HumbleChief

Hey Val, been through these battles before and never really know what bites and why. There was indeed an archive folder with the correct 'saved as' name and a single archived plan, but not a recent enough one that had the previous work included, like it just arbitrarily stopped archiving and autosaving within the spec'd time interval. And yes, searched high and low for any archive in every folder including DropBox and Carbonite as I've found them in unexpected places in the past, but this time, nothing.

Eric, it was that check box "same roof height at exterior walls" - brilliant and very helpful. Never used it before. Thank you.

To the OP. The default roof pitch of 5:12 is affecting the porch overhang (roof pitch 2:12 as set (changed) in the wall dbx) as if the fascia heights of the 2 different roof pitches have to match, as David suggested above, even if there are no actual adjoining roof fascias. Did not know that. Thanks for the tip David.

Interesting, did not know that. I took the OP's plan and eliminated every roof structure from every room except the porch, eliminating any other fascia heights and it still built with a 2' - 6" overhang instead of the spec'd 12". I built a demo plan and clearly saw what you posted David - again very helpful. There must be something in the plan that is hanging on to a fascia height? Or is it inheriting the default 5:12 pitch for every other roof and applying that to the 2:12 pitch and forcing the 2'- 6" overhang to accommodate the 5:12 default? That seems to make the most sense.

I must have misread the above posts which clearly stated that a picture is perhaps all that's needed and a plan file may not be, and based on the forum's history from its inception where a request for a plan file is not only common but sometimes insisted upon, just seemed weird. I will learn to read more carefully. Did the OP get any actual help? I opened the plan file but could not figure out the problem. Anyone trying to help the OP? Or simply arguing semantics?

Apologies to the previous posters but I'm curious as to when attaching a plan became the less desirable option to a screen shot or any other method to diagnose a problem? I downloaded the attached plan file, which the attachment I consider a common courtesy on this forum, but could not figure out the issue. Anyone else with an idea? As an aside, Eric and Ryan are always very helpful but if you, Jambruins, have any other future problems please attach a file whenever possible as it makes diagnosis that much easier. Again I could not see why that 2' 6" overhang persisted, so not much help here.

Yup, know all this, did all that, but somehow this plan got lost in the shuffle... Maybe not asking for advice but rather might serve as a reminder for others...

I know, I know, archives, archives etc. etc. but it's just gone. Sometimes I just don't get it... With the settings below I have no useful archive of the work that was completed.

air gap?

Built guitar templates using Chief, and the guitars built by hand.

This thread has me thinking a bit more. I cannot argue the nuances nor their importance within a perfectly rendered image that looks genuinely life like but I don't have clients that would notice such things and if I did I would try and find a way to not have them as clients any longer. If I were to present any one of the images shown in this thread, complete with light leaks and not quite right reflections, they would be thrilled. Does that simply reflect badly on myself and my clientele? Or is that more a reflection (see what I did there?) of a real world client presentation? Dunno but have never had a client call out minor (or major depending on one's perspective) rendering errors other than color which they are always warned cannot be reproduced accurately.

THANKS, I'll keep my eyes open for the phenom...

Steve, just to be clear for the rest of us, your original wall was not 1.5 and I assume that's 1 1/2 inches? Was that the invisible wall at the top of the stairs? If so what was the original thickness? Was it thicker or thinner? Thanks

True that...

Love how these threads go sideways, looking forward to the video

These discussion almost always evolve, as they should, into what software works best for which user within which business model. They can also devolve, which they should not IMO, into Chief bashing or other software promoting as if there were a single solution for every user. It's too simple to just use what works for each user. I've been using Chief for over 20 years, am 67 going on 68 years old and would never even consider another software package at this point in my life/career. Does that make me a Chief fan boi? Perhaps, but that's only because of my current career situation and goals. Watched a Revit video once and was shocked by how long it took to do the simplest of tasks and for my business the simplest of tasks is how I make a living. More complex stuff and I might have considered other software so Chief is neither good nor bad. Revit is neither good nor bad and deciding which one fits your business model is the only real decision.

