Alaskan_Son

Not sure...I've never watched that video. Per my experience and understanding though, textures will retain their orientation with regard to a symbols origin/axis (i.e. the texture will move with the symbol). It works for me anyway. I know because I just tested with Antoine's situation and I've created pretty complex symbols in the past where the wood grain pattern is different on each and every face...and those patterns remain correct no matter how I reposition my symbol in the plan. Here's a quick example... Timber Truss.calibz

Yep...OR just convert your object to a symbol and the texture should "stick" that way as well.

How difficult is it to learn Chief on a scale of 1 to 10?? I'd say right between 1 and 10...and I'm not kidding. Totally depends on what exactly you need to do with it, how much you care about the little details, whether or not you will be using other software, what design processes or software you're accustomed to, your individual techniques and tendencies, your design and/or construction experience, your expectations in general as to what a 3D design software should do for you, etc. In general I think the guys above have about covered it. Its really easy to get started but can take a substantial amount of time to master. I totally agree with David...Study things till you really grasp them. If you don't fully understand something you're just going to continually get hung up on it later and it will likely affect your understanding of other processes as well. The Users Guide is really a valuable resource and is probably worth going through, and the Help files are invaluable as well. Take advantage of them. I'd also add one more note...You will likely learn substantially faster and more efficiently by studying, taking training classes, hiring a tutor, and/or watching tutorial videos than you will winging it and just using the forum. I've kinda done both and I have to say the best things I've learned that have proven to be the strongest foundation and best reference were things I learned from the Users Guide at the very beginning and things I've read in the Help files when I have questions. The forum is definitely a close 3rd but IMO should serve as more of a supplement and clarification source than as a main learning tool...although, you will of course also pick up value tips and tricks from the forum that you can't find anywhere else which gives the forum a unique value all its own. I just really recommend you avoid making it your go-to learning source. I think a lot of people do it and it really just slows the learning process in a lot of ways and can lead down all sorts of rabbit trails keeping people from learning things correctly.

As Rich said, turn on the reference display using either the little icon in his attached picture, by navigating to Tools>Reference Floors>Reference Floor Display, or by simply hitting F9. You can select any floor to be your reference floor by clicking Swap Floor/Reference (just below Reference Floor Display) to toggle between the floor above or the floor below...OR, what I often find easiest...click on Change Floor/Reference (Control+Shift+G)... There you can switch the current floor, the reference floor, the reference floor layer set, and a few display options all in one place. Regarding moving the entire building. You can usually do that pretty easily by using Edit>Edit Area>Edit Area (All Floors). Once you select the tool, simply draw a marquis selection box around the building and then use the move handle to move everything all at once. You can also optionally draw a closed polyline of any shape FIRST, then click on Edit Area while the polyline is selected and that polyline will be used as your selection area.

Chopsaw probably nailed it. Cameras will always display if the particular camera view is open. Don't worry though, they only display while they're open and won't print that way.

I'm away from my computer right now but what about exploding the dormer and putting the various components on a unique layer and turning that layer off?

I've never used Adobe myself so I'm not sure how they handle it, but I know there are a good half dozen PDF formats and various ways they can be printed/saved. Most dedicated PDF printing/editing software will allow the user to control those settings however I think that with many built in PDF printers those settings are preset and can't be changed. My guess is that you could get larger file output out of Adobe too by adjusting some of those options (embedded fonts/images/colors, searchable text, security features, encryption, form field support, layering capability, transparency, resolution, enhanced readability features, and many others).I'm thinking maybe Chief set their PDF printer up to maintain many features and capabilities (some of which we may not use or need) but I also think that as the creator of PDF that perhaps Adobe still has a few tricks up their sleeves that allow for more efficient file creation. I usually use Chief's built in PDF printer but I use Microsoft's built in PDF printer for my Word docs and NitroPro for most of my other apps. I think I have one or 2 other PDF printers installed too. I guess I've never really cared about file size because most of our layouts are fairly small. I imagine for many of you who produce large CD sets that file size is probably a notable factor. I might just have to test the difference in file size output for all the printers I have installed...might be interesting...or not.

