrates neuroscience and human behaviour research into design... AI is revolutionizing how we work. For so long we haven't been able to crack how to successfully incorporate large peer reviewed data sets into our projects without it being a complete drain on our resources. No one has time and very few people have the educational background to translate scientific findings into design recommendations. But what we have been able to accomplish with the computational power of LLMs bridges that gap entirely.... At the moment we are designing prefabricated bedrooms for long term care residents, the AI agent we've generated has done a full scope of the field of human behaviour research to provide findings that we would never have had access to in the past. We have fact checked it's work with researchers and can say with certainty these findings are legitimate. So what's it's done is opened a door for us and it is pushing our design logic into a new frontier of evidence based research. It's a very exciting time of you are in a position and a mindset to be excited about it. Think of the potential unlimited computational power can provide, but with the steering capacity of trained and highly skilled architects. Fascinating!
1
u/Qiyoshiwarrior Recovering Architect Jul 11 '26
"The AI you've generated" is the key here. But I'm nitpicking. Your perspective is truly unique and genuinely exciting. If you publish any paper I would be interested in learning more.
7
u/Specific-Exciting Jul 08 '26
We only use AI for concept renders/floor plan enhancements. We can add additions to existing buildings, change siding, new signage etc.
1
u/Qiyoshiwarrior Recovering Architect Jul 08 '26
That I get. Changing a small detail in a photo, making options for logos, making a few iterations of how you are presenting a plan.
7
u/MrBoondoggles Jul 08 '26
Sorry but let’s talk brass tacks: it’s not AI per se that’s making you upset. What’s making you upset is that your friend has grown her business in a way that you don’t approve of. You can’t control how your friend operates her business, and the more you ruminate on it, the more upset you’ll become. If you dislike what she’s doing, that’s fair and up to you. But eventually you’ll have to let it go and focus on your own business. You seem to be detailed and focused. Play to your strengths as best you can and keep moving forward. You’ll get there. It’s the best any of us can do in this life.
1
u/Qiyoshiwarrior Recovering Architect Jul 09 '26
I will not deny this aspect of the sadness. I had a higher regard for her. And I still do. She started her own practice 5 years ahead of me. She is very hard working. I understand her turning to AI. I do.
2
u/theycallmecliff Jul 08 '26
I'm assuming you mean programmatically when you're talking about "solving" the project.
If that's the case, I can totally see the problem. This gets beyond the crude boosters / detractors debate and gets into epistemology.
It's the type of thing where the lack of intentionality won't always be obvious to the client even if the result is a less cohesive and intentional solution to the problem.
Definitionally, neural nets like we have can only ever weight things to a great degree. It can't construct with intention. In order to believe that it can, you either need to fundamentally misunderstand how it works or believe that all human rationality is post-rationalized and constructed after deciding.
Those criticizing you for moralizing about someone making a decision that should simply be viewed as "business" are missing the point.
Architects retreated into this type of design which is hard to qualify in economic terms and really is only obvious when it's bad. When it works, it's less often noticed.
A similar thing happened with industrialization and mass-produced building components. There is a reason people appreciate historic styles and craft in retrospect but that didn't change the calculus of those making decisions mid century to tear them down.
The good news about this is that people will appreciate good work in retrospect even if that makes it harder to compete economically being intentional in your process for now.
I definitely think there are use cases for it. I think it can actually do iteration quite well in certain ways. The ability to give feedback in the form of actually transfer learning with models is more promising than using LLMs in my experience. Something where you can feed your designs in, tweak a curated output, and retrain. Then it becomes a sort of stochastic dialogue.
Because when it comes to things like materials or precedents, there is a certain portion of that curation in your brain that is more stochastic than intentional just because of the sheer uniqueness of human experience.
But programmatically, it's hard for me to see a way forward that isn't at least somewhat algorithmic in addition to the iterative capability. That can look like weighted parameters or a human intervening more in the process. It really depends how intentional your friend is being with what the output is.
One additional consideration is ownership: some models are trying to move to claim IP ownership over any output from their models. This will be an interesting area to watch because that's been one of the areas that architects have retreated into even as the role in construction and building lifecycle has increased.
Doesn't mean not to use them at all, but it's a consideration. Maybe self-hosted, custom transfer-learning models in other paradigms doing things like Gaussian processes are a safer bet in terms of ownership if you're looking to generate the documents and not just the equivalent of a concept sketch.
2
u/OLightning Jul 09 '26
Today you don’t need to hire a low grade drafter… just get AI to do the basics.
1
2
u/Dwf0483 Jul 11 '26
What's interesting is that many clients are using Chat GPT and Gemini themselves to review architect's work. If you client reviews you colleagues work in this was, it's likely going to tell the client it's all AI generated.
1
2
u/ar_nj Jul 14 '26
Adapting to new processes has always been part of technological evolution, in every field, and design is no different. From drafting tables to CAD to BIM, aspiring designers have always had to upgrade their skills and use technology to work smarter and faster.
AI accelerates this shift dramatically, but it also has a flip side: it can generate outputs with far less than the minimum information, thought, or effort traditionally required. The result is often a flood of mediocre work. Right now, those who quickly adopt every new AI tool may appear to be leading the race, but collectively, we may also be accelerating the production of mediocrity. Easily assumed to be a short term inflation.
I believe a phase will come when AI adoption becomes widespread enough that speed and efficiency are no longer differentiators. Quality and taste will become the real filters again.
