KirkClemons

Is the wall perfectly straight? Or is the elevation camera looking directly at the wall? I've seen cases where a slight angle to either the camera or the wall provides bad results.

The current version of Chief Architect (X7) is supported on Windows 10: http://www.chiefarchitect.com/products/sysreq.html I am using Windows 10 on all my systems and love it.

Yes, basic. I use it mostly for trying to move an object by a specific distance, instead of trying to go through the transform/replicate. Saves on clicks. Never run into a case where I needed to multiply, divide, or add multiple values.

It's also a little known fact that you can perform basic arithmetic in the specification dialogs of Chief Architect as well.

This could be due to the codec throwing an error, and stopping the process. Try a different codec and see if you get any different results.

Try this out.

I was just meaning you could attach the original image file that you want to turn into a texture. Unless you do a backup entire plan, the plan file won't have the texture anyway.

If you want, you. Can attach the original and I'd be happy to take a look.

I use GIMP to do most of my textures. There are even a few plugins that work well with it. You can download it from here: http://www.gimp.org/ Also, you may take a look at this app, it does a decent job with most images: http://www.bundysoft.com/wiki/doku.php?id=projects:johnj

This video should help: http://video.chiefarchitect.com/player/player.php?id=190

The images will need to be photoshopped into a seamless texture in order to remove the 'tiled' effect. Scale and size won't have a desired effect in this case.

This is also a known issue with X7 when using that particular arrow style. Switching to another arrow style resolves the issue for now until a fix can be implemented.

How many light sources does it have? And what's it's surface count?

That's great! How does the scene look in your opinion? Are you happy with the results?

This is just what I've come across in different Architectural Visualization topics, but as a rule of thumb, if you are creating a day time interior scene, you don't want to turn on the lights. This makes the scene seem out of place for most people because if there is sun shining through the windows you won't usually have every light in the room turned on. That being said, I generally turn off small lights such as cabinet lights and usually just go with the one main light fixture, such as the pendants or the cans but not all of them. If possible I avoid turning any fixtures on in a day time scene. Instead I boost the direct sunlight intensity in my ray trace settings and try to angle the sun into the room through the windows as much as possible. Then use "Studio" lights to brighten up the scene. What I like to do is add a point or spot lamp directly behind the camera. Under light data I turn off 'Casts Shadows'. Then play with the position and intensity so it doesn't mess with the scene but actually brightens it up. This way you only have 2 light sources that are actually present, the sun, and the studio light behind the camera. You get nicer, softer lighting without the added time required to render all the light fixtures.

What I usually do is use 'File> Save as...' to create a separate copy of the plan. Then delete everything around the room I want to ray trace.

Unfortunately, not. That would be nice to have as an option, but since everything in the plan plays a role in the results, everything is included.

It's not huge, but definitely higher than the average scene. Are their any objects behind the camera that won't show up in reflective surfaces that you can hide or delete temporarily? Also, isolating just that room into it's own plan can help too. And of course, keep an eye on the number of light sources. Only use what is absolutely necessary to portray what you want to show. I've seen minutes added to a scene just from adding one light source.

It's been discussed. But I'm not sure how close we are to consider beginning to implement that type of solution. I'm sure that as more ArchViz artists begin to use our software the demand may warrant the man hours to develop such a service but for now, it's just a 'would be nice someday' on our radar as far as I know. Someone from our development team may know more.