mattyt12

After the rectangular polyline tool is selected and you click in open space on the plan it drops in a default square 600x600 or 2 feet x 2 feet, is there anywhere that this can be altered?

I find some apps keep the taskbar from hiding (spotify is a main culprit) until you open up and minimise again.

Agree with Chopsaws statement plus use of shadows from 3D trees from behind the camera is effective at breaking up the monotony, Chiefer is an expert at this.

https://chieftalk.chiefarchitect.com/gallery/image/2618-chief-architect-x9-3d-exterior-rendering/

https://chieftalk.chiefarchitect.com/gallery/image/2616-chief-architect-x9-exterior-rendering/

https://chieftalk.chiefarchitect.com/gallery/image/831-residential-architectural-rendering/

zoom in and update the view, the closer you zoom in the finer it will refresh but when you print it will automatically update to the final quality. This could be wrong but I believe its the way chief handles images to keep things running faster/smoother and not bog down.

alternatively you could add a hanging tree png in a photo editing program, not a real good example was a 30 second job importing images in layout but you get the idea.

I check "use plan scale" and use a separate layerset/Text Style to control the note size independent of what the plan/elevation shows.

I can still tab 7 times and use up/down arrows to toggle by the hour, as the others have stated it doesn't highlight that the hour box is selected. However ive just discovered my hot key to open the Sun Angle Specification is gone and the tool doesn't show up to reassign? Im using X11 but my signature isn't reflecting the change I made in my signature.

I have my own texture library with all the materials typically used ie. bricks from PGH/Austral, colourbond colours and textures (https://steelselect.com.au/resources/textures)

Ive created some of my own james hardie textures but again done once and saved. 

Windows not really, I spent best part of 10 years resizing manually each window when placing but have recently found some time to create a library with standard window sizes to suit cladding and one to suit BV.

There isn't any Australian Libraries but if you spend some time working on a template you only need to create a particular wall or item once, creating new wall types is a quick and easy task.

You can always create your own CAD Block or Rename the one you need in the CAD Block Management Dialogue

place the light you want to modify, open the symbol specification dialogue, select the CAD block you desire, close then add to library.

Have you tried using PBR instead of Raytrace then export as an image with transparent background checked?

Is there a schedule you don't use for anything else? For instance if you don't use a furniture schedule, re-import/create symbols as furnishings rather than a geometric shape, assuming that your are modelling the wall manually block by block that is.

Legend thanks Eric, works perfect.

Excuse my Macro ignorance, my knowledge is pretty limited however, is there an easy way to use the Custom Object Field of an object to complete simple arithmetic so that a value shows up in the schedule, I can get the formula to show but was hoping to show the end value.

I don't use cabinet schedules in my workflow so would like to use a generic base cabinet for its Object Information. My end goal is to use these fields to calculate the level that the garage needs to be taking into consideration max. driveway gradients and transitions.

Thanks in advance.

do you have angle snaps turned on? seems to work ok for me

I think the first example is easy to replicate with transparency control of solid fills, drawing order flexibility and polyline union/intersection/subtraction.

The second is pretty close to what Jon produces and the third is similar to the first example minus gradient fills which Glenn pointed out is the only thing chief lacks.

On ‎17‎/‎04‎/‎2017 at 10:35 PM, ED-209 said:

Basically, I want some decent-looking trees and hedges that show up in a 3D bird's eye view. I don't want to use generic green spheres.

 

make some new CAD blocks, the added transparency to fills a few versions back helps  a lot. (Apologies, I misread the 3D as 2D)

1 hour ago, TheKitchenAbode said:

 

 

Great job Graham, shame that the glass doesn't translate well with PBR. Delete the glass objects and add an arised edge to the benchtop the shot then becomes very believable.

Thanks for the tips too.

Thanks Gerry, I'm not adept enough with macros to create one that computes the total but after watching another great video from Michael I started experimenting with the material lists and the result seems promising.

Polyline solids show up under Exterior Trim so I isolated the categories to only show these in the material list. Fill and cut polyline slices have their own materials so to be able to differentiate each. Again I'm not knowledgeable enough to use a macros so utilised the cost column to total these which meant adding 1 to the default formula to give a positive value (Fill) and -1.0 for the cut value then chief just does the rest.

a big +1 for me, I use cad lines

Nice creative use of solids Michael. Goes to show although maybe not as free flowing as sketchup, chief can produce almost anything and only limited by ones creativity. Some handy tips on technique for creating custom symbols too, cheers

you can create your own symbols, I found a Clipsal model from sketchup warehouse (to suit Australia). Ive attached my electrical library if it is of use to anyone, the plan symbols aren't universal but the company have been using them for years and the trades are well accustomed to it but you could always swap out with your own 2D symbols.

As a side note, solid fills don't translate to the 2D blocks on symbols, I have an angle hatch with a small spacing then cad detail to view so it explodes then block it again.

Electrical.calibz

37 minutes ago, johnny said:

What I am about to say may be very unpopular, but I feel there has been too many entering this business due to applications that make someone think they can design/draft plans for people - kinda like in the 90's when everyone became a "graphic designer" because they knew how to use MS Publisher.  It used to be the technical know-how of preparing Condocs kept the standard relatively out of reach of wannabees.

 

We need greater restriction with mandatory schooling/internships/continuing education and licensing even for "designers".  I'm not saying people need to become architects - but there should be some level of competency required before designing buildings. 

I think I have to agree with this sentiment, I also believe there should be a practical component to training as you see all too often a solution that works in theory but in practice a very different story.

IMHO bim, 3D, VR and paperless plans are the way of the future, the possibilities really are limitless.

As Christina points out, more and more people are aware of the technologies out there and are after the full immersive experience. The tools are there now but maybe not upto to the task for the complexities and nuances of construction to become mainstream as of yet.

It will take a major shift in thinking for trades/contractors to adopt and utilise an ipad, surface pro or similar but masses of information could be conveyed in a lot simpler form. I think this will become a natural progression for younger generations as the momentum continues to shift towards technology in the classroom ie less and less pen and paper or chalkboards. Much in the same vein carpenters now rely on powertools rather than a hammer and nail or my generation using CAD to earn a living rather than pencil, rulers and drawing boards.

3D pdfs exist already so there is no reason why you could have 3D details so the contractor can orbit around to get the full picture rather than perhaps misinterpret a 2D representation.

Is there any reason why BIM couldn't be more widely adopted for residential, I know here our frame manufacturers have software to design and certifier their timber frames and trusses, energy consultants use a software to simulate the thermal performances of a design. Why cant these all be streamlined to utilise the one model?