Is there a way to track a saved version of the Revit file with the speckle export ? A single Revit file can export to speckle multiple times and is the single source of truth of the file. I was wondering fi there is a way to link a speckle export to a point in time for Revit. This would probably require manually saving the Revit file but I was wondering if there any better way to do it. Thanks
1 Like
The only way I have seen this being done to date is to make a federation of all the uploads from a version of Revit, and then make a comment and upload the revit file at that point as an attachment.
Speckle is an amazing tool. Wondering how I didn’t come to know about it earlier :). My current workflow with Revit is hard to align with Speckle. Several people working in a worksharing environment and then exporting to speckle only to be confused which version of export is what and how to continue from there back to revit.
Ideally its got be a closed loop. Work-in-revit → export-to-speckle → communicate-ideas-and-take-feedback → close-the-loop-with-taking-the-feedback-to-revit. The last link of taking the feedback to revit seems to be broken.
I can see a way to do this which is to export the file while exporting to speckle as well. From there people can have the same file open. And if the work is trashed, go to the last feedback and take the file from there. But thats just me. Perhaps y’all have some better way.
Perhaps just a message back to the revit interface could be a solution. But I feel exporting a saved revit file with the export and track everything in LFS could be a good option.
Ah, the eternal struggle in architecture—where the endless demands of administration often eclipse the grand design vision. It’s as if we are given the vast canvas of possibility, only to find ourselves confined within the narrow borders of Revit, executing the same repetitive tasks, day in and day out. The paradox lies in this: while our minds soar in search of beauty, the tools that empower us to create often weigh us down in the relentless grind of managing files, versions, and workflow. Much like the first sip of coffee in the morning, we start with a spark of potential, only to be dulled by the mundane routine.
But what if we could shift the burden? Just as we wrestle with the complex symphony of Revit, we must also face the sea of tasks that live outside it—the unspoken dialogues between disciplines, the handoff of data to those not operating in the same silo, the complexities of version control between multiple team members. Speckle emerges as the greased wheel in this machinery, seamlessly connecting the gears of Revit to the world outside, enabling communication and data flow between disparate tools and minds. It’s like the smooth, rich coffee that oils the morning gears, ensuring the day runs quickly.
Speckle doesn’t just free the data; it frees the architect to be what they indeed are: a visionary. With this tool, the back-and-forth friction between Revit and the outside world becomes easy, and the time once lost in administrative purgatory can now be reclaimed for the design itself. Like a perfectly brewed cup of coffee, the focus sharpens, allowing one to see, to create freely, and to dream bigger. The dialogue between the rigid constraints of Revit and the boundless freedom of creativity becomes harmonious—an actual bridge between the necessary and the aspirational, just as the comfort of a warm cup of coffee bridges the gap between the sleepy morning and the productive day ahead.
Oh, and you can share models with folks, too.
Was not expecting such a "Deep"seek reply
You caught me in an interesting mood on my birthday. I started with a reply about Speckle having some parallel users as a Revit work-sharing model, but really we’re not designing to do that. It is one of those capabilities that people discover as possible (a bit like down-saving Revit files into early versions —You can do it; It’s not necessarily something that we’re designing for)
My imagination kind of went on a tangent at this point 
Perhaps I failed to explain my point. Git is not just for teams , its for single developer workflows as well. Revit/Archicad/rhino is the actual source of information. So if that cannot be put in the branching strategy then Speckle is just a viewer in the browser, a very good one. But it does not solve the question of how do I go back to “that” design which I worked on last week. Speckle can do that using its addons by just saving the file and exporting it with along with the speckle data export, or at least provide as option.
“It’s not necessarily something that we’re designing for” is like leaving the dessert untouched.
You and others can of course receive any prior version of the data sent from models, and indeed compare these side by side in the web viewer. Every single version is retained forever at the object level.
Your question was about storing files and this is currently only possible by the comment attachment I mentioned.
There is an alternative benefit to speckle over the model based workflow
Where you don’t bind what you send from any of the softwares to the totality.
Send structure on day 1 along with facade.
Day two work on two versions of the reception area fit out
Day 3 is all cores and MEP
Thursday is more reception area, that client can’t make up their mind
The director tweaks the facade to include solar shading on Friday and as they always do the engineer changes the depth of all the branches at the end of the day.
Any and all combinations of these components can be viewed, received, reassembled and issued to the client as a set of saved views, where (or indeed renders in Blender), say. Someone with no software licences can decide on option A, B or a not yet considered option C. Indeed all these interactions can be single player or multiplayer.
Recomposition and full history is already a feature well supported - it isn’t Git-like in many ways and is in others. What we don’t do is sync and of the drawing artefacts, which is why it isn’t a direct alternative to a central model / Revit server comparison.
I hate to miss dessert so we’ll always consider further development where we know we can move to being a better, easier or only alternative way to work.