jtcapa1

Thank you guys, it was very helpful to see your thought process, and how to use these tree structures to customize the settings. I'm now more motivated to spend the time upfront to get the new custom default settings and pallet just the way I want, which will save countless hours on all future projects. I spend way too much time working to produce and not enough time learning these tools.

I've run into this many times, as I'm sure others have, but in my haste I have not learned the best way to work on a project that has more than one building on site. In this case I've got an existing CA file from a great client who wants to build a detached shop. I love showing how the two buildings will interact, but it is a *&% bear to work with both in the same plan file. What have others here figure out in terms of working on the 3d model, getting it just right then merging it back to the main plan file? How is that best accomplished??

Now that CA has gotten to be a very powerful 3d modeling & 2d drafting program, I'm finding that I am spending more and more time using the "out-of-the-box" programs specification dialog boxs to make custom modifications that are not already a part of my custom setup/toolbars features. Way to much time. The most recent example was simply trying to change the deck joist member 'type' from the default to a pressure treated LVL framing member. It used to be fairly simple. Now (IF I CAN REMEMBER) I have to do these steps ▼ Select the deck, then click... Open - Room Specification - dialog box Click the Structure tab & go down to Planks, Joist: & click the Edit tab (after unchecking the 'default' tab The opens the 'Floor Structure Definition' specification dialog box and go down to the 'Structure' dialog and under the cryptic 'Construction: Joists' there is a tab called 'Define' Click and open Define which bring up a new window called 'Framing Member Defaults Management', hunt around for a framing member called 'Deck Joists', but you won't find one?! Instead highlight 'Joists' and click 'Edit' Here is the new window called 'Joist Framing Member Defaults', highlight 'General' and under 'Options' - 'Role', click and select 'Deck Joist' Presto-Change-O we are finally at the location where you can select the hidden 'Options-TYPE' and select the joist type! My question is this: Is there any way to set up a hot key, or a custom Rabbitt toolbar icon that will just bring up the 'Joist Framing Member Defaults' dialog box?? Skipping 8 steps?

It was the OP's suggestion. Would have thought that was clear. Are you saying that it changed in X17? I've not checked.

I'll upvote that suggestion on single lines versus double lines for framing. I think there is a real good need for this option.

It is not that you are "dumb", trust me we all feel that way as CA continues to improve and suddenly we need to learn a new tool. It is no easy task to grasp the power and nuances of some of these cool tools unless you've got time to just play around, or your a savant like our beloved Rabbitt. Once you figure it out, you'll be amazed at what you can do to improve the visual quality of your 3d models.

I played around with using a double roof system. Like Rene, it was 'very very easy'...▼

Some clever work-arounds, but instead of a distributed region, couldn't the roof be created using a skylight tool?

Peals before swine. These are very subtle nuanced and another black hole of time. Most of my clients are not as interested in that level of detail. Looks like fun though.

Which image is which? Can you elaborate a bit more on your experience using D5 to finish your renderings?

I have some random crashes of X17 recently that gave and error message about disk space! Really! I have CA running on its on 1 TB SD drive. Nothing else. And now it has filled up? Crap. X17 has a lot of redundant bloat. Library files, backup files, archive files and duplicates of same. Sure, I got lazy and sloppy when it comes to managing all these folders and backups thinking I had plenty of space. I was wrong. Anybody else have this issue?

Like many of you, I've been taking advantage of CA's growing ability to accurately display building elements in 3d, and have moved away from Textures when I need that extra detail in a 3d rendering. I'm wondering if there are any simpler ways to achieve this look of a standing seam roof without inserting 3d models from sketchup, stretch them, rotate, space, rinse and repeat. This looks great, but takes far to much time.

That is very interesting Michael, I didn't think anybody was actually doing that. I've been offering 3d framing models to all my GC's or their guys in the field, but very few have used it. Partly because of the poorly written CA cloud viewer. I understand it evolved from a different idea, but if you have the right kind of viewing software and a powerful enough notepad, then it would be a great tool in the field. There is so much more information I've crammed into my models that never gets into the "clean" 2d documents. I'm convinced that as portable VR merges with AI very soon that is the only way they will be viewing our drawings and models. It is not quite there yet, but I'd love to see CA at the front of that technology line.

It depends on what your background is. I came from an old school Architectural office where all the documents were tightly controlled and scripted, back in the days of hand drafting ink on mylar. It was very tedious and often frustrating. Many old architects are rolling over in their graves at the sight of COLOR in permit and construction documents! *gasp* It took me a few years of working in Autocad once it started using color as a visual tool to distinguish line weights, when I started to wonder 'why not use color in my documents'? might help the permit reviewer's and contractors see things more clearly. It worked well and I never looked back. I really don't give a damn if someone thinks my drawings are cartoonish. Color brings a lot more information to the documents when combined with textures and materials. I stopped designing on paper and switched to designing using 3d models, as CA is fast and easy when it comes to playing around with ideas. Companies like CA and ACAD have worked hard to force the computer to look less like a computer rendered and more human, but I don't really think that is necessary. We need to evolve with the technology, and I honestly believe that the future of our work will not be ported down into 'dumb' 2d documents. Those will soon become a thing of the past. Keep an open mind and look forward, not backward. Cheers, -=JT=-

Rendr just put out another promo, that makes it sound great, even for clients to walk around the house. This came out today: