Renerabbitt

nice, thanks for the info Brian

Its the two roof planes you have cutting into the fireplace

Certainly, either post your plan file as a backup here or send it to me direct at renerabbitt@gmail.com and I can give you a quote ..this is my gallery:

Hey there! If you're looking for templates, I've got some that could save you a lot compared to custom ones. I sell these templates at a lower price thanks to volume-based pricing—basically, more people using them helps keep the cost down, kind of like economies of scale. What’s great is that my templates are specifically built with interior designers in mind. They come with defaults for measuring to furnishings and casings, and they display beautifully when it comes to furniture-based plans. Could be exactly what you're looking for! Let me know if you're interested!

This is all a very confusing post to me. You have the file in .plan format, and assuming you use chief architect, you can remove those cabinets yourself and just export as dwg?

so what is the reference to a dwg file format? what is your end goal, which cabinets are you trying to remove?

common practice for us is to share links via a cloud service like dropbox or google drive or we transfer

change your stile dimensions for sides

probably a less complicated method which would be using chiefs number formatter and a custom macro is just setting your roof pitch to 5.25

You're not gonna see much in performance from an M3 to an M4 etc in anything but raytrace views. It will be a jump, but nothing monumental. The rest is up to how you draw and resource management. Doesn't matter what machine you have, 4.million polys and a ton of vector lines will slow down any machine. I should know, I have two of the fastest machines one could build

convert your arc to a polyline with more sides and you'll have a better experience with it

I would really encourage you to wait another month for the new M4. m3 is still a bit underwhelming in the rendering side when compared to PC

are you using X16? This should be fixed in X16

share your plan and layout file and we could tell you whats going on

makes sense, thank you

is there a reason for the call "macros." here? Serious question...is that because its an array? because it contains a lambda?

just seeing this post here so I'll paste my response from your other post: and then:

Terrain videos:

Want to download objects from 3rd party software and optimize or UV map them correctly. This tutorial goes over decimating an object down to an acceptable polycount for Chief Architect using the free software blender. Then we map the object so that we can properly texture it: optimize, decimate, uv map, texture

Ever wanted to curve a custom object or railing panel? This will give you a curved panel that follows your staircase

Advanced tutorial on building a walkout basement with independent foundation saved plan views

I think the confusion is coming from my method. we are not generating a wall thickness with a wall covering but rather covering a wall layers thickess which is set to no display or insulation air gap material with a wall covering and then revealing that no display area which is perceived as a void

Est. Watch: 2 mins Looking for a quick way to change fonts globally in Chief Architect, including rich text? This video shows you two simple methods to update your entire project without the headache! #ChiefArchitect #CADTips #FontCustomization #TextEditing #DesignEfficiency #ArchitecturalDrafting #InteriorDesignTools

likely because the standard of window labeling and ordering such as 3060 has been around for over a century and is the most common accepted practice uniformly across window mfr and drafting standard books being taught in international schools of building and design "Architectural Graphic Standards". Major window manufacturers like Andersen, Pella, and Marvin have been using the "3050" or similar sizing conventions for decades. Their catalogs from as far back as the mid-1900s likely reference this system, showing the continuity of the practice. I am personally pretty hard nosed about it, when asked to change it I simply say no, haha, not to be a jerk but it is an accepted standard from way back in the UBC days which predate the IBC and changing it invites liability. All of your major window mfr will use this standard / or order from this standard and in terms of liability, I just wouldn't chance the confusion by introducing more complexity. An " or ' simple can easily be misread by someone that is expecting the standard to be written and simply not seeing your foot markers. 3'0 looks a lot like 30 at a quick glance when youre expecting a convention and you're working off a check set a 1/2 print scale or digitally on an ipad etc. Same goes for if you are exporting a dwg for an engineer.