HumbleChief

Double check ALL of the boxes and settings in the dialog box. The pic posted shows drywall, selected in blue, as "framing" in that little check box below the layer settings. Two things make sure the framing layer is set to fir framing as a texture/material and make sure it is also set to framing as the drywall layer is incorrectly set to.

Not at my computer but in the original plan the layers were all reversed with drywall on top and the remaining layers below that. Maybe those layers are the correct size as the dialog box shows but in that incorrect order? Study that dialog box again in the ceiling structure finish tab and you should get the 88" you are looking for. Or try a shelf ceiling as 'help' will direct.

One way might be to define the "Ceiling Finish" in a way that it might be built with an "Air Gap" then 2 x 4 ceiling framing 'Auto Detailed' as Insulation, then sound board below and finally drywall. EDIT: and to answer your question more directly, that's how Chief works. This dbx will get you to the 88" ceiling height but it's always good to wait for the smart guys to offer another method.

Looks good Doug and I never bother to try and build that in Chief and just throw a detail at it in plan view, not worth the effort in my world. What do you think of the OP's challenge after seeing his picture above?

DOUBLE GABLE.plan

Yeah, the details matter and in this case defining "a lot of overengineering" might be good next step. Definitely possible, and conventionally framing that new roof is the way to go but as far as getting Chief to (from the OP) "show the exact truss / roof framing that my builder can use." Not going to happen without the needed engineering unless your builder likes to wing it without engineering, permits and inspections. You can however show in Chief an approximate framing possibility that the builder and engineer can then size members etc. and then build. Just shape the roofs in a way that allows for that 7 ft. passageway and let Chief auto frame the roofs.

Yes, the video was only intended to show a technique and not any specific construction detail. Do you build in a similar manner in Canada?

Not exactly sure what you are asking but this might help. 199498449_DOUBLEGABLE.plan

Chief will sometimes remember wall locations from previous floors and previous builds of the plan. Try saving as and shutting down Chief and reopening the plan.

If you do decide to customize your tool bars make sure you have a backup of your toolbar file because Chief can get pretty creative with them.

That behavior has made me crazy for years. Sometimes I'll hold the control key and eyeball the next placement but really have no less clunky a method. I've also places them by hand and used the align distribute tool but like I wrote no less clunky.

...and of course the ever reliable..

I've heard that X14 will have every improvement but what you really wanted, improvements you never thought you needed, improvements that you will never use, and improvements that will make every plan creation just a little bit better and faster. But those are just rumors.

THIS^^

Yeah super easy to move once drawn, was just curious if I had missed a setting.

Interesting, did not know this.

Thanks you guys. Appreciate the feedback. I also saw the deck beam spacing setting but couldn't get the beam out flush or any other location than the 12" hard coded distance. Thanks again.

Simple deck. The 'deck beam' (and posts) locates itself at approx. 12" from the outside edge of deck. I would like the deck beam and support posts to be flush with the outside edge of deck. Is there a setting for same? Simple to move it of course but that turns off auto framing. Simple again to set up manually but was wondering if there's an 'offset deck beam' or posts from 'edge' similar to the post offset from 'end' setting somewhere? Thanks deck beam.plan

I have a contract clause that states "Upon payment, all printed floor plans and elevations shall become the property of the Owner but all electronic files shall remain the property of the Designer." Not the best wording but the intent is clear enough. Always a bad thing when you have to revert to the verbiage in the contract to settle matters as each client and situation is unique but it could give a starting place for nay negotiations.

Not sure if you've done this yet (doesn't look like it from your Adjust Lights DBX) but one thing that might help is, in plan view, go to 3D>Lighting>Add Lights and add general lighting to the scene instead of depending on the recessed and undercab lights to do all the work. Make sure that 'Light Sources' is turned on in all views (or hit F5) and don't hesitate to add a couple of brighter lights. You can position those 'Added Lights' in any location and height and it gives a lot of flexibility to your lighting scene. 300 Lumens is also more what you would find in your own kitchen but in my experience, which is limited, 300 lumens doesn't do much in a Chief render. Can you post the plan? Others might find a couple methods that can help. EDIT: For example if you 'Added' a light (in plan view 3D>Lighting> Add Lights) near each of the 2 chairs it would brighten that area that none of the light from the recessed or undercab lights can reach. Those lights can be adjusted both in intensity and height to get you what you want. Worth a try?

Yeah it's random and can't be reproduced and is easy to remedy but a bit of a niggler.

Can you create a plan set and save that? And you could certainly save it as a plan file and access it at anytime. Perhaps not through the library but a simple plan file called Jack and Jill.

Great sentiment and perhaps a good idea if the horse hadn't already left the barn. Chief has already made the call to do 3D rendering in house and I would imagine has invested many thousands of dollars and man hours in same and to suggest they give up that investment and link to better more capable rendering engines while giving up their investment in their 3D rendering technology seems a bit naive. Is it a good idea now? Or was it good idea before Chief has committed so many resources to their own 3D tech? Can't answer either question but from a business standpoint it would be hard to imagine Chief not pursuing and refining their own tech since so much has already been invested. Should they do n both? Keep investing in RTRT and link to Twinmotion etc.? Maybe, but I personally would not hold my breath. Will Chief fall behind the metaverse curve with their decision to keep rendering in house? This has been predicted for many, many years on the forum. Chief better do (insert new technology or plans to compete with ACAD etc.) or else they will be left behind and yet they just keep on trucking and are most likely gaining market share from their dogged focus on the small residential builder. The decisions on which direction to take a company are very easy to make here on a forum with nothing at stake, but when the business is at stake it's a whole different ball game and most of us do not know how to play that game as well as Chief has demonstrated that they do.

I've experienced this many times and I think I sent it into tech but it's hard to reproduce. Anyone else see this behavior?

So glad I could help.