Renerabbitt

Id be willing to tackle this for a fee. Would import the 3d model into an external software. You will get a ton of artifacts using just chief as the textures are very low resolution

Set your railing as a panel style and set the balusters and rails to the specs of your iron posts and rails. Then in 3d place the railing I made and use the material grabber tool to paint the custom material on the curved panel of the railing you just made. The only problem will be that the material paints on both sides of the panel. It should suffice for a client who isnt overly particular

Joe, I'm in line with Perry on this, some plan checkers may just not be up to speed. New energy code requires new framed assemblies meet a U-factor greater than batt cavity fill can achieve on its own. This is a Screenshot from Energy Code Ace: Richard was right on the money in his post. These requirements will be commonplace soon enough for new construction if they aren't already. CA energy commission is tackling the thermal envelope this bout.

Oh yeah, forgot to mention, x10 only I believe. PBR is physically based rendering. It is a camera method like vector or glasshouse in X10

LOL, sounds good to me If anyone just wants this in normal 3d, use the "adjust material definition" tool and go to the properties tab and delete the metal map. Without the metal map the gold will not look gold in PBR

Buy me a California Lunch? Ornate Railing Panel and Fixture.calibz Click link above. Two files included, one is a railing panel that is best used placed inside an open railing the second is a standalone fixture with railing included. Modify stretch planes as needed Built for PBR...doesnt look as good in standard view, need to pull out metal map if you just want standard 3d view

would help a tremendous amount if it had a contrasting backdrop like a red/green or white sheet. Gold on gold is so hard to cut the background

my two cents...samsung's 960 m.2 ssd is worlds faster than some of the fastest sata 6 ssd's. Worth every penny to me. My desktop used to run on a samsung 850 pro, and now it's on a 960 EVO...HUGE difference

The solution is in my previous post.. you set your imported cad line on a layer other than general cad which will not automatically change the layer to terrain perimeter. Your terrain is on the layer CAD, plot plan in 3d view

please post your plan so we can take a look..my guess is that your cad line you converted to a terrain perimeter may be on the layer set that cad line was originally drawn on

terrain/build terrain..check to see if that works

Tanya is a client of mine for her home kitchen remodel and is very pleasant to work with, I recommended the Chief community for her project

I loved Dropbox for its mobile features and overall functionality...but was too expensive for multi user when I priced it out several years ago.

It would help to have more information about your intended office collaborative. multiple users or just switching from desktop to laptop? I personally use Microsoft OneDrive as I had a lot of trouble with chief crashing in Google's Backup and Sync service, and Dropbox's pricing was too much for multiple business users. My x10 root is in OneDrive as well as my working .plan and .layout files. OneDrive does a fantastic job of authoring which allows me to work with live cloud updating. I chose to keep my files locale and constantly updating as opposed to dlownload on demand option. Something to note, if you plan on sharing the user library, you must wait for it to fully upload from one machine and fully download to the next or OneDrive will upload with the computers name tag attached to the user library essentially creating a copy that will not be seen by CA until it is renamed to "user_library." Same confliction methods apply to .plan and layout. If you have it open in both machines, one will produce a saved file with the computers name tagged to it.

This issue was solved by the OP in her second response.. whenever there are two horizontal faced planes at the exact same coordinates they will fight each other in 3D views, the same is true for external 3D programs as well. Moving one object up or down a smidge will give priority and fix the issue

Thank you, I ran it through Thea a few years ago without changing a thing just to see what details would pop up missing. Obviously some funny details here and there but still happy with the overall feel..funny to see it change and see mistakes..one of these days I’ll pump some more hours into it

This is news to me, do you have a reference? I did know that you could continue a wall and just put r-15 but hadn’t run into problems using 2x4 assembly. I’ve read through so much new code in the last couple days my head is spinning. I suppose I should collect my resources before I contribute more to the conversation. What I keep finding contradictory info on is that the min mandatory is up towards u-factor of .102, and then I find it at .051...what a huge difference, and both point toward apendix j04 with dated documents only months apart in the first quarter of 2017. So if performance methods must meet minimums of .102 then it’s feasible that you could use just r-15 in new assemblies, but if the min is .51, the performance approach technically would not be acceptable unless there is some exception that I can’t seem to find. I understand that people ARE using the performance approach and avoiding continuous insulation, but does this actually meet code requirements and can anybody explain why this would be allowable. this is table 150 from the energy code: I like to go to battle with overwhelming amounts of irrefutable hard data, and I feel as if I have a bag of hear-say and conjecture which is my own lack of clarity and experience as I typically only deal with remodels and frankly, just can’t seem to find a timeline of unbroken data. This forum is amazing btw, such a talent pool.

What a great compliment to get. I love hearing that. first two renders I ever did was about 12 years ago...and man did it take me FOREVER! Like 2 weeks and a month respectively. Both in chiefs ray trace and I was too stubborn to ask for help. I wasn’t getting paid or I would’ve likely been canned. The second one went through 14 redesigns as it was just a fictitious and completely unrealistic conceptual living room

I’m in complete agreement that the performance approach can get you around mandatory measures, mkennedy2000 is helping me get through some res software so I can get on your level of self performing the calcs. Still, I consistently find information that contradicts this approach. See attached: Exceptions may apply is never spelled out in this document. I would conclude that if you can reasonably show an overall performance package that satisfies the intent of the code, then the plan checker can get on board with it.

It's a shame that REScheck isn't compliant in Cali

Thank you for the resource, and how AWESOME is it that you can get water/vapor barrier assembly out of this Any problems you've run into using the spray foam. I wonder if the trade off is there for hiring a sub to spray or in-house install of rigid and a thicker wall assembly. Considering doing the performance method as Perry mentioned

Awesome work, that's gotta feel so good to get it so close to reality. Here's a budget rough conceptual render I just did for a designer. 5 hours on terrain/pavement/curbs/etc, 1-1/2 hour setting up the render settings for all future renders and additional imported items, and 1/2 hour rendering. Not realistic, but good enough

It's my understanding that all exterior wall assemblies going forward in climate zones 1-5 and 8-16 will require some form of rigid insulation greater than r-4 for a 2x4 exterior wall, and even in zones 6,7 will still require rigid to meet the u-factor 0.065

Additionally, has anyone incorporated the rigid insulation with a braced wall panel at the exterior side of framing?

I do drafting for a slew of contractors that use the big box stores for their materials. That being said, the prescriptive requirements of U-factor 0.51 for new exterior 2x4 wall assemblies specify cavity insulation of R-15 and continuous R-8. Welp, R-8 isn't all that readily available, so I downloaded an assembly calculator sanctioned by energy.gov that calc'd R-15 with continuous R-6 as meeting the maximum U-factor. Has this been anyone's experience, is R-6 meeting the mark for you California folks?