Alaskan_Son

Perhaps. Using images have a number of other issues even in standard views, but ignoring those for the moment, I actually use vector based views (both Vector Views and Watercolor with Line Drawing) for about 95% of the 3D views that I send out.

I personally almost never use this method. It has a few notable issues to contend with. One of the most problematic though is that the results are essentially useless in Vector based views.

Yes. You'll have the same problem. You'll need to marquee select still. If you convert to an Architectural Block or Symbol though, then there's no problem. Note that if you try to Explode the Architectural Block though that you'll have problems.

Just to clarify what Ben is talking about here and to confirm. You absolutely CAN completely get around the issue, not by marquee selecting the spline, but by marquee selecting the main polyline. In that particular plan, the real trick is how to select only the one polyline because not only do you have 2 overlapping polylines in that plan, but you also have the underlying picture box which is also the exact same size of shape as the 2 polylines. First you'll have to get that sorted and then it all works like butter. There are a few ways to separate the aforementioned items, but here's one... Group select all 3 using a marquee. Click again on the edge of the 3 objects while holding down the control key. This should reduce your selection to 2 objects. Drag those 2 objects off to the side a specific distance using the Tab key. It should become apparent which objects were separated now. If the object that remains is the picture, simply place that onto it's own layer, lock that layer, and then repeat steps 2 and 3 to separate the first 2 objects and drag just the one back into position. If the object that remains is the unwanted polyline, simply delete it, repeat steps 2 and 3 to separate the picture box and good polyline, put picture on locked layer, blah blah blah. The point is that you use the same tricks to separate the objects and get the picture onto the locked layer so that all future selections of the main polyline can easily be done with a marquee. Any changes to the size or shape of the main polyline would have to be done using boolean operations because selection with a single click is not an option. Again though, no problems at all when selecting with a marquee. Thanks for the tip @BenMerritt. I've never had the issue quite to this extent, but I have had some notable slowdowns with similar scenarios and I think this method may help speed things up a bit until you can get this issue addressed.

Just for whatever it’s worth: It doesn’t seem to be an issue with splines (other than the fact they may have been the original source of geometry) . I didn’t inspect in great detail, but it looked like all the polyline holes were made up of plain polylines (no arcs or splines that I noticed). I noticed that boolean operations seemed to be smooth and fast as ever if they are all done in succession (starting with the clean rectangular polyline and never de-selecting it). If however the polyline with multiple complex holes is de-selected and then re-selected we have the problems. Not sure what the deal is because I’ve done this type of thing many many times. Maybe I just never reached that number of segments in the contained holes.

He wants the displayed scale to change during this process.

One thing that can make a HUGE difference is Temporary Dimensions. Try turning those off before starting over or going back to modify the cutouts.

Ya, that's not possible. You're better off just sending them 2 files.

That's actually exactly what the %scale% macro does. It adjusts values to reflect both onscreen and printed scale. Give it a quick test...Place that macro into a plan view and send that view to layout at 1/4" scale. Now print that page to PDF TO SCALE. You should see that the scale on the PDF prints as 1/4 in. = 1 ft. Now print it to to PDF at 1/2 scale. You should now see that the scale on the PDF prints as 1/8 in. = 1 ft.

You should really be posting over in the HomeTalk forum... https://hometalk.chiefarchitect.com/?_fromLogin=CA3 That being said, Home Designer does have some options in this regard. Model your object using your available tools, take a 3D view, and then File>Export>Export 3D Model. You can then Import this same model as a symbol.

Just to be clear, what you're showing has nothing to do with the truss. It's a limitation with framing members. I do agree that it would be nice if we could edit framing members more freely though. In the meantime we have to trim them with other framing members to get the desired shapes.

It is controlled by the layer color. You just won't see it change if the camera is open. Send to layout or close the camera and you'll see the line color change.

If you ever want to share symbols with people using older versions, just open a 3D view and Export as 3DS.

Make sure to Open SYMBOL, not Open Object.

To expand on what Robert is showing, I would recommend: Dropping symbol into a blank plan Open Symbol and turn Smoothing Angle up to 180 Use Delete Surface tool to delete unwanted surfaces one at a time (turning Smoothing Angle up makes this much quicker) Click Tools>Symbol>Convert To Symbol

