VHampton

You're quite welcome. Foam moldings enjoy an incredibly long life span. A stucco skim coat should result in even further durability.

Agreed w/ Shayne. Foam molding would be the ideal solution. Many US companies carry basic profiles. But a company as Shayne pointed out would be the way to go. Draw the profile, and they will cut it. The fabrication is similar to a CNC machine for wood, except that it's cut from a foam block, and the tool is a super heated wire. Try this place below as well... Also located up North. Check out the video. The process is quite simple. It's also pretty amazing. https://www.mouldexmouldings.com/pages/our-process

Aside from the Jason's wise observation on the auto rebuild possibilities (which is the best place to start), here are several suggestions. Take an archived plan file from the manage archived plan file menu. Reduce the terrain. Lower the undo/redo number. Select a number of the larger 3D objects in the model and delete them. See if the plan speeds up. 3D objects Too many have potential to bog down any plan. Even smaller projects. Anything from the 3D warehouse should ideally come from CA... ...otherwise be on the lookout for objects that range between 5-10 Mgb with many "surface counts". If one introduces enough of those into the plan file, it's more work for the program. Terrain A large terrain perimeter can slow things down. It looks like there's a few acres of it in the model. Undo/Redo If the undo/redo number is set to anything above the single digits, it'll be placing a strain on the system. Each time you make a move, the system has to take a snapshot of that occurrence. Granted most computers come with ample memory these days, but 16GB graphics cards work best. So do machines with 64 GB of memory. The specs. appear such that 8GB of memory comes with that graphics card. By all means this is suitable for CA, but the above can certainly be of help.

You're welcome. Keep on Chiefin' On!

To add to your findings, a suggestion might be to make a copy of the outer wall, and change the fir framing to stucco. This works well in lieu of a solid railing with a cap. The rail wall appears to be all stucco.

Pretty outstanding. I was thinking the same. If there were only a way to make a second terrain. Anyway, I pity the fools who tell Mr. T it can't be done.

Yes... a duplicate of each backdrop. But they're the reverse images of each other. Since my inventory of backdrop image files contains reverse views, this is somewhat of a non-issue. Hopefully you'll find an easy fix. If Mr. T can get it to work however, then it is a bit of a mystery. Having said that, the duplicates should present a simple resolve the slight hiccup.

Have had the same issue on using image files for framed artwork as well. Meaning that they arrive into the program as being reversed. Solution... edit the photo w/ whatever photo viewer software you may have. Flip it horizontally. Then try a reimport for the backdrop.

This may help. The winders aren't coming to a point like in your plan, but the concept is there. The stairs can be modified to suit your floor plans. Our codes in the US don't allow them to converge so tightly. We need 6" of space at the narrowest part of the tread. By the way, the walls are invisible (glass) as they encompass the stair. For a better view. Good luck. It can be tricky indeed. Stairs.plan

...or perhaps the door in the current plan (made w/ computer A) can be added to the Library on computer B ?

That's actually not so bad. BTW... I do the same. Meaning set aside a rendering set on 11 x 17 for the views and leave the projects set on larger format. Presumably the PBR views use up every bit of the Tabloid paper size (less the borders and title block). Again 5 MB and 15MB total is excellent. BTW... I rarely get those numbers anymore because the camera views are static vs active. A typical set can get into the 50 plus sheet range after it includes structurals, mechanicals, electrical, schedules, and interiors. Throw in a PBR view, or live camera, and a full set can reach the 30MB range no problem. Pattern files are also known to skew the size. Over the years for example, I've learned never to use a "sand" fill for stucco. That can send the PDF print into some really wild numbers. Anyway... it sounds like the printing issue might be resolved? Hopefully tech support can help. Those folks are great.

Gotcha... and I agree. There are indeed steps involved. However... no matter how much memory one's set-up may involve, a PDF using live cameras can easily reach well over 30 to 50 MB depending on what the PDF is formatted to. Even an Active Camera view can increase the size of a PDF to the point where it can't even be emailed. In terms of the PIA in having to always resend images, that kind of comes with the territory to some degree. It helps keep the PDF size down for starters. Anyway, good luck with the tech support. Their findings may be pretty much the same. None of their sample plans even dating back to the earliest X versions has ever had a live camera in layout. That's primarily due to the memory issue which you're experiencing, and the increase to a PDF file. Printing multiple views of live PBR cameras can lock up almost any computer even w/ 64 GB of memory and over 16GB on the graphics card.

Observation... Live camera views on layout take forever to print. PBR's in particular. The original post says that you've got PBR cameras on the layout page. What happens when they (the live cameras) get sent to layout as an image file. Meaning keep all live camera views out of the bounds of the layout borders. The print process should be an entirely different experience.

