• Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


1 Neutral

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. @solver Yes, like this. Is that from a manufacturer or something you modified? Do you mind sharing this file?
  2. @Alaskan_Son no it’s actually just a single “X” created with 3/4 partitions, say in a W3024, so you end up with triangle shaped compartments.
  3. Anyone aware of an open wall cab available in chief with partitions creating an "X". I'm pretty new to X12 and learning the ropes. I'm sure I could pull it off with CAD tools but a little pressed for time on one of the proposals I'm working on. Quick search didn't find it in the archives although it could be called something else...
  4. OK I don't think all the cabs were selected when I generated the custom top, so "some" of them were reacting differently and showing (almost) through the top at certain angles.
  5. This is just in my nature especially after working in 2020 for many years. Workarounds were almost always necessary. I think the main issue was even though the top was "included' in the cabinet measurement, it was necessary to adjust them to 34.5 for everything to size correctly with the separate custom top. Guess I need to watch for this type of stuff.
  6. I 'disconnected' the top from the cabs to customize it. I raised it 1/16 just now and it seems to have cleared the showing through. OK yes I had #3 but not #6. MEP#6 does have pop up USB outlets. Height setting is referenced from the ceiling which I thought was weird but they work great. Thanks! This time went through the CA >backup entire plan. Wheat_kitchen.zip
  7. Worked out my first full design on CA and I've got some work to do to get up to speed. I mainly do kitchens and baths. A couple issues I came across, wondering if there are simpler solutions for them. I'm using X12. 1. I was placing outlets in the island top, in real life they are the pop up outlets with USB plugs. For this I just placed horizontal outlets at the correct height but they always seemed to be fighting something when I placed them. Couldn't get them to line up with each other either. Some trials: - placed one got it to correct height, then copied/ mirrored it - used a different style-- floor outlet with cover same collision issues - placed the outlet close to where I need it and moved it. It would make it disappear or place it across the room. - make a cutout and placing it into the hole, using xyz coord. This made the hole larger than needed. Perhaps I'm missing something. 2. I did a custom splash with a custom texture. It shows in cam views and "sometimes" it was showing in standard or clipped elevations. I checked different tiles and materials and others from standard library and manufacturer catalogs seem to show ok in the elevations. Anyone have any issues or tips with this? Wheat kitch.zip
  8. I was able to modify this slightly to get it to work. My novice Ruby brain has me in the Text>Text macro management console which led me to have to define the depth,width, height variables first. Not sure what #{width.to_f.round.to_s} does exactly. I'm just as comfortable with the IF statements I just wasn't connecting with the syntax. Thanks for the clarification. As I work through my transition to CA I may need a crash course in some areas that I will need to be proficient. This is my problem too, I like to have a clean representation especially for shop drawings. Having been doing this for some years certain nomenclature in built in to my brain and makes me more efficient in ordering, building, etc. I appreciate the example, seeing something that works helps me identify how some of the variables,etc. work in CA. I've probably spent more time working on this than intended but I think understanding it will be important in the long run.
  9. I have had this issue with other software and I'm hoping there's a simple CA remedy for it. My standard upper is 13" D. When changed in preferences the depth is always displayed on uppers, ex. W243613 with the auto label. I want to change the upper labels to display standard as W %width%%height% ex. W2436 (without depth). I can do this with the basic label change. But if I change the depth up or down it would be beneficial for it to display the auto generated label %automatic_label%. I know there is no way my syntax is right but the basic idea is-- case when depth == 13 result = W %width%%height% else result = %automatic_label% Any pointers are greatly appreciated.
  10. After poring through the options I decided that Chief Architect Premier is going to be the best fit for me. It does a lot more than I need in some areas and maybe isn't as geared on the production side (right now) but I'm confident it's a better solution than what I'm coming from. Looking forward to diving in and getting my workflow more efficient. Thanks Mark, Mike and everyone else for the pointers.
  11. Just sharing an experience while looking for the best product for me- - Chief Arch customer service has been great! I'm not going to bash a competitor's product but I had a vision of using other software. While it has become better than it was I got soured by the experience. 1) pricing and price structure was crazy. the cheaper version is so stripped they push you up to the major cash versions - $5K, $7K. Plus training. Plus maintenance. 2) after a short teamviewer presentation in the morning I felt like I was at a car lot. "I have this price, lower than we talked about before if you buy the more expensive tier and buy it now." " And oh, it's the 31st so this is the last day for this "deal". You might want to jump on this before the end of the day." And you KNOW that follow up mail came at 4:30 pm and what it said. Honestly, coming from 2020 I can only equate it to leaving one jail and getting transferred to another. Only to pay more for the abuse. Am I the only one looking at this and saying who does business like this anymore?
  12. I appreciate the input. Reading through the specs doesn't always tell the whole story for me so I like to get more opinion from real users. The forums are good for that, this one is no exception. The trial I have is interiors and the ALDO is in it. I agree it would be an essential for me. Good point. What's the saying, something about trees and a forest? Just reading specs doesn't tell me this. Thanks. The goal is to make my life easier and a wall of limitations is not in my favor.
  13. Are you saying that these features in Premier that are worth the jump in price? I imagine limiting CAD detail could slow some processes. In the big picture it's not a huge cost difference but that's $ I can use elsewhere.
  14. I like a lot of what I have seen in CA while I'm still running in trial mode. The question is if I jump all in to CA do I need premier for my industry or will interiors version be adequate? I am in kitchen-bath sales and manufacture, all interior work. I am coming from a long stint with 2020 that is just frustrating at almost every turn. The other 2020 users call it a necessary evil. I have many other terms for it. I don't question that the drawings and renders in CA will be better with experience. Are the extra Premier features with respect to creating material lists, drawings-elevations, match-apply properties, etc. essential for valuable for the drawings I need to generate?
  15. Mark, The examples in CA you shared with me are awesome, a level that I could never do in 2020 because of all its quirks. Most of the capability is there but the crashing, workarounds, disappearing dimensions when trying to make anything even remotely complex is just frustrating. Anything I would generate with door sizing would be exclusive for me. This is in my quest to simplify some of the processes I have to do on a regular basis. Again, its a balancing act. Ideally I want to generate quality drawings/renders with reasonable speed and create accurate cutlists for everything because I design AND manufacture. I figure CA probably doesn't do it all but if I can get *some* accurate reports it appears to be a good option for me.