I fully understand that. The thing is that you can still inspect the resolution of a PDF (or image) by zooming in just as you can inspect a picture with a magnifying glass. In the original 2 page PDF I posted notice how you can zoom in as close as you like and the quality of the text never seems to diminish? That's because the text is vector based and lossless or infinitely scale-able. Notice how the quality of the images become pixelated though? That's because they are raster based or bitmap. What you are seeing are actual pixels. Those will not improve no matter what printer you try to send them to. You are essentially seeing the quality limits or resolution of what will print. Now zoom in on the high res PDF I posted last. Notice how the pixels are much smaller? That's because it has a higher resolution ...more pixels per inch. What I am saying is that it doesn't matter what your monitor is capable of, you can still inspect resolution by zooming in and per my tests, the resolution of Live Views is barely (if at all) better than Current Screen As Image...at least with the PPI of my monitor. It sounds to me like you're basically trying to claim Chief's live views are somehow vector based and lossless...like they are somehow limited only by the resolution or dpi limits of the printer. This is simply not true or else the images in those PDFs would behave exactly like the text does and would remain smooth and sharp no matter how close you zoom in...but obviously it doesn't. Like I said, there's some sort of finite resolution limit to those non-vector based live views and I'm just curious what it is. I don't think it's really all that high. If it was, the file size of layouts and PDFs would be huge whenever there were any non-vector images involved .

This is exactly as I understand it as well. What I'm trying to figure out though is what dpi the live views are limited to. My PDF proves that its not unlimited. In other words... I know what the Current Screen As Image resolution is. It's equal to my current screen size. I know what the exported/imported image resolution is. It's whatever I set it to be. I DO NOT know what the Live View resolution is. It doesn't seem to be all that much better (if any) than what I can get using Current Screen As Image with 1920x1080 screen. Live Views obviously have some finite resolution limit when its not a vector based view and it would be nice to know what that limit is.

Actually, I PRINTED a PDF at 4,000 dpi which is a higher resolution than any physical printer I have access to. The PDF printer IS my printer and so I should get 4,000 dpi ouput...which should give us the absolute limits of Chief's Live View resolution (unless its higher than 4,000 dpi of course). Even when saving and viewing that PDF in the most optimized version possible (zero compression and no image re-sampling) I get the same pixelation. I can prove the PDF is displaying the limits of the 2 views' resolutions too because if you zoom in on the text on that first page you'll see that its lossless (no pixelation whatsoever). Just for comparison sake, here's an example of a "high resolution PDF" and I might note that the resolution requirements aren't actually all that high..much lower than 4,000 dpi anyway. SAMPLE PDF.pdf

Yep. It would be nice though. Mardie, here's a link to a suggestion that was made a little while back that could really help with situations like this. Maybe add your vote to that thread... https://chieftalk.chiefarchitect.com/index.php?/topic/9645-ceiling-grid-tool-for-us-light-commercial-users/?hl=grid

I'm not sure this is entirely accurate or it could at least use a little clarification. I just tried printing a PDF at 4,000 dpi and the ouput of both the Live View and Image are dang near identical. See the attached PDF. Page 1 is the Live View and Page 2 is the Image. If you zoom in, the pixelation doesn't appear notably different between the 2. Test.pdf

I think you may be right. At first glance, the printed output of the 2 methods looked pretty similar on my end but on closer inspection, the "Live View" actually does appear to have a higher resolution than Current Screen as Image. I haven't personally had issues with blurriness because as Perry said the live views print just fine (at least for my uses). I was just trying to confirm to the OP that the export /import method is the only way to increase resolution for images and that we can't control resolution when sending DIRECTLY to layout (which may be only partially accurate depending on screen size?). This has got my curious though now...At what point or screen size does Current Screen offer a higher resolution? Is there a specific resolution that Live Views print at? And to hopefully clarify a little, it looks like we do have partial control of resolution (depending on screen size?)... Lowest resolution...Current Screen As Image Medium resolution...Live View Highest resolution...Export/Import Is that correct Dermot? And if you can clarify what resolution that point between medium and high is that might be helpful.

