Chopsaw

They should maybe think of that since their marketing team is going international. It is interesting in your example above that it does not follow the same default formatting as you get when you select "Use Default Formatting" for a label display, as when you tell it to display as a string. That seems to be more than just a little bit inconsistent. That really should have the default thousand's separator, should it not ? That is why I dumped the formatting all together and put what was required back in manually even though it is not a clean as I would have liked. This may have been a little better but still fails under 1,000 %area.round.to_s.insert(-10,",").gsub("sq ft"," pi.ca")%

Just don't go under 1,000 French sq ft with it or I will need to revise for you.

I may have made it more complicated than necessary... See if this causes any errors. PARK 1 %(area).to_f.round.to_s.insert(-4,",")% pi .ca

Give this a test run: PARK 1 %((area.round(0))*10).to_f.round.to_s.insert(-5,",").chomp("0")% pi .ca

Can they be changed to French Joe ?

Yes even spaces are critical but I deleted mine. Try it one more time and I will recreate if necessary.

It could be done a bit more elegantly with a user macro but try this until one of the guru's suggests something better.

Something like this perhaps ? My French is a little rusty.

It is really an image and can be set to be stationary or rotate to follow the camera. It works for most situations but not an overhead view. However there is something really off with it in X13. Mine actually did what yours did in plan elevation view as well as layout. I thought it might be a video card or video card driver issue but I see you have a RTX 3080 and and up to date driver ?

Did not have time to test much but check this : Or rather uncheck that. It definitely does not work the same as in X12. You may have found a bug. I would send that in to tech support and see what they say.

Is the tree shorter in layout or just skinnier ?

Also you will want to check your local restrictions. Some jurisdictions will not allow that type of creativity unfortunately.

Lots of different ways to approach that I suppose depending on the exact results expected. If you only need a rendering as good as the one you posted a material could be created in photo editing software allowing you to create several versions and edit the colors. Or as Rob just pointed out multiple wall material regions. However if you want some realistic profiling to the siding you would need to use polyline solids. If those siding profiles need to show wood grain then you are in for extra work again.

Try using the Perspective Floor Overview camera.

yezzzzir! Ok then set them to display the upper portion to match the other walls.

Yes. Just put them both in the same folder.

Are those Pony walls ?

When you export a .dae file there is a texture folder that is created at the same time so you need to transfer not only the .dae file but also the texture folder of the same name. I believe for Lumion to access them properly they need to be in the same folder.

It looks like you may have used "Water" which for some reason does not have a texture file associated with it. Any of the other numbered waters will work.

It may not be easy or automatic but I am sure it has been done before. Check your doorway width or post the file if that is not it.

Actually it is a little easier than I first thought... You just need a unicode left and right arrow. Try these: ◄────── ──────► Copy and paste.

Kinda silly that is not an option but I can get you this close if you think it looks ok.

Actually if you were plotting out cad lines freehand the way I do that might be a benefit to set at 7 1/2° or it might just be easier to turn off angle snaps altogether.

Sure, just draw what you need. You might as well draw your I beams as well so you get a proper section view. You might be able to find some bolts at the 3D Warehouse as threads are a little difficult to draw in chief.

Sorry, you did say that but it seemed you were a little quick to offer that as a solution when there was no reason it would not work properly using the right tools. There was some good advice given and some really bad advice as well. I have never had any luck with the Line Input method. It is a ridiculously frustrating tool to use. Also not sure Additional Angles is of any benefit when plotting out survey lines. However I would much rather talk about it than give out smarties and run away. ( not in reference to the participants in this thread though. )