HumbleChief

The walls cut correctly up to some place nearer the exterior wall where they fail.

Thanks Joey, Tried a few different things including build all framing. Does it cut the wall for you? Is it supposed to? Thanks again.

...to the height of the ceiling plane? Or is there a setting to do so? Tried the stop at ceiling above setting but doesn't seem to help. 376353779_ceilingplnes3.plan

I think fact that it s indeed for all Cells is pretty limiting. I was trying to give the Title Text a little breathing room top and bottom but keep the Header and Main Text a little tighter but no way to do one without changing them all. Not a fan but better than nothing? Would like to see the 'attribute' setting applied individually to each Title; Header; and Main text fields. Just sayin.

With all the data available for roof heights, base line heights etc. it seems it would be not so hard to cut the joists kinda like a real world joist? Maybe more difficult in rea; world software engineering but might be a nice addition?

Thanks. Sent it in anyway.

But wait, there's more. The other end of that 'correctly' cut joist is cut incorrectly.

And the roof plane with the non-cut joist has one that's cut correctly? Weird.

Here's a plan with BOTH conditions but I can't find a difference in the roof planes that would cause this. Perhaps different eyes? CEILING JOIST 1.plan

Whoa, not sure what I did but now am getting this...

Seems to cut the joist just as lame looking as it always has here.

Yeah same here but the elevation change is relative to the subfloor. So +12 moves the 'Subfloor Height Above Terrain' up which in turn moves the terrain down, in relation to the subfloor.

Yeah I would definitely ask why there's an AMD chip with an Intel chip set. From their web site...

Hey Mark, Next time you have a question can you please add a few more screen shots?

I just watched Scott Harris's webinar presentation on Remodeling/As Built Overlays and the added tools and views to the 3D reference views is very, very cool. I have been a harsh critic of Chief's tendencies to create a feature, half bake it, then abandon it forever more. This feature seemed to fit that mold but the new tools and views available now makes it easy for even bone heads like me. Way to go Chief, VERY much appreciated. EDIT: I don't how many of you have the chance to join the webinars hosted by Scott Harris but he does an incredible job of presenting and answering questions from us not so smart folks. Highly recommended.

You kids are killing me. Why not respond like an adult with a counterpoint or refute the claim? Don't you think its interesting enough to do so? Or wait, a simple down vote? Here's another chance to down vote a post but instead what are your (whoever you might be) thoughts about Chief's GUI? Curious.

It's also important to remember that most technical issues start with a post to the forum to check the validity of any misbehavior before reporting to tech staff.

I think GUI design is Chief's weakest link. Kinda like it was designed by software engineers instead of a GUI design expert.

I see you sent this in to tech, please let us know what you learn. Thanks

Edward, I feel your pain and it appears that Chief is clearing the 'Client Info' (and Designer Info) when saving as a Layout Template even if that box is not checked to delete when saving as a Layout Template. Happens here too. The preferences as you've noted only affect Designer Info, not Client Info but that info is cleared as well. If that box Delete All>Client Info is not checked Chief simply should not delete Client Info but it appears that it does just that. Why is Chief deleting Client Info when the box is not checked to do so?

Interesting. Did not know there was a field for designer info in preferences.

Edward, I've never used those steps to create a Layout template. Not saying they are wrong but what would happen if you used File>Templates>Save As Template and select Set As Default Template? Select OK and the location, and any New Layout will open that template file? Might be missing something but works OK here. EDIT: But it DOES clear all the client info as I have nothing set up in preferences. Even though the dialog box below clearly gives the option to delete client info - or not. That's a bit confusing.

I don't make time to respond to tech support very often as I just don't have any extra these days but the response above, as courteous and professional as it could be represents a very typical disconnect between the brilliant (I am not being facetious) software engineers and the every day user and their experience with the software. Perfect case in point. I as a user can't really understand why, when a section is cut, the 3D solids are no longer editable. It makes no inherent sense from this user's point of view. On the other hand it makes perfect sense to the software engineers because - software engineering. I think that disconnect from the engineer's mind to the user interface occurs far too often in Chief but it's been like that since day one and the user needs to adapt to that engineer's mind because the inverse will not happen any time soon.

From tech support "What you're seeing and describing in your second video is correct. If an elevation camera is cutting into an object, especially a simple object like a 3D solid, you won't be able to edit it. This is due to the nature of how 3D works. When you're cutting an elevation view into a shape, you're not actually seeing any of the sides of the shape; you're just seeing the edges, which have zero thickness, and the backface of the opposite end of the 3D shape, which you cannot select. The Cross Section Lines I believe are generated to act as 2D line overlays for shapes for the sake of modifying Line Weights. As you pointed out in that second video, any camera view needs to be totally outside of a 3D Object to select it. This applies to normal 3D cameras just as much as elevation camera views. Effectively, you can only see 1 face of a 3D object in an elevation view, and you need to click on the outside of that face to successfully select it."

So it's been silly for a long time? And by silly I mean I cut the section in order to draw the 3D solid, then the user has to reposition the section cut line in order to modify the 3D solid? Silly is much too kind a word for that behavior. I reported it to tech support and asked if this behavior was intended.