HumbleChief

...yeah and how about those fires in Australia and now flooding. Pretty sure it's the new palette styles causing that...

In an experiment to see how far off topic this thread can get I too find it interesting, the insert page after/before tools are still there in both X11 and X12 but they do behave differently. I like X11's behavior better...oh and another thing about X12...

The function has not been removed, only removed from the right click context menu, the Hot key works exactly as it did in X11.

I don't use the right click menu to copy items and the tool is still on my menu bar and it is without a doubt the most used short cut key I use 'Q' in my case because it comes to left hand so easily. I was never confused by it, never got copies I didn't understand, never had a problem but perhaps others did? I think though like Michael stated it's not really an issue but forcing a change in one's workflow can be an issue and a real pain. Sorry, re-read the OP and see it's an issue with the right click menu....I use it from the tool bar, again with a short cut key..

Did NOT know that - thanks so much Rene!!

...and have to say it worked OK except for the way the styles are stored in the User Library by default without a way that I could find to save them in to a specific folder. A separate folder can be created then the style palettes dragged in to that new folder but otherwise the User Catalog will just get clogged with Style Palette files with no easy way to organize them. Could be missing something and the cynical part of me, (based on many years of Chief use) wants to assume Chief will leave this feature, just about finished but won't revisit it again to make changes. Has anyone else tried the feature? It took a little time to figure it out but it works pretty well except for the additional steps needed to organize the style palettes. Would be nice to have a place to store them in a plan file? Or?? Curious about others' experience. Thanks Oh yeah, decent chance I don't understand how they are intended to be used. Any help with that appreciated.

Nice Dan, thought this might be the case.

Yeah, these 'systems' if you will become very personal, designed and implemented around each person's work flow. Mine has grown and gotten pretty ugly but I'm used to the ugly and it works for me. Will follow this thread though and see it something more efficient pops up.

Yeah I figure it wasn't as easy as I made it out to be. I have few older installation files in my downloads folder but almost never use older versions like many others do. Don't know if your files still live there as well? Sorry I wasn't any help...

Curious Larry, why would you want to 'migrate' Chief's files instead of simply installing it on the new computer?

Trying to remember the up and down sides of the .plan and .layout 'warehouse' templates and years tried the 'Save As Method' which would, in theory, rename and save all of your changes to details etc. for the next plan but I could never get it to work real world. I was always working on 4 or 5 plans and the Save As Method just got too confusing for me. As a possible relevant note to the OP and the suggestion of a .plan and .layout template for details it seems that (as mentioned here already) any changes to the .plan file will effect all associations of that .plan file and all of its links. If that .plan is 'saved as' in the job folder then it would be and remain unique to that job. The down side is that the template .plan and .layout files would not be universally updated so they both should be pretty comprehensive to begin with or manually updated as the detail library grows. There's a learning curve and some complexities as there always is but anything short of a unique .plan and perhaps a unique .layout for each job I think would cause problems in the long run. It's been many years since adopting my current, awkward as best, system of a default .plan template with lots of details spread through a couple different floors but am curious about what others end up using and if the additional Layout option truly creates an easier way to organize details.

THX...

Thanks Bill. I can see some possibilities, and some complexities as well. I might start small and work my way up to a system that works. Either way opening more than one Layout (even though it was possible in X11) is a great new feature.

Quick question for you Bill. If you need to modify a detail from your .plan file (which I seem to need to on a fairly constant basis) do you double click that detail box and make changes? Re-save or just remember that detail was modified?

Interesting idea with the 2 Layouts. May try something similar except in my work flow I use very few details other than the details supplied by my structural engineer. Seems as though others use many many different details. I also use very few that don't need some sort of change for each specific plan. Bill, will that Details.plan and Details.layout constantly change and be updated? To Michael's point above about them then changing wherever they are used, do you see that as an issue? And...different strokes for different folks of course. First thing I learned in the field was to never scale a detail and have never found a need to send details at any specific scale other than to make sure they are readable.

Tech support says that the "Clip Plane Indicator Length" in wall elevations is only intended to show that data on the plan and not be reflected in the 2D elevation camera's output. Any wall elevation is intended to take a snap shot of that 'room' and that room alone. I guess one could create a quick room if it seemed faster. Consistency is an important part of any software program in my mind and in this case the 2 modes don't behave consistently but I, as are most readers of this thread, am over it...

Here's a much shorter vid illustrating the inconsistency. I sent it to tech support as I do not think they intended the Clip Plane Indicator Length setting to have no effect when using 'both sides' for the wall elevation view.

Did a little more exploration and I think there's an inconsistency that should be resolved. As shown in the vid the back clipped cross section view has the same setting as the wall elevation tool but they do not do the same thing. Of course we can create CAD masks and other methods but why do the 2 tools behave differently? Why doesn't the Clip Plane Indicator Length setting in the wall elevation tool create a clip plane length like it does in the back clipped cross section? Seems inconsistent to me or just plain non-functional.

Great idea Mark but it only works if you create a 'room' with those temp walls. Not a huge burden but wonder why the settings in the 'wall elevation' dbx do not behave the same as the back clipped cross section dbx?

Sometimes it seems like we all have a gripe about a feature or a feature limit that seems so petty but small changes can make such a huge difference in work flow and the ability to move through a plan just that little bit faster. A (again) small example is the ability to turn off a back splash with a check box instead of changing the value to zero - small, but huge regarding work flow. Just now I went to edit a plan view and instead of the old 'Open Object' option (which is so software engineer speak) it now says Edit View. Seems really small again but it makes a difference and all of the small changes just speed work flow that much more. Appreciated Chief guys! Any others you've noticed?

Hey, thanks for the help and comments. I hardly ever use wall elevations, and have never exported them, and was simply curious if there was a setting in the dbx I might be missing. Familiar with CAD masks but again was curious about a setting I might be missing to make the process a bit easier. Again, thanks for all the help.

Thanks Michael but not really the best option in this case or at least in this case with my expertise. I'm exporting in DWG not sending to Layout but will remember CAD masks if needed in the future and hopefully I don't waste others' time in creating threads in the future. Apologies to those who took their time to respond but appreciate the help.

Thanks again but I think the back clip setting solves it.

I think I figured it out using the 'back clip' setting that limits the wall elevations in a way that works OK. I was previously getting all the walls beyond that back clip and was looking for the 'clip to sides' feature that was not there. Very seldom use wall elevations hence my confusion. THANKS

Thanks Mark, I am exporting the elevations and not sending to Layout. I need to 'clip' them to include only specific sections of a 'wall' instead of entire walls as Chief defines them. I've been able to 'back clip' to get close and am assuming this same feature as in back clipped cross sections does not exist in wall elevations? Or am I missing it? Thanks again.