HumbleChief

My older HP110 no longer has Win 10 drivers or support. Which plotter do you have? You can always print to PDF first, which is what I am forced to do but prefer it anyway.

I'm not sure how one could tell for sure but the newer NVidia cards aren't that expensive for a LOT of graphics power. Will that fix it? Again no way to really tell until the money is spent and the computer put through its paces.

Chief has a major problem with large models, there's no denying it. Check the system in my signature. It's pretty muscular but I still get bad slow downs when the models get large. I'm not sure where the bottle neck is, either graphics card or CPU but you'll need LOTS of muscle if you want to try and get through Chief's large models without slowdowns. I'm not talking bothersome slow downs, I'm talking crippling slowdowns that you have to wade through once a model gets so large. If you want a fast computer here's a link I just posted to the Chatroom that has about as much budget muscle that can be reasonably afforded. https://chieftalk.chiefarchitect.com/index.php?/topic/10545-need-a-fast-inexpensive-computer/

Yeah don't make it so difficult. Create a roof plane where you'd like the cricket to be and set the pitch to 1/2":12. They almost never end up beinghe right height etc but just move the plane up/down using the roof dbx or the transform replicate tool. Break the main roofs and join them to the cricket. Some times they are a necessary evil but we do them all the time. They might be ugly, but only from Google Earth.

I sent a couple renders to Layout and didn't notice any 'bluriness'. Not sure what the problem is but am pretty sure the blur is caused when sending 'live' elevations. Don't know about renders.

Pretty sure you're referring to live elevations Perry, not sending a bitmap. EDIT: You could be right about that Perry - I don't send renders to Layout very often. If you send a bitmap picture to Layout the best way to get the best resolution is with the largest monitor you can access. Also can you 'crop' the picture by zooming in a little before you send to Layout? That will save some resolution for the final picture.

Text 99% of the time

Ha Ha...make that 15 years later and still confused. (Wish I was kidding)

...and a VERY good one IMO. I agree Chief should be consistent as in the example you show.

I'm confused. You are in a 3D view and moving a line with the 'Z' coordinate? I'm not saying you're not, but I don't see how that's possible. How do you draw a line in a 3D view? How do you select it? Move it? Can you show an example? (You must be talking about something else because the line tool isn't even available in 3D views, that I can find anyway) ...and Johnny, big deals are not inherently BIG, they are always as big as you make them. Learning a new program that does things differently than the norm is not a big deal - unless you make it one.

Newell...really?? I think your dining room gable wall should be larger and perhaps a pretty blue color to go with the drapes and define it as a gable wall but don't balloon though the ceiling below, or above and set the stucco molding to be larger and inverted but don't change the color, I really like that color. Windows should be larger and not so clear. ...or maybe post the plan so someone can really help you

I don't always have problems but sometimes I seem to follow the same methodology and end up with some really odd and confusing settings and floor/room heights. I think it's always user error but the entire floor/room height system should be easier to understand IMO. I don't think I've ever even seen a really comprehensive tutorial on same.

Good question Scott and I think it's a bug in the paradigm that Chief uses that makes these simple tasks difficult to understand and implement which causes unneeded user errors. In this case there's a setting in one of the dbx's that doesn't allow for a single room's floor height to be dropped or raised independently of the other rooms - but sometimes it does allow for it. It's very confusing. Not just for me but obviously for Dave as well. Dave can you please post that plan you are referring to above? I'm very curious what you/I might be missing.

Somehow the floor heights are depending on the foundation room below but I simply will never understand the paradigm Chief has chosen to define room/floor/ceiling heights.

Is that really that confusing?? or odd that one software application would work differently than another? When I work in Sketchup I simply adapt to its way of doing things. I don't post about how it should work like Chief. Seems such a small and easy thing to get used to, not really sure what the real issue is. I also don't think that 'lines' can be added or moved in a 3D view so how would they be moved using the 'Z' axis?

City of San Diego FAR includes the garage but in some areas you get a 400 SF credit for the garage. Some San Diego County cities use FAR and lot coverage. Others use only FAR, still others only lot coverage. The County of San Diego use another completely different set of parameters depending on the zone. Coronado another different look where you can gain FAR credits by performing certain tasks while building. And so on and so on.... I do 'research' on every project to define those parameters before anything is drawn. That reminds me Richard we have 'phantom floors' in some cities now as well. Those high attics and basements can count towards square footage sometimes, in some locales, in others not so much. It is a mine field no doubt.

If you are an architect you can probably do your own calcs. As a designer here in SoCal, like Perry said you need a licensed engineer to sign off on your plans.

Did not Know that - thanks Joey.

Look at the second mortar joint down, I'm saying that's all done by hand with p-solids to look more impressive than you can actually get from Chief OOB.

Johnny, you are in a 2D view. There is no 3rd 'D' or Z axis in that view.

Any needed engineering or even any questionable spans are handed over to my engineer who will mark up the plans and get me a set of calcs. for plan submittal. Why would someone want that liability when an engineer is employed for exactly that reason?

Arnstein, In the structure dbx, uncheck ceiling over this room and set the second floor above to 'open below'. I also set the wall framing to balloon though ceiling above. Looks like setting that second floor to open below might be enough. The answer to your second question is most likely yes.

AND it was touted as a new feature for the X8 update - an embarrassing lapse IMO.

Darned if I can find where that default setting might be...

Thx