#Chief architect vs revit trial
I've been using an older version of Chief Architect's "non-professional" 3-d software, as well as played around with their free trial versions (Just doing home remodeling projects for myself and friends and "playing around" with designs for practice.) Chief Architect is cheaper to buy, but they don't have a free student version, (it is pretty hard to learn on the free trial that disappears after so many hours of practice and you have to keep starting all over!) I am already familiar with Chief Architect, which is also an object oriented (if that is the right terminology) 3-d cad program like Revit. However, if I decide to just do some sort of design/drafting service out of my house, I probably wouldn't be able to afford to purchase Revit-at least not for awhile. I am slowly trying to get back into architecture after 20 years of being a stay at home mom and am trying to decide "which way to go" with CAD, as well as work in general: do I want to work for myself doing (probably) small remodeling projects (which I actually do enjoy), or work for an architecture firm? I realize from looking at job ads, though, that I need to learn REVIT if I want to work for any of the architecture firms around here that seem to be looking for help these days! One big advantage to learning Revit is that I would probably qualify to get the free student version to learn on. I posted here back in August with some questions and you were all very helpful. Can anyone compare REVIT with Chief Architect for me? Is Revit that much more superior to Chief ARchitect in quality and features, or is it just more customizable? Is Revit a lot harder to learn, or would they have a similar learning curve? Do any small architecture firms use Chief Architect, or is it primarily something contractors use these days? I know that Chief Architect users have a forum, but I thought that you all here might be a bit more "unbiased" perhaps!