![]() For example, Grasshopper is easier to learn and harder to use powerfully than others. What are the pros and cons of each product? Which product should you use? I asked Robert Woodbury these questions and his response was, “The pros and cons of each package are largely best understood on context. GH is a free plug-in to Rhino that requires Rhino 4.0 or better to run it. GC is a completely free stand-alone application. GC uses a scripting language while GH uses a visual scripting technique that employs a set of linked DLL’s (Dynamic Linked Library).Ģ. There are two main differences between GC and GH:ġ. Here’s the same table condensed to just GC and GH: If you studied the table in my previous post you probably noticed that out of all of the choices only GenerativeComponents and Grasshopper offer both object based and scripting capabilities. Their insights will be included in this discussion. ![]() Instead, I asked two experts, Robert Woodbury and Lars Hesselgren, what they thought about both of these generative design platforms. I’m not going to try to compare these products myself since I’m just now learning how to use them. I also want to propose a way to explore them both by reading the book, ‘ Elements of Parametric Design ’ by Robert Woodbury and using the GC and GH pattern tutorials websites that accompany the book. As promised in my previous post, I’m going to compare GenerativeComponents to Grasshopper. I’m Mark Loomis, a landscape architect who is guest posting on this blog. This is the Second Guest post from Mark Loomis I would like to thank him for taking the time to share with us his findings regarding different generative design platforms,hope it serves to start an interesting conversation with our readers and followers. (A canopy design created in Generative Components by Elif Erdine) Rhino Grasshopper VS Generative Components
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |