johnny

This is an example of like-for-like drafting of a 2D shape in Chief by Rabbit (who i respect a lot) and in Vectorworks. I think this highlights well the 2D differences in an example that occurs regularly. #1 in Chief.... #2 in Vectorworks...(sorry i used teams to screen record, if I do this again i'll try and use something better) I’ll add that even though I’m working in 2D, in Vectorworks the behavior carries directly into 3D. If I extrude this shape, the 2D geometry remains fully editable....so I can adjust the underlying 2D lines at any time and the 3D object updates automatically. Also, if there are multiple instances of this shape in the model, I can modify all of them by making small edits to the original with no need to duplicate or reposition anything. That level of flexibility really starts to leave Chief Architect behind, and highlights how effectively 2D editing can drive precise and efficient 3D results.

100% agree. To me I dont even understand why they don’t fix this since its seems like such low hanging fruit.

Very true statement

+1 I fully agree with the suggestion...but i'm curious Joe, are you using the specific client selection of fixtures inside your ConDocs? What you're saying makes sense regardless of your answer, but i was just a bit curious. FYI i think this was meant to be in Suggestions.

Ah, good catch. When I looked into this detail, I noticed that the (4) target line is positioned behind the fill used for the truss. That said, fixing the layering would only address part of the issue. As a general practice, I instruct my drafters to avoid crossing the target line with other elements whenever possible. In this case, the (4) should be placed above the other numbers on the left side. I’ll have them correct it.

Thank you. The font is Universe 45....we probably spent 40+ hrs looking at different fonts and arrived to that one due to its ability to read well at full-size 1/4 scale Ansi D but read very well still with the same layout 50% or 11x17 (Ansi-B) while simply using the print function out of Chief for those two sizes with no different template required. Rendering? Don't you mean real photo? ...lol...no, you are correct it is a rendering though the actual home turned out exactly like it. We export out of Chief into Blender, add elements like landscaping, trees, and hard surfaces and a Corona plugin that lets you use it for Blender. We then run it through a quick AI detail opimizer which just puts the finishing touches. Before you bother with all that, I do believe in the short future all this will be for not. I've seen my team do some crazy things with just AI. I'd say the only reason we still use a strucutred path is to get predicability and fine controls over the end render you don't have with AI.

Joey does great work, but just to show you another "format" ......for this project we do a full size plan set and then a detail workbook (letter size) for supplementary reference/details. Its a method where you can provide details for reference with different conditions we may not have thought of. However, we do a completely different interior spec/detail workbook but I can't provide on this project here in the forums. This is arch only. FC_WALKER_PLANS_ANSID_5_18_2022.pdf Walker_Detail Packet.pdf

I want to say (as i wish someone made this point clear when i started).... Depending on the complexity of the homes you’re working on, this transition can feel rough at first. About 80% of the process will genuinely impress you...you’ll find yourself moving faster than you expected and wondering why you didn’t switch sooner. The other 20%? That’s when you’ll be tempted to throw your computer across the room. You’ll quickly hit moments where you question whether it would be faster to go back to your old software. But then you’ll remember just how efficient that 80% felt, and going backwards won’t be very appealing anymore. It’s a constant push and pull. Some things will surprise you....in both directions. The 2D CAD and generic 3D tools can feel shockingly limited, yet at the same time you’ll be amazed at how quickly you can assemble complex roof structures. You’ll turn to the forums for help and find one of the most responsive, genuinely helpful communities out there. But when it comes to advanced problems, the solutions often aren’t straightforward....they’re clever, sometimes obscure workarounds rather than direct modeling approaches. However, its best just to accept...."this is the way". You’ll start to realize that the software can do almost anything....but not always in the way you expect. Often, the solution involves using a tool that seems completely unrelated to the task at hand. Over time, you build a mental library of these techniques, and that’s when things begin to click when you can triangulate answers to your own solutions. Just make sure to recall the pythagorean theorem when trying to solve your probelms. There are strong invisible forces at work in your model space that have some setting in some part of the app that can help or wreck you. In most BIM applications, you directly model the exact thing you want, step by step...which can be precise but also tedious. This software works differently. Think of it more like a dance partner.......when you make the right moves, it responds in kind. Once you understand how to guide it, you begin to unlock a level of automation that makes routine tasks incredibly fast. That’s when the real value becomes clear...even if you arrive there a little begrudgingly. In the end, it’s very much a love-hate-love relationship. Good luck.