I personally don't use hatch patterns for this type of thing. I'll typically use polyline solids, solids, or linework. Here are a couple of videos I made a while back that might give you a few ideas. They were made for ceiling grids, but the same basic principles could apply. Elevation views are usually a different story. You can usually just adjust the material definition to get what you're after...

I think like Perry you aren't fully reading the post. He actually only did this is a workaround to achieve the desired higher resolution. He did try sending to layout normally first. I guess I assumed he tried as a live view. Maybe he didn't. This may or may not be part or all of the problem. The OP may have been inadvertently sending Current Screen As Image not realizing a live view may print cleaner than the image...which may or may not be true (the printed results of those 2 methods look nearly identical on my end but that may be due to my screen resolution...I'm really not sure).

"...Your information is just wrong here..." Please tell me how my information is wrong sir. Do you know of any other way to increase the resolution of an image sent directly to layout? And you can't say you don't need to increase the resolution because that's the entire point of the thread. Images sent to layout are PRINTING too blurry for the OP's tastes. "...The post says nothing about printing..." The title of the thread is "Sending perspective view to layout. Prints Blurry" AND there is an attachment with pictures of printed pages. "...If I were the op, I'd try to actually print one and see..." ???? ???? I give up. You win.

I don't know why you have such a problem with me Perry, it seems like you're always out to prove me wrong for some reason. You are absolutely correct that images sent to layout will usually be blurry until printed, but... Just look at the attachment. It is a picture of 2 different PRINTED proofs.

He said they are blurry when sending to layout as opposed to importing the image to layout. If you look at the attachments and put 2 and 2 together I think you'll realize he's talking about how the images appear on paper afterward. They are blurry when the image was sent directly to layout but are sharp when the picture is exported and imported at a higher resolution. He's asking if there's a way to send directly to layout at a higher resolution to avoid the export/import process and as far as I know, the answer is no.

The OP is talking about blurriness in images printed to paper. See the attachments in that first post. I think using the export-import option is the best way to get increased resolution but I'm not sure I understand the need for that extra cropping step. All you should need to do is resize the picture box once its in layout and/or export with a transparent background.

You bet. Glad you got it figured out : )

If you're applying your material to a contoured terrain you're going to have distortion problems. You may want to apply it to something flat.

Maybe check out this post in another thread... https://chieftalk.chiefarchitect.com/index.php?/topic/9742-arrows-and-text-on-3d-views/#entry88394

You should probably post the plan but... I'm guessing the "Cannot find" item is sitting somewhere in your plan where the program can't tell where it belongs. Re: the rim joists, I'm guessing that maybe you created copies of a rim joist and so that's how they're reporting. And re: the names, I believe those are automatically created by Chief based on where they are created and I personally don't know any way of changing them other than clicking on that item in your material list and simply changing the name there.

Would be best if you could post the plan but... It looks like you're trying to snap to a roof plane baseline. I can't seem to set a dimensions directly to those either so there are a few options that come to mind: A. Dimensions from the edge of your roof plane to something else and then drag the other end back to your baseline. It should snap this time. You can MOVE a dimension TO a baseline, but for whatever reason it doesn't seem to pick up on it during initial dimension creation. I run into this same behavior on a number of other items as well. I've gotten used to it but I suppose maybe I should be reporting it. I probably will next time. B. Use Point To Point dimensions C. Draw CAD lines and dimension to those. D. Turn your wall layer on, dimension to those and then turn the layer back off. Hope that helps.

As far as I know, the only way to have your material list automatically generate what you're looking for is to manually place breaks in your plate material so that each piece of lumber is shorter than the longest material available in your Structural Member Reporting dbx. You could actually place the breaks exactly where you want them and place extra studs where you want them too and both your model and material list could be extra accurate but I think that's kinda crazy. I think its best to manually modify the material list instead and leave those plate breaks to be decided in the field. I think the bottom line is...Either manually modify the model or manually modify the material list.