Alaskan_Son

Control+Tab followed by Enter is a good alternative.  

1 hour ago, chiefjone9 said:

I totally get your frustration—I'm also using Home Designer Pro and often hit the same wall when features are only in Premier. I haven't found a way to reshape stair handrails in Pro either, just balusters and newels like you mentioned. I usually search with “Home Designer Pro only” plus the feature name on both YouTube and this forum. Would love to know if anyone else has a better search method!

honestly, the best method is to avoid using this forum unless absolutely necessary, and just stick to the Home Designer forum.

Use the HomeTalk forum instead…

https://hometalk.chiefarchitect.com

12 minutes ago, OGDesigner said:

Alaskan_Son, This is brilliant and worked like a charm! Is there a reference to writing these operators?

 

Me!

Joking

Okay, Not joking ...

Its tricky because you have to use both Ruby (programming language) and Chief which are 2 entirely different and separate constructs.  You can use any number of online resources to learn how to program in Ruby including the actual Ruby documentation, the StackOverflow forum, and even ChatGPT...

...But then you also have to learn how to use the various tools that Chief has given us to work with.  This is where it gets tricky.  There is a lot of nuance and interplay between the 2.  We have certain information in Chief that we can access and parse, various ways to access and parse that information, and some (but not all) of those ways can optionally use Ruby.  Chief has quite a bit in its documentation about built in name:value pairs, special built in Classes and Methods, and other text macro stuff, but has very little about actual Ruby programming (and rightfully so).

If you're serious about custom macros and otherwise using Ruby to access and parse information in Chief, it is well worth the effort to pay for an hour or 3 of consultation/training time.  You'll save yourself many hours...days..even weeks of otherwise unnecessary experimentation. 

Use a simple Ternary Operator:

%height > width ? height : width%

...or put into an Array and use the max method:

%[height, width].max%

14 hours ago, Renerabbitt said:

not just objects. text size for instance, number height on dimensions, , basically many input you had in inches will be wrong, some do convert correclty..it really is a ton of work

Yeah,  I don't get it.  It seems like it would be an easy thing for Chief to just make the calculation conversion internally, but clearly its not that simple or I know they would have done it already. 

38 minutes ago, Chrisb222 said:

 

Thanks Steve. I was just going to not respond to that since I like to keep positive energy here, and couldn't tell if it was sarcasm, humor, or a serious question. It seemed obvious to me that I was showing the Chat image simply to illustrate a desired aesthetic - I even indicated it was altered architecture... who would want that?? I guess I have a blind eye and lack human intelligence.

 

At any rate, it was really surprising people would think I was actually willing to sacrifice model accuracy for a pleasing rendering. Whatever, but thanks for the support. 

It was a totally serious question and you seemed to acknowledge its legitimacy in your last post where you seemingly admit that its a problem.  Just like me, I'm sure you have seen countless examples of AI changing crucial details (not only in renderings but also in simple text).  People gush about how great the results are and many times don't even realize the extent to which the end result has been changed.  

And when you mentioned "(altered architecture)" it was proceeding "heavy demand time" so I assumed it was a catchall phrase for the level of service you were using and could include material changes, landscape changes, trim details, and so on.  

Again, I really and truly was just curious if you care that AI changes things because you stated...

On 5/22/2025 at 12:01 PM, Chrisb222 said:

THAT ^ kind of rendering enhancement I would welcome.

It's a hard pass for me though.  It's 90% cool, but that remaining 10% is a deal breaker.  It's not a useful rendering in my opinion unless its accurate and in just about every single example I've seen to date AI does something either structurally or with lighting that I think would be a disservice to my clients no matter how pretty it looks. 

11 minutes ago, Renerabbitt said:

Pretty sure the unit conversions make 4" into 4mm upon import. It's a nightmare truly. I've tried many times to create my templates in imperial with every workaround I can think of. It's a ton of work

Yes. That is what happens if you bring objects over from imperial plans into metric plans.  Feels like it shouldn’t be necessary.  

...or just open up the camera and uncheck Clip to Room.  

