Ridge_Runner

I'm not really a fan of how it works, but I use it as a perspective "shift/adjustment." I have never understood why it is called a "crop" when it seems to only increase or decrease the amount of camera perspective. Anyway, to answer your question, I use it to get the camera perspective the way I want it and then turn it off for that view. That "locks" the perspective angle and I can zoom in or out without changing the perspective. I use it mostly on full overviews and not so much in floor cameras. I have messed up floor camera views so many times trying to use the tool that I usually just delete the camera and start over. It seems to me that it is too sensitive to every mouse scroll wheel zoom I make and I screw up the camera royally very quickly; IOW, one mouse wheel turn makes too great an adjustment. I don't know how to "dial it in" so that it works well for me. It does give me some very abstract images at times, but that's not what I am after. Sorry for the rambling.

Nice Christmas present for somebody.

Thank you, David, and Merry Christmas to you.

Not sure if it will help you in your workflow, but I usually do the as-built and the remodel as two separate files, doing the as-built first and then making a save-as copy as the starting file for the remodel. I then make a Cad from view detail of the floorplan in the as-built and then delete what I don't want in the CAD mask; making a layerset first for this purpose in the as-built file makes fast work of this. I then modify the line work, line weight, line style, etc. as necessary for the look/purpose I want, and then block those lines creating a CAD mask. I name the block and add it to its own layer. I then add it to my library or just copy it if you prefer. I then open my remodel file and past (or copy) that block using paste-hold-position and lock that CAD mask layer. Now, when I remove, change walls, etc. in the remodel file, the CAD mask/block will still show where the old walls were; remaining walls that don't change will still show in whatever look you want for them (I copy an existing wall usually and modify it for existing walls that remain). Add notations for clarification and done. You can do this about as fast as it took me to type this. Search the forum for "CAD mask", "as built" or similar and you should find several comments/suggestions of how others handle the as-built situation. CA doesn't really give us a good way to handle the existing walls in remodels, due to the way it is programmed, without workarounds - two walls cannot occupy the same space without workarounds, basically, and then not very versatile.

I quit using the auto-hide feature some time back for this very reason. It seemed to work OK with all of my software "except" Chief. I got tired of having to fight with it and the edit toolbar so changed to the way Mick suggests.

Partially ... Would be a good idea to add your basic hardware info also similar in content to mine below, especially Mac or PC and OS version.

Totally agree! This forum is great - not perfect - but great!

Thanks, Michael. Very kind of you.

I usually work with the wall layers and alignment check boxes. I will make the framing layer on the wall above checked as the "Foundation to Exterior of Layer." I then make the foundation wall layers a little different as shown in the second image; works for me. Note: I wasn't too concerned about the dimension layer being to the brick on the foundation wall as this project was an as-built. I would change the dimension layer to the concrete wall for new construction. BTW - I always despise the outside of the mudsill being supported by the brick in this scenario. I prefer to have the main foundation wall align with the outside of the stud wall above and use a brick sill on top of the exposed brick. However, some builders around here don't want to go the extra cost to do it that way. And some just don't like the "look" and want the brick back under the siding.

Totally agree. Make the CAD lines your friend. Thru a project I will usually place several of them on a "temp" CAD layer so I can turn them off before condocs.

Any of you Mac users going to order the new fully upgraded Mac Pro? for $50,000? And don't forget the wheels; they come extra for $400 more! Might as well get the matching monitor for another $6,000 with its matching special Apple cleaning cloth. After all, it's only money, right? If you do order one, please let us know how it holds up running Chief. I might want to consider one, maybe used, when the price drops later.

Set your newel spacing to something greater than the length of your stairs. You have it set to 96" and the software adds the center newel.

A similar door came up on the forum some time back; may have even been the old forum. A search might bring it up but I don't have a clue what wording you could use to find it. Maybe some of the ones who contributed to that discussion will remember it and can locate it.

My preferred method. If you zoom in you can get it accurate to the 16th.

No. I am with you! I never want to justify "sloppy" work, but some things just aren't as important as we often make them.

Welcome to my world! I constantly fight "myself" over this. I spend far more time than I should on these OCD areas when some of them just don't matter that much.

David, I use Foxit Reader also and I don't see any way to add and subtract text and lines. When I entered the "Reduce File Size" in the "Tell me what you want to do" dbx it took me to a 5-day trial of their paid version, which I signed up for and used to reduce a current file. Just curious if I am not looking in the right part of Reader's menu.

Thanks Michael for putting this comparison together. I always use plot lines and color off. I do, however, like shadows on in most 3D views. I have just sent a job to my online print house; I used Bullzip as the original PDF printer. I took David's path and used a trial of Foxit's PDF editor and reduced the file size; it reduced it by approx. 50%. It was not a large file, just one to test. In viewing the reduced file with Foxit Reader, I did notice some lack of quality in the linework, especially in the 3D views. Will see how the returned prints look as the original file was only printed at 300 dpi. Thanks, again, Michael.

Like Chop said, it's the email providers and slow internet connections that these large PDF's choke on. I do not have a fast internet connection where I live (DSL land line in a rural area); my upload speeds max out at about 500-800k on a good day. If school is out it is even worse. Probably will be a few years before it's improved. Uploading a 50-100MB file to the cloud or sending it out to the print house takes an enormous amount of time. I have had Chief's PDF engine create PDF's in the 120MB range before. That's mainly why I use the free Bullzip. It has its problems with "tiling" the layout views making portions of the layout page lighter than other sections but it reduces most of my PDF's down to 5-10 MB. It is something I just have to live with right now. Anyone know of a good "third party PDF optimizer?"

Thanks, Kevin.

Known problem with Chief and PDF print drivers. This was discussed some time back. You can do a search to find it; something like "PDF printing problems" or such. Short answer - CA's built-in PDF print driver doesn't seem to exhibit this problem. Using other PDF print drivers does. I have tried several and they all seem to do that to some degree. Drives me crazy BTW. The PDF driver "tiles" the data on the sheets in blocks - some normal and some very light. The reason I switched from CA's driver is because it creates very large files, sometimes 100 Mb or so. Others will only be 5-10Mb for the same file. I finally settled on Bullzip for my PDF print driver; it works well for me, but I live with the tiling.

I love it! Not to relish in your misery, but I also find myself evaluating my own plansets after this thread. I have always liked the hand-lettered look. I never really mastered the quality some did in their skills at hand lettering, but I always tried. Did pretty good, but when computers came along, I went to Arial for a long time. I use "Handdf Double" for most all text now; I just like the look. However, I sometimes notice some of the dimensions get a little cramped and I have to rearrange the dim text to clear things up. Like Christopher, I am going to go back to maybe Arial for a planset or two. This thread follows my own desire to always make my plansets better and clear. But, I do like the "artsy" side. I also like to see how others do their plansets; thanks to all who have shared so far. Good thread.

I suspected that was culprit, but it did give us a good chuckle from a strenuous day.

I was thinking the same thing. There is no finished floor for the framers to work from.

I would say that's an improvement!