johnny

Edit - I guess reading your post again you're actually looking for something like Dropbox or Onedrive. There isn't collaboration tools in Chief like other apps.

My team services a multi-state large home builder in the Northwest. We have drafters, architects, and engineers. We'd like to hire a part or full time drafter who has a strong background in knowing how US homes are built. We aren't primarily looking for pretty pictures...we are looking for ConDocs working with our engineers. We work completely in the cloud and have a refined communication system. We do have physical offices (though most people are able to work from home due to COVID), but in this case we don't need you to live close to any of our offices - we can teach you our process through MS Teams or Zoom and you can work from any location. To special individuals who are seeking an internship with architectural licensing options in the future, we do offer NCARB Intern Development Program (IDP). Initially we want to hire as a subcontractor, but over time if things work we can offer direct employment with benefits. If interested, please PM me through ChiefTalk and include your email and i'll respond that way. I'll give you far more details through that secondary communication.

I find it a bit odd they seem to skip 2018 in this list. Downloading older versions | SketchUp Help Download All | SketchUp

That is interesting...i've tried several models into Sketchup with collada and the textures come in just fine....so just FYI maybe there is some subtle issue - but if the whole system works for you then I guess it works.

I'm curious why you're trying to get to an FBX file in your process? You can export from Chief to Collada (as you do now) and then import that right into Sketchup and its a pretty clean file without the 3DS issues. I do wish Chief exported FBX directly for other reasons, but unless you plan to use the file in Unreal Engine or other gaming software I don't see the point of adding that step....but i'd love to hear your reason. Perhaps there is some other advantage I'm not aware of. Another thing i'm trying is using Vray with Blender which I find is WAY WAY better to organically shape terrains. Not only that but Blender is free and very robust.

Do a search on PBR inside Chief....if you're talking actual photo grade where you can't tell the difference of a real photo vs rendering you will need to supplement with 3rd party software. Lumion or Twinmotion Ultra real = VRay

Nice work Yusuf. I'll always admit that Chief is a good tool to make pretty pictures - and I'm sure with tons of 2D work on the plan side it can work for ConDocs. What I will say is having used other apps for commercial work where the BIM model is also of a quality where you can cut sections and details that are representative of the actual assembly method, the idea of drafting 2D details in Chief sounds arduous....let alone the lag issues with such a file. I've completed some conceptual work for Commercial projects in Chief and it wasn't fun (compared with apps designed for commercial).

You used Chief for a large government building?...and "they" have their own copy of Chief to mess with the file? That alone is interesting.

I think the OP is talking about getting points snapped back into other points to delete extra point/nodes. If he just hits the new "simplify polyline" on the secondary toolbar (sometimes docked on the bottom of the Chief UI) shown in my pic it might help you. The tool is designed so you can get close enough and it will delete those "close" extra point/nodes. ...but yes, Chief has hordes of snapping problems.

So is my firm.

My firm runs 100% on the cloud - 16 team members including 3rd party engineers - and its the best thing we've done. You can easily slave a local drive location so files you're currently using are accessed from your own HD but it uploads back to the cloud as you work - with no interruption. If i wasn't working with a team I'm not sure the advantages of working on the cloud other than an auto-versioning and backup (which is nice).

I feel for you - I don't have one for CA but I can tell you i've put more time in certain projects on the site/storm plan than the actual house plan. Where I am its nuts too.

That is a good point..and if I was in my 60's looking at retirement soon it probably wouldn't make sense. I'm in my low 40's so i have some time to go...lol

Hi Glenn - Let me make a video to explain - i will post. JP

...or even take the inability to reuse complex elements from one design to another. Say I go model a timber-frame porch or stair-case and want to copy/paste in another design - not possible with Chief since we cannot block walls and other elements which are critical to the definition process of a "space".

I agree....and what I saw in the new 3D shape modeling and even the new section tool in x13 fits this bill exactly to your point. I watch a few different webinars from software companies and I'm always amazed in the Chief webinars how fast the questions devolve into "why doesn't chief do this" sort of questions. Kinda like the issue related to truss heels I think you brought up - and then furthered into why or how Chief thought it best not to measure a heal the way every other truss company does. This tends to happen when there isn't a solid resource the developers can use to ask builders, designers, or architects how something should work....instead they do it and hope its right.

Yes, it was on the framing demo - but the part i am talking about isn't adding a framing layer - that is cool, I agree...but one could argue it didn't make a lot of sense that wasn't possible before being the fundamental parametric way Chief operates would have made this a simple addition. Part of me is wondering if we can use this new layer to build cold/warm roof conditions or if its just setup to do purlins or skip-sheathing.

I can't blame Chief for moving forward supporting a tech that will become common in the future - even if its not today. Real time ray tracing is the future. Personally, I thought the demo they showed was overall pretty good as it related to the future of available rendering techniques. Now that some here have pointed out issues with the renderings, I hope Chief does correct it. That said, i'm disappointed thus far from what I see in other x13 update areas. Its like the added check boxes on the roof layer/surface to add air gap etc when we always had the ability just to add an air gap layer. Who is this designed for???...the non-professional? There are many other issues i have, but this just highlights a particularly odd addition. However you look at it, Chief is spending FAR more time on things that will sell new copies of their software to users that fit a target client which is not representative of my company, or many on this forum. They seem to be developing in order to make big splashes in sales booths or youtube videos wherein a few clicks blows the audience away and they open their wallets to buy a copy or two imagining they will ride off into sunset and save thousands by not needing a design professional any longer. The design professional needs better stair modeling tools, or generic solid modeling etc...not faster watercoloring renderings (again, as a for instance). My company has started a process of examining alternatives to Chief - and we're exploring ArchiCad in depth right now. We may have 14 copes of X12-X13 to sell...who knows.

Interesting - thank you very much. I guess in my mind I was mulling to get the casing to work, so I wasn't imagining this to be a mullion - but obviously by the operation that is exactly how Chief views it. This was very helpful.

I'd say not offset from the outside casing...but i know there is typically a small offset chief shows (which i'm not sure of the logic there), but what I have now is nearly void of material thickness in-between the upper and lower window. On your blue example to the right it does appear less drastic than the left...but when I mull the top and bottom window in the same file i get the same error. Are you doing anything to get a different result?

Every so often windows refuse to mull together correctly. Here is a recent example on a current project. Does anyone know what setting might cause this? Here is the sectioned area with the windows and some pictures. Thanks for any help.mull_issue.plan mull_issue.zip

You can create shapes like that fairly easy with boolean operations on solids - however, accurately controlling and adjusting those shapes is far more effort in my opinion than its worth. I hope X13 (which Chief said would be greatly improved in this area) will bring some needed relief for accurate shape modeling. (i suppose unless Eric did it some other magical way)

If this is just for fun the I suppose getting Chief to do back-flips can be entertaining enough. If this is going to be a real pool built from your plans I'd recommend using another app. There are free apps like Blender worth learning and then you can just export the model file into Chief as a symbol object to finish your back yard planning.

Lumion right now has far better lighting and visuals than Twinmotion, but its also far more expensive. I do feel in the future Twinmotion will be FAR better than Lumion but I dont know how long that will take. The hands-down best rendering for architecture is going to VRay - but the path from Chief to VRay isn't as smooth as Lumion or Twinmotion.