If you set up the camera as a Wall Elevation, it will automatically clip the sides, bottom, top for you (Clip Plane) and it will Clip to Room which cuts off the view of anything beyond the defined room.  You can take advantage of the automatic Clip Plane behavior and just forgo the one Room clipping behavior though by unchecking the aforementioned setting.

Not sure man.  I think you might just have to turn on all your layers in a 3D view and start group selecting anything that didn't move with the room.

49 minutes ago, sea_lyons said:

Maybe I didn't do this properly. Opened a new Metric template. File>Import>Import Default Settings

 

This is what I get

 

 

I guess maybe I've never personally had to import settings between plans with different units.  I just assumed it would work like any other plan.  You're right though, Default Settings don't seem to carry over.  Now that I think about though, I guess it makes sense that Importing Defaults from a plan with different Units may be problematic (although I feel like Chief should be able to make conversions internally so that this type of thing is possible).  That being said, you can still Import:

• Saved Plan Views
• Layer Sets
• Default Sets (at least anything not store with Imperial Units)
• Wall Types
• Note Types

I tested in X17 and it appears to let you Import EVERYTHING but in doing some quick additional tests just now it does look like the Default settings (at least any that I noticed) don't actually carry over.  There's no message to say that they don't, but they don't.  I guess maybe just Import what you can, and adjust the rest.

9 minutes ago, Chrisb222 said:

 

Wholeheartedly agree. If Chief could produce a render as nice and fast as AI (on a Mac, tyvm), I would welcome a rendering upgrade. Otherwise, yes please just focus on fixing the lacking parametric objects, and giving us better tools for drawing plans and construction docs.

 

CA Standard Render, 1s:

 

CA CPU Ray Trace, 15 passes, 2:09m:

(I prefer CPU RT because it shows nice shadows of 2D plants)

CA GPU RT Ray Trace, 100 samples, 46s:

 

ChatGPT Enhancement, 2:41m during heavy demand time (altered architecture):


THAT ^ kind of rendering enhancement I would welcome. Otherwise, more meat and potatoes, please.

Do you not care that Chat GPT completely changed your house?

50 minutes ago, sea_lyons said:

We'll be friends again soon hopefully lol 

 

Yes, I've done that. But everything in the dialog boxes and my temporary dimensions still show up in imperial which is causing issues...

 

I was managing until I was trying to make a shelf 50mm in thickness/height. I can enter 50mm in the DBX but that automatically changes it to 1 15/16" - which I guess is actually 49mm? So I thought I'd add 1/16" or 1/32" of an inch - but that makes it 51mm on my elevation. I won't admit how many times I went back and forth on that one haha....

 

Long story short - I think I definitely need to start with a metric plan...

 

 

 

 

Ya,  it's definitely best to start with a metric plan if possible.  I think the best approach is to just open an empty metric template and Import all your various settings as desired.  Chief made this a lot easier in X17 but could still be done in X16.

That being said, the problem you're seeing is actually due to a limitation Chief has with cabinets in Imperial plans.  I've never been 100% sure why, but cabinets (and by extension shelves) are one of a very small handful of items that Chief limits to specific increments (in this case 1/16").  Most items can be set to a much more exact dimension without issue.  Try this quick experiment in an Imperial plan to see what I mean:

1. Draw a couple otherwise identical shelves using both the Shelf tool and a 3D Solid and enter "50mm" as the thickness for both.
2. Dimension each of the 2 "shelves".  You should see that the Solid will show 50mm and that the Shelf will show 49.21mm
3. Now open the dialogs for your 2 objects one at a time.  If your change your Number Style to Decimal Inches, you should see that although they both displayed 1 5/16", that they do in fact store more accurate values when Chief allows it (which they do for almost everything).  In the case of Cabinets though, Chief just happens to limit them to 1/16" increments.  Again, I'm not 100% sure why but I wish they didn't.

10 hours ago, CWCP-D said:

Like having a macro for the Assessor Parcel Number for example. Is there a way to set up a macro for that....

