Autocad - is it worth using?

Hey,
I have quite good Photoshop skills and would like to develop it more. Therefore, 4 years ago I had Autocad courses. I didn't like it more, it was not easy.. Today started thinking is it worth to know how to use Autocad? Is it still popular or it's already old-fashioned program? I think if I should focus more on Photoshop or should try to remember my old Autocad skills.

 

Comparing Autocad and Photoshop is like comparing a protractor to play-dough.

Auto cad is a CAD program for engineering and ACTUAL design.

Photoshop is a PAINT program used by artists and the occasional artist under the DELUSION they know what design is. 99% of the time, they don't.

Autocad is for precise mechanical drawings used in creation or documentation of physical products, hence the other side of CAD being CAM -- computer aided machining.

Photoshop is for pushing pixels around to make pretty pictures and has dick-all to do with ACTUAL design.

To that end, your question makes little to no sense. Which are you interested in? Making pretty pictures, or doing actual design work for manufacturing?

 

I was thinking from the freelancing side.. sorry, forgot to mention it. and it;s a very important detail. I was thinking from which program I could make money as being a freelancer? Which one is more profitable these days? I would focus on it and improve my skills to maximum

 

depending on what you are going to do for freelancing. as @deathshadow said, Autocad is more for mechanical drawings, if you are planning to design some posters or photos, it won't help you out.

 

What's your engineering or architectural training/background. IF you want to freelance designing disc brakes and sway bars, go autocad -- though I don't hear people freelancing that much. You want to be a freelance architect and have all the qualifications of understanding load bearing, materials stresses, and so forth, you use autocad.

Autocad is a tool for architects, engineers and real designers. To make the most of it you need all the other qualifications in materials, physics, and construction that are basically a doctrate's worth of course-work unto itself. To use it properly for what is is meant to do would likely mean obeying things like an Engineering code of ethics and a slew of understanding of construction, resources, and proper ACTUAL design.

Where as the folks pissing around in the toy paint program can do whatever they want, so long as they DON'T try and call it "design". (though many know-nothing morons do so). It's a tool for art and artists.

This isn't a case of 'which is more profitable to freelance" -- it's a case of "are you even QUALIFIED to do ACTUAL design from a physics/science/engineering standpoint?!?". That you'd even ask about Autocad in the same breath as Photoshop makes me think not.

 

Given how many people already use Photoshop, I'm guessing that there a lot more demand for people who are proficient with Autocad. So I'm guessing there's probably more money to be made with that if you can become very good with it. Autocad is very complex and will take time to become proficient with, but if you can figure it out I think it has the potential to be worthwhile.

 

On the freelance side, working in AutoCAD is considered more highly paid.
Since you yourself understand that this is much more complicated, 3D modeling is a very painstaking task

The cost of a license for this program is very high
But for acquaintance you can download the student license http://autodesk.autocad.ideaprog.download/