With GPUs, the model number indicates some basic information about the cards. Here's the simple way to read them. - For Nvidia, their naming scheme is based on numbers. Let's take an RTX 3080ti for example. The "RTX" Letters at the beginning indicate the type of card that it is. Nvidia makes RTX, GTX, and GT type cards. RTX cards offer hardware-accelerated ray-tracing and AI processing features. GTX cards lack these features, but are otherwise fully-capable Nvidia GPUs. GT cards are typically marketed as display adapters and are not intended for gaming, generally speaking. The first number (30) indicates the series (generation) of card. Newer generations offer better efficiency and more features. Nvidia's last five generations were 9, 10, 16, 20, and 30. The second number (80) indicates the performance tier of the card. 10-40: Budget tier-- usually a GT card. 50-60: Mainstream tier -- good performance for most people. 70-80: Performance tier -- high-end cards. 80-90: Enthusiast tier -- Flagship, top-of-the-line cards. Finally the suffix Ti or SUPER refers to a "boost" in performance over the "standard" model of whatever card it is. For example-- a GTX 1080ti is a 10-series Flagship card. It's several generations older than the RTX 3060ti, but manages to match or beat its performance in many games. "80" places it in a higher tier. Back to the OP... Will a 4090 be fast? Absolutely. The question is, does the work require that kind of horsepower. Unless one might be making movies in Ray Trace mode, Chief runs quite well with a 3090. Everyday drawings and an occasional render may rarely result in GPU overclocking on a 3090. If renderings however are the primary output one's day to day work, then the 4090 makes sense. This from a 2020 tech article may shed some light on the 3090 vs. the 4090: "When fps are not CPU bottlenecked at all, such as during GPU benchmarks, the 4090 is around 75% faster than the 3090 and 60% faster than the 3090-Ti, these figures are approximate upper bounds for in-game fps improvements. The fact that the 4090 is currently the fastest performing graphics card available is reflected in its jaw-dropping MSRP of $1,600. Since PC gamers rarely buy AMD GPUs, Nvidia only have themselves to compete with. Surprisingly, $1,600 is actually reasonable value for money, when compared to previous gen. flagship cards. Prospective buyers will need a top of the line system to extract maximum performance from the 4090 and because of its monstrous dimensions, many will also need a new PC case. Consumers that demand value for money, should wait a few more months for the 4060 / 4070 models by which time AMD's 7900 series will also probably be heavily discounted. Alternatively, shoppers looking to buy in the near term should consider the last gen. 3060-Ti, which offers excellent real-world (1080p) performance at a fraction of the price ($400 USD)."

Presumably, the slab elevation is literally less than one step above grade and therefore no rails will be involved. If that may be the case, why not try invisible walls and call the "room" a slab? It seems like there literally is no deck, but rather a patio.

Incredible. Your knowledge base is amazing. Many of us old timers may only be using one or two tools of the Swiss Army knife by comparison. Which is perfectly fine, but what you've got going on there is MACRO in every sense of the word. My compliments.

PBR is a memory hog in general. Tech support will confirm. Maybe save that camera in plan - and send to layout as necessary - but again - only as an image file.

Suggestion... Keep the PBR viewport out of the layout sheet's borders. Save the viewport off to the side as a way to gain quick access to the camera which is set to update manually. Never have cameras set to refresh automatically. Send whatever that camera view is to Layout as an image. PBR's watercolors, active cameras, and even line drawing cameras become a fairly large memory request even with the most robust hardware when they live on a layout page. Secondly, even static camera views (on a layout page) can turn a PDF in an astronomical size when going to print. On CA's sample projects. there's not an active camera in layout ever. All image files. In sum, image files only in layout will shut this bad behavior down quickly. Hope this helps.

This is excellent guidance. When doing any big plan changes, it can be helpful to go to > Manage Auto Archives. ...and then do the "trial run" on the archived copy.

Apparently, this is a feature w/ another software. It would be great if CA could consider. Without naming the the product... it's called: the "spot slope annotation". Elevations will show the roof slope triangle. Over the years I've saved almost every CAD slope triangle in the user library, so no big deal. But as new bells and whistles are inevitably going to make their debut, this one more tool in the tool box would be very handy indeed. Thanks for suggesting Rob.

Agreed Maureen. The underside of an exposed deck can provide nooks for just about anything. The elevated deck in the image shows covered seating below, and presumably, it's water-proofed, with a soffit (which would eliminate bee concerns). 100% agree. The rail posts will probably want to be centered on the girder. It's common for a spliced connection w/ blocking and bolts.

Excuse the earlier posts about girder center etc... Just now realizing that the question was more about the "ladder framing" along the outer edge. Alan's sketch is exactly how it's done when the flush girder terminates the joists, but the deck framing needs to extend past the columns.

Edit... (as per Alan's sketch below). That Ledgestone is probably all non-load bearing veneer. With the girder (and post) presumably in the center of the column... The outer deck perimeter is probably packed out. In the same manner as one would do w/ rake boards at a gable end overhang.

A few suggestions... What kind of line weights are being used in the .dwg file? On average, anything in the 18 - 25 range is good. What output for the export is being used? Is it in inches or feet? That could explain the variation in line heaviness. Not sure. Lastly... The issue is not all that common. If for some reason, exporting as a newer version of AutoCad is an X-15 quirk, then "back dating" the export file could be a possible solution. Try sending the .dwg as an older release of Auto Cad. Like early 2000's.

If an older Layout has functionality when it comes to printing, that says something. Especially when all other projects files are printing ok - including the new layout. Rather than embarking on a journey down a rabbit hole, it sounds as if all went well. Glad that worked out.