I've designed and otherwise helped set up a few different alternatives to the Project Information system that allow for the addition of as many project info. line items as you'd like.  Some are macro based, and some are not.  I'd be happy to help set you up with something as well if you'd like.  Just email me at alaskansons@gmail.com if you'd like to discuss further. 

That being said, one of the easiest OOB solutions is to simply add your Assessor Parcel Number as a custom, non-evaluated, user-defined Text Macro via Text Macro Management.  See example below where I have created an %APN% macro...

P.S.  This should be in the General Q&A section.

And the Match Properties tool is yet another good option.  

Looks like a faulty font.  Exactly which font is that and where did you get it?  I know you said sans seriff, but that's just a generic term for fonts without fancy tails coming off the ends of the strokes  There are a few that have leading issues like that, but that is one of the worst I've seen.  I would definitely just fine a different font.

19 minutes ago, Michael_Gia said:

 

I've perused many forums, Revit, Archicad, Softplan etc.  They all complain about the same stuff.

 

It could be all summed up with, "stop giving us new features and just fix the stuff that's broken/not working to our liking"

 

And all these companies know that only new fancy features is what maintains their client base and attracts new subscribers.

And we want that, because only a healthy wealthy Chief Architect can keep improving.

 

Chief's Room Definition paradigm is what allows us to go quicker than any other software of this type, from concept to 3D rendering and construction documents.

 

The downside is you have to get real comfortable with patching things up with 3D solids that are assigned their own layers.

 

Material lists are still inadequate.

 

Client 3D viewer is still half baked.

 

And this new File Structure is awesome but only if they implement a cloud version so we can really collaborate with others and even ourselves, since a lot of us are often on the road or abroad and use multiple computers.  Chief still assumes we are all sole proprietors, all hunched over our one computer in a basement somewhere with no internet.

 

I agree with almost all of what you said.  All except that last sentence. Believe me, Chief is fully aware of the need for collaboration between multiple machines.  I'm about 99.99% certain that one of main reasons (if not the main reason) for implementing Project Management in the first place was so that they could address some of these collaboration issues, more specifically with the goal of a managed cloud store so you eventually wouldn't have to import/export anything at all.

Can you post a copy of the survey?

9 minutes ago, 5FT-20Designs said:

Michael,

Not sure if this is best practice, normally unless there is a reason not too, I align a new building 0/90 degrees from the property line or the road.   I rotate the survey so the property line or road I’m aligning with is horizontal/vertical.  I then rotate the North arrow the same amount to maintain the correct quadrant bearings on the survey.

 

I believe DB’s suggestion will work for what I need.

That all sounds reasonable.  What seems odd to me though is that it sounds like you're essentially attempting to display the North Arrow angle in Quadrant Bearings, but that will only ever be N0°W (or N0°E).  It would seem that the text alone would suffice and that placing any extra lines or macros would be totally unnecessary.  Am I missing something?

18 hours ago, 5FT-20Designs said:

I have a text box referencing a hidden line to show the north arrow degrees. Is there a conversion similar to "to_i or to_f" that will change the degrees to quadrant bearing?

Currently the text box has %angle.round(3)%

Number style & CAD defaults set to quadrant bearing.

There's not simple one line method to do this, but can definitely be done with a custom macro and I can help set that up for you if you'd like.  

That being said, I would definitely need more information about what you're trying to accomplish though because quadrant bearings are defined according to North and so that angle you're trying to display should always simply be N0°W no matter what angle the line is at. 

3D>Camera View Options>Cross Section Slider

Ben is correct.  It seems that you are trying to accomplish something that is a mathematical impossibility.  The only way to have the same fascia height, the same overhang, and the same plate height (ALL 3) while at the same time have different pitches would be to use trusses and make the heel height taller on one section or the other.  With rafters its simply impossible.  

Next time, just draw the object right in elevation view where it goes. 

I don't believe there is any way to set a default for this.  I've actually meant to send in this request myself.  I think about it almost every time I change that setting but naturally, I'm always in the middle of something and forget to write it down.  I'm gonna send it in right now actually.  You should as well.