...or like having a concrete slab treated like a 'room' with a ceiling or even a roof if one thought one was needed within a concrete slab 'room'? The list is sadly pretty long and some of the decisions were made by people who have never built anything - ever - but even given all of the niggles I still look forward to each new release, like I am with X13, because my productivity goes up every time.

From my experience Chief has consistently added new features that were kinda OK and many simply unfinished with pimples for all to see and then never revisited the feature again to improve or make truly useful. The glass house reference feature (among many) comes to mind. So much potential but unusable in (my) real world application. Will RTRT reflect that same MO? Will it only be eye candy for those without a true sweet tooth like the professional rendering experts here? Or will it evolve and change and grow in to a state of the art rendering engine that the professionals at such things can truly master and implement? Dunno. As far as upgrading to the next version with or without RTRT I'm all in as I've watched Chief just get a little bit better with each version in ways that have objectively improved my productivity. RTRT? Not required for me but must say if Chief can get their act together re: same I would not complain (much lol).

Wow that's been about a year and a half. Time does indeed fly - was I having fun? Hope that helps in some way.

Upgraded my dual Xeon power guzzling diesel bulldozer that was built for RayTracing back when that was the only game in town to the Ryzen in my signature about a year ago? Really bad with time sorry so it could have been longer or shorter ago. It was a time when the Ryzens came out and gave a dollar for dollar run against the fastest Intel chip, comparably priced. Always had an Intel but went for the Ryzen and have been very pleasantly surprised. Was initially excited about PCI 4 and used that as a motivator to upgrade to the Ryzen but the more I read after the fact the more I learned there were few real world advantages to PCI 4 and have not bothered to upgrade to an M.2 drive or any of the other fancy PCI 4 stuff. Really don't have any bottle necks with a few slow downs after the models get big but overall with the dramatic reduction in power consumption and the overall simplicity of a single CPU that's faster than the dual I was running I am very pleased. But that was then and this is now and I have no idea what's what in the current CPU landscape and would need to do some serious research in order to decide which CPU I'd purchase tomorrow. When I initially saw this thread I did not want comment because the budget seemed too low to really do a new desktop any justice and just didn't want to say out loud how silly I thought it was to buy a 2 or 3 year old processor that is yesterday's news and that would provide almost no performance gains over the current system. Heck maybe I won't say it out loud. As to Joey's comment and experience, I think if you shop right you can get one heck of a capable machine for very little money but you have at least pay some attention to what you are buying. Knowing what you need your machine for also really helps but as far as specific advice for the OP I got nuthin' other than find some more money and buy a better spec'd machine or get Joey to buy one for you. lol.

Agreed somewhat as I have as many or more questions about Chief's motives and methods than most on this forum. In my opinion your logic above makes total sense. Is that their best shot? Or just a quick reveal of speed increases? If it's the former, which I highly doubt, then sadness reigns throughout the kingdom. If it's the latter, then I will still keep my hopes up and my expectations low. BTW we still have a roof and wall structure dbx when in a foundation 'room' defined as a concrete slab as if a slab would create a room at all, and that there might a roof over same, so Chief is capable of any kind of logical misstep that we all must learn to live with. Still hoping for a great render engine when all is said and done.

Let me understand a little bit. Chief has a webinar showing that they have now incorporate Real Time RayTracing in to their rendering engine and show a brief exterior shot illustrating the quickness of said engine and that shot shows some users that Chief has basically no idea what they are doing and even lack the skills within their work force to create a rendering engine that is even useful let alone a 'good' rendering engine? I'm tempted to wait for the final release before criticizing their efforts (and will be first to do so as my history here has shown) and as with every new release keep my hopes high and my expectations low.

Hey, I resemble that remark....

Nice...

...and quicker Water Color with lines too....