TeaTime

FYI, in a broadly sense, when simply selecting an object the Active Layer Display Options side window will show you the layer the object it on (highlighted), and all other layers related to that object so in this case just clicking on the image you'd have seen both the picture layer and the label checked to be displayed and you could easily uncheck the label layer there.

Well okay, sure, but for 99% of (normal) people out there...

Shouldn't need to, they unlock automatically when the Customize Toolbars dialog is open But I think that's the issue, it sounds like you're planting them as new floating toolbars, then closing the Customize window in order to set it up, and then dragging those floating toolbars up. But that will just dock them next to eachother. instead, when adding them from the Customize dialog, just drop the icon directly onto the toolbar, don't drop it on the Plan view as a floating toolbar. You might even drop a few of them in a row if you know you need several. The pain is you can only add toolbar butons from the Customize dialog, but you can only customize those buttons outside of that dialog. But that's purely because the Place Library Object buttons are special.

Uncheck Same Eave Heights in the Build Roof dialog.

@GeneDavis, just type @ and start typing the name, it should autofill as you go

Just don't bother calling Support if it doesn't work right, there's no way that's a supported OS configuration! Honestly though I don't know that I'd expect it to do much for PBR--assuming you're referring to the Real Time Ray Tracing--since its entire purpose is to offload 3D rendering from the CPU onto the GPU. I don't know a lot about Atlas but it sounds like the point is sort of the same, to free up resources by disabling a bunch of "unnecessary" services. But that's only going to affect RAM and CPU usage. I would only assume you'd see a general performance increase simply on account of the PC running better in general. That was sort of my take from what I read on Atlas in the first place, it seems to be intended for hardcore gamers who just want to squeeze every last bit of performance out of their system. Seems a bit excessive.

so...

I'd probably sooner just manually draw it with 3D Molding polyline - there's a good deal of measuring/trial and error to get Window shapes right - polyline will snap onto and automatically match the stair angle. The only thing you really gain from using a Window is it'll follow Default casing. You can Ctrl-drag a window onto a door, so if the door had no jamb/casing and the passthru defined the casing, that'll work.

Huh. Just to see if maybe it's a matter of my not using them as rigorously as you, I made a few and did a multiple copy array--woops, ended up with 336 of the things, and it sure slowed down Plan view (but so does having that many Callouts), but my 3D views loaded the same speed before and after, displayed or not. I wonder why you're seeing a performance hit.

I haven't ever encountered any significant issue with them, no. I don't think I understand, if you don't want them in 3D just don't display them in 3D?

Agreed, but the main point was showin labels on a Top-down view, and the only way to do that is mixin 2D and 3D Views, regardless of rendering tech. Hopefully some day we'll get the ability to show text and dimensions in 3d views and none of this will be necessary!

Something like this? https://www.chiefarchitect.com/support/article/KB-01142/creating-an-image-for-use-in-a-brochure-flyer-or-website.html

So, I'm guessing the sound of crickets means "No." Historically Surfaces have never really ideal for Chief, I think very few people find a lot of success with them. I had an older model surface years ago, I think around X12, and it worked "okay", not great but it was fine in a pinch. But overall performance, I didn't enjoy it and I wouldn't recommend it. Of course X15 is a different beast, and I don't know that newer Surfaces have kept up with the changes to Chief's graphics. And thats always the biggest concern with any computer when considering it for Chief. The Surface 7 sports either an Intel UHD (i3 model) or Intel Iris Plus (i5 and i7 models) while the Surface 8 has Intel Iris Xe - none of these are ideal, though I'm fairly sure they'll work. Chief's requirements are pretty obscure, they simply say your graphics needs to support DirectX 12 but computer spec sheets never list that so you gotta do some side research. I'm pretty sure Iris Plus and Iris Xe both support Dx12 but I doubt youll get exceptional quality from it and no GPU Ray Tracing. It's best to think about Chief like a video game given the way it renders 3D, asking "will this computer be good for Chief?" is the same as asking "will this computer be good to play video games?" and if you find yourself talking to a store sales rep, that's a good way to frame the conversation.

Text macros within a Text Box will use attached arrows to determine what object the macro applies to (it's Referenced Object), so any arrow will work though, so long as the arrows tail end is snapped to a text box. So Leader Line are the easiest since they draw an arrow and automatically attach a text box at the end.

This gets my vote, especially if there are a number of cabinets with comments that you want displayed. Quick, simple, and clean.

Dontcha just love getting two entirely different reactions -- Chopsaw's right, you can absolutely adjust your dimensions to display in metric regardless of the plan being an imperial one, but on one hand it's simply a matter of what's more a pain: re-adjusting your various dimension defaults? Or redrawing on a metric plan? However, you also need to remember that there's a lot more that's locked in Metric / Imperial, like Schedules and Materials Lists. Again though it just depends on the scope of the plan, but I like to err of the side of caution. I'd redraw.

Oh boy that's something else entirely - yeah if all dimensions in the plan are metric, then using a Metric plan will be less of a headache overall.

Not sure what you mean by that - various fields in chief have different minimums, some 1/16, some much less. If you open a cabinet spec and set it's width to 24 1/32" it'll correct it to 24 1/16". Even setting Num Style to Dec Inches, it'll change to .0625, not .03125. But, yes, manually drawn dimension lines set to Decimal will display 17.6 using Grid Rounding, 17.7 using Distance rounding.

No, I don't believe so - entering in fractional inches, 1/16 is the smallest the Size fields allow, so even entering in 17.7, it's rounding to 17.6875", the nearest 16th.

Sure can - save one door, copy it, reflect one. Bottom line from the start though is you need two door symbols any way you swing it.

Because of how Change Opening/Hinge works, I don't think there is an easier way. I guess I don't get why it didnt work though, with two door panels in either direction you should be able to apply and flip them to whatever orientation you need

Well, if Change Opening/Hinge is essentially just doing a Reflect, then if you flipped the symbol the wrong way, then Change Hinge should flip it back the right way, right?

Try copy/reflecting the door and making two different versions?

Curious, Pony Wall layers are supposed to cut around the casing, not the opening. How'd you create the pony wall? What are the wall layers, layer grouping, etc.

I think "expected' depends on the situation, but regardless there's just no control to make it do/not do that. It just *does*. Though apparently if the cap splits the walls it doesn't do that. But you don't want that. Making wall type copies technically fixes it but breaks it in another way Maybe that's acceptable, but I also don't think it'll be possible to get that little brick wrapping around the corner like in the photo - Chief will only allow a break a certain distance from the corner. That photo shows a single brick length wrapping and I think Chief'll fight you there. Might do something like a thick cornerboard - but the cap will probably just need to be done manually.