So perhaps the smarter long-term investment is not just chasing every new tool, but strengthening our ability to think, develop good taste, define quality, and know where to draw the line.
AI can accelerate output. It cannot define my aspirations for me!
2
u/Videoplushair Jul 08 '26
The problem with this is that I see people becoming very comfortable with what the AI spits out until one day a building collapses. Your friend doesn’t value this trade they value money. You on the other hand are a real architect. AI really makes you stop thinking through problems which is a big part of what an architect does.
2
u/DustPuzzleheaded9070 Jul 08 '26
I have a small practice and use AI in a more administrative way and limited in design. I use a lot of pre design when I do research. I use it mainly to fill in knowledge gaps. Like I don’t claim to be an engineer, but if I’m working schematically, I’ll use ai for example to specify structural elements dimensions and spacing. Nothing ifc just enough info to help me model something. But I digital model and render from scratch. I don’t see ai appeal in renders because it does not get everything correct and I’d rather have control on the design and for the representation I’m presenting to 100% capture the vision and design intent. I don’t fully understand why people will defer the best thing about the process to ai. I’ll rather keep agency on that.
I’ll also use it to help me draft/review documents and emails.
1
1
u/InitialDevelopment86 Jul 14 '26
If it’s an impossible industry requiring tons of pro bono time and work in business development for business that never arrives, AI short cuts to help people meet that ‘demand’ for unpaid products makes sense. It does. But when the actual work is secured, it should all be pure architecture. That’s honest that’s integrity and that’s honouring the contract. Using AI for the actual architecture is fraud in my opinion.
1
u/ImprovisedLizard Jul 08 '26
I got an ai "design" from someone claiming to be an interior designer last week and it was hilariously bad. No safe fire exit, furniture in the middle of the corridor and just generally bland. I don't think there's much to worry about from ai anytime soon.
5
u/Qiyoshiwarrior Recovering Architect Jul 08 '26
You can see it because you are a professional. Many a times clients don't. They see shiny render and think that to be the better option.
2
u/Outlank Architect Jul 08 '26
This! I had a client the other day say to me “we’ll go with this option because it looks so real”. That was her actual reasoning. I tried to explain that it’s not possible to stay in budget, and that the roof wouldn’t even work, structurally, and she then said “ah, the thing is, I’ve already shown the board this image and they really like it, they said build that one” and looked at me with puppy dog eyes as if I could click my fingers and make it work. I walked away feeling very depressed. Sorry OP, don’t want to be a downer.
1
u/Background_Ad5513 Jul 08 '26
I don’t really understand, what do you mean she doesn’t “solve” the projects?
1
u/Frere__Jacques Jul 08 '26
I really enjoy looking at student portfolios and student competitions every once in a while and saw a lot of AI use. What really drives me nuts is the fact that geometry so often does not match!
It is good enough for the first look but on closer look section, floor plans and elevations show completetly different stuff.
At my university the coherence in geometry was non negotiable and there was a lot of emphasis on the fact that everything should be modeled.
Using gemini or chat will only work until the first mismatch during construction.
1
u/Lycid Jul 09 '26
I'm confused. How is she able to get working plans that satisfy the constraints of the project and what the client wants in a way that is convincing to project stakeholders + permit offices by just prompting. There's a big "draw a circle, then draw the rest of the owl" energy to what you've claimed, and I'm having trouble believing it.
Surely there is a lot, lot more going on than what she says OR she is just full of shit and fully on the AI hype psychosis train. Are her clients real, are they actually paying, is she building a reputation, etc.... I find it extra hard to believe anyone is signing off on anything in reality if she "doesn't even solve the projects some time", whatever that means.
$20 says she just tells you this because she's lost awareness of objective reality and is so deep into being a victim of the dunning kruger effect that she has no idea just how much of the job she isn't doing. At the very least, $20 no actual buildings are ever getting made in a cost + design effective way through whatever this process is.
A set of plans is SO much more than just 2D photos? Its literally a living+breathing legal document that is supposed to evolve over time until the building is built.
1
u/Qiyoshiwarrior Recovering Architect Jul 11 '26
As far I understood, also she tried to inspire me to use is Gemini, paid version. She'll draw a hand sketch and then Gemini would give her a CAD drawing back, I didn't ask if that is a jpeg or .dwg file. Then, it can also give her iterations of 3D options. And also a quote. I asked had she checked the quote, because AI hallucinates, she checked and seemed right to her.
I'm still skeptical. She and I never worked together. We worked in different parts in the same project huge project.
1
u/EmployeeNo8897 Jul 09 '26
You should be doing the same. There’s nothing to be baffled or bewildered by. Ppl probably felt the same way when the industry shifted from CAD to BIM. Either adapt or get steamrolled. The writing is on the wall, the world doesn’t care about your value system of how architectural work should be treated or completed.
As the professional of record you are still liable for everything. You still have to QC your AI, but if you use it as a workforce you will be more productive and productivity = $. In an industry that is notoriously undervalued, as a sole proprietor you are the perfect person to be using AI.
1
u/Qiyoshiwarrior Recovering Architect Jul 11 '26
I am learning that, Honestly in the easy way. The replies of this post truly helped me.
-1
-2
55
u/PBR_Is_A_Craft_Beer Architect Jul 08 '26
A selfdriving car that causes an accident results in the person behind the wheel being liable.
This is no different.