Its called "vertical plank siding"...and i'm nearly positive it's in the default Chief library under "Vertical Paneling" or something like that.

I should have added that all the notes, CAD, and callouts which don't flip with the plan. Obviously the plan flips so does everything else in a live view. Its just we have all those extra things so the box beforehand makes it easier.

We developed a fairly efficient method by first drawing a bounding box around the outermost X and Y elements, then placing a centerline through that box. From there, we perform an area select (grabbing everything), and use the mirror tool....excluding the box and centerline from the selection. This process is repeated for all elements that need to be mirrored, including sections, elevations, and any other drawings. It’s a bit faster than other approaches, though not perfect. One advantage over the "reverse plan" tool is that it generally keeps the page layout elements in roughly the same position. Overall, it’s the most effective method we’ve come up with so far.

I'm curious if anyone has successfully found a way to publish material list data inside Chief as a schedule?

You’re better off investing your time in learning how to move from Chief to an AI-based, controlled rendering workflow. That’s clearly where things are headed, and after a lot of research, I’ve figured out how to get predictable, controllable results from AI rendering. It’s too complex to fully explain here, but once your node matrix is set up, you can re-render new projects in under 30 minutes (with adjustments) for a perfect 4K output. The challenge, for now, is training yourself to control the AI and build a consistent workflow. In my opinion, learning Lumion or Twinmotion this late in the game isn’t worth the time, and I say that as someone who knows both tools well.

I think it would help if you found an example or sketched something to illustrate. When you say "walls to create a shed below" really threw me.

100% agree. Dare I say next to impossible to manipulate effectively post union. Not to mention, if you plan to do any wood texture for a rendering etc you have to have a texture per direction so per wood member (which kinda sucks). I really wish we could build wood structures out of framing members (which auto rotate the texture).

I'm noticing that I can't use both the automatic (follow me) sun with added user lighting. Is this correct?...or is there a method of getting both? Thanks!

That does look good - i'll try.

Overall kinda works - but the corners are a problem. I can't seem to get the wall intersection tool to miter the corners.

....and then just manually put posts in after? I guess that would work. Thats too bad there isn't a way around this to have my cake and eat it too so its automatic.

Is there a way to get a custom fence panel to run through the posts?

Thank you. I was looking in the roof Dbx and simply couldn't find it....now I know why.

I'll admit, I haven't used this condition in a while, but I have a project where I need to do the boxed eave gable end returns. I remember in past versions of Chief this was just a few clicks. Now, I can't seem to find where that option is. I remember you could even set it to hip-return that little roof section. Did they remove this feature?...or am I just missing it.

Laptops habitually overheat and thermal throttle - specially with the GPU. You want a laptop that is full body aluminum and uses that body as extra heat dissipation. The best i've found thus far is Razor Blade. Build quality is A+. 16-Inch Gaming Laptop with Fastest OLED Display | Razer United States and i upgraded to the UHD+ (3840 x 2400) so i could get 4k - makes a huge difference on drawing sizes using the laptop screen. Read about the thermal aspects - and I can attest to it 100%.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but the further you increase those lower wall heights the less "A-frame" the home becomes. Just wanted to point out obvious fact.

Hi Glenn, My window separation default is set for 3" (two 2x6) - and if I start a brand-new file (directly from Chief's template) the window default mullion depth action works fine when "bump" two or more windows together. It uses whatever casing depth i have set. What's happening (i believe) is there is a legacy file bug issue happening. If we had the ability to set the mullion depth by default I could fix the problem, but since that option only is available upon manually mulling the windows....i basically have to mull each window set to resolve the problem. I was going to reach out to Chief's tech support on this issue.