Sorry Doug, just got back to my actual computer and realized that I was being sloppy again and misread your code earlier. What you did was just fine. My bad . I should have waited till I was able to focus a little better. I'd love to help you if I can find the time. In the meantime, here's a quick little lesson on the house. Chief stores the height and width for your door as a Measurement in inches in Imperial plans (millimeters in Metric plans). In my original, sloppy, uncorrected version of %(width/12).round%, I was taking the width (in inches), dividing by 12, and rounding it to the nearest whole unit. So, for a 16'-1"(193") wide door, The actual result would have been 193"/12 (16.08333") rounded to the nearest whole unit (16"). The result would have been displayed simply as 16 (no unit indicator) if a person were to uncheck Use Default Formatting in the Label panel, but it would still be stored as inches, which is exactly the bad practice I was telling Doug to avoid. My corrected version of %(width/12).to_f.round% took the value (in inches), divided by 12, converted to a float (essentially a number that includes fractional values in decimal form), and then rounded that value to the nearest whole number. Note that a float is NOT a Measurement but a completely unit-less number. So the result would be 193"/12 or 16.08333" converted to a float (16.08333), rounded to the nearest whole number (16). Doug's correction of %(width/12.inch).round% took the value (in inches), divided it by a specific number (also in inches) and the result was a unit-less Measurement value. This is completely fine for this particular use case, but it should be noted that the result is being stored in a somewhat funky state because it's still a Measurement but has no unit. This is particularly weird if you try to add it to another Linear Measurement with a specified unit in which case you would get an error. In addition, you wouldn't be able to even assign a unit without first converting the result to a float. All this is a non-issue with your particular use case, but it’s something to think about while you’re learning the syntax and developing your own personal methods. I think a more logical, more correct, and more useful method might simply be %width.to_ft.round% which would simultaneously convert the inches to feet (no math necessary on our part) and convert that to a float. Using this same logic approach, a person could easily convert their door sizes to meters without needing to know the conversion with something like like %width.to_m% Anyway, there's a lot more to the Measurement class but it's really quite useful and can make very quick and easy work of otherwise complex calculations. Quick example: a = 1.ft + 1.m +1.in ----> 52.370079 in b = a.to_m ----> 1.3302 ...very quick and easy conversions. I could spend all day digging deeper, but those are a few of the very basic basics as they relate to this particular topic at hand.

Still away from my computer, but try this %12.in+12.ft% and see what you get.

Sorry, I just quickly tapped that out on my phone. Not at the computer. I wouldn’t recommend your solution as a general rule since the results technically store the information as inches (a very small garage door ) and getting into that habit could result in some incorrect values when used in calculations. There are other ways of storing an accurate value using .to_ft and there are tons of other approaches I could have taken, but using the original method I listed above, the safer syntax (and what I corrected my original post to say) is... %(width.to_f/12).round% x %(height.to_f/12).round% GARAGE DOOR

%(width.to_f/12).round% x %(height.to_f/12).round% GARAGE DOOR

It sounds like the OP is using HD but they’re showing a screenshot they found online. I’m away from my computer and don’t actually remember, but the HD product line may not even have the Centerline option. Best to post the question over in the HomeTalk forum... https://hometalk.chiefarchitect.com/

I typically just take a single camera, paint all visible elements with the appropriate colors, export image, paint with next scheme, export image, paint with next scheme, export image, etc. You may want to use multiple cameras to provide different vantage points but the basic idea remains the same. Cameras remain in fixed position. It’s easy enough to change colors once the client decides what they want. The problem with multiple files is that it’s a lot more problematic if you start wanting to change or fix little things since it would necessitate that you make the same changes to all versions of the plan.

By the way, just to be clear, I have no problem with exploring other software. On the contrary, I have used many programs in my workflow as do plenty of other users just like me. My statements were more geared toward our primary design software(s). Failing to stay current means not only that you're missing out on the latest tools but also that you're falling behind on the learning curve.

If I had the time or desire to do so? Yes. Do I have the time or desire? No. I can't even find time for paying customers these days much less finding time to donate. Besides, I would really need to spend time exploring your unique needs and workflow. Each user has different needs, but it has been my experience that the vast majority of users simply don't recognize all the areas where they're missing out or just doing things inefficiently. That's a funny statement. It's exactly this aversion to dedication that keeps anyone from ever mastering or fully realizing just about anything.

I don't even know where to start...honestly, I can't find the mental energy to even begin to break it down because there are so many little intricacies that come into play, but from the perspective of a professional kitchen and bath designer, a long time CA user, and a professional trainer, I can tell you this: If you can't see any reason to upgrade then 95% of the time it's because you're either not learning the tools very well or you're not using them very efficiently. When I'm hired to train, coach, or act as a consultant for a person or company using a Home Designer product line or an older version, I find myself almost constantly having to side note that there are much better ways to do this or that in X12 or that certain operations aren't even possible with their current version. If you do this for a living, I really think you're missing out by not staying current.

I could spend hours going over all the various intricacies and I have neither the time or inclination to do so; however you can totally accomplish what you're after with the various tools Chief has given us. Just to name a few things to get you started (some of which have already been mentioned): Using Layers, Layer Sets, and Layer settings to limit what is reported. Specifically, checking or unchecking Material List for any given layer tells Chief whether to include items on that layer in the Materials List or not. Using the Components tab. This tab controls exactly what any given item is going to report to the Materials List. Use the Add/Remove Line Item tools and adjust the Formula field for any given row to set exactly what you want reported. Using one or more Materials List Polylines. This can further isolate what exactly gets reported and from where.