VHampton

You are most welcome ~ and welcome to the forum. As a brief observation, you may notice that most members list their software versions as well as hardware spec.s It's sort of an unwritten signature request so that others can be of assistance for future questions. Sometimes the answer to a situation may or may not not apply based on whatever version is being used. Anyway... all the best! ~ and glad that your minor issue got resolved.

As a former DELL user... their gaming computers are simply made for Chief. I still have my old ones. The best thing about PC's (and DELL) in general is they're like being able to work on an older model car. Adding memory and extra drives is relatively easy. The NVIDIA card also enjoys a long history of being quite compatible with Chief. That was years ago however, and AMD does an equally great job. (It just needs to be in the higher series according to the current system recommendations). So in sum, it may essentially come down to the graphics card. If that piece of hardware has robust horsepower, you will be all set for everyday Chief use and more. For what it's worth, the option for additional memory may not be necessary, but what's helpful is that you can multi-task in the background while a render is underway. The 64 GB option probably in the hundreds of dollars for the increase. Consider it a business expense - which it is. (It can always be added at a later date as well). Good luck with your decision making. It sounds as if the services which your firm provides may not require the highest end of the spectrum (based on the quote below regarding occasional renderings only.) But then again, this is your office computer vs. a laptop. It should be reliable for many years to come. On a side, renderings can be expensive to outsource, particularly at a cost for several hundred dollars for a single view. If one were to make enough of them, or want to explore that type of offering with various software makers, the machine will literally pay for itself. Interestingly, the most expensive of the (3) options is being offered at a $1,000 discount. Surely that's an offer worthy of serious consideration. The hardware on that model is literally above and beyond, and while you may not need it, Chief will run extremely quietly in the background with that kind of a system. It should be excellent for many years to come. This article below may help with some insights on the Ryzen vs. the Intel. It's kind of like asking if a Ford Mustang will outrace a Dodge Charger. They are both incredibly fast. The price variations which you appear to be muling over are both under $3K, and yet in the general same range ($2399 vs. $2699). The findings in the report may help to offer become insights on why that few hundred dollars more could be worth the investment. If possible, and budget allows, the slight premium is worth it. https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/ryzen-9-7950x-vs-intel-core-i9-12900k/

The hole in the wall is easy. Seems like you got that covered. Window pass-through vs. door may be better in the future - meaning making it as follows, with: no casing no sill no frame no sash For the floor hole (or going through slab) maybe just draw the PVC pipe as a "solid" and show it come through the floor? It will "read" as a hole in the floor (in plan view) as a result of the 3D solid being created.

There is a plausible answer per Chopsaw. Export the X15 plan file in a perspective overview as a 3DS model. Save to desktop. Import the 3d model into X12. It will render. One can also take camera views in any format... line drawing, clay model, and whatever. The module behaves just like an actual plan file except that it's frozen, meaning no way to adjust.

Same... right up until a recent project. It feels strange in having to use that input. Sears and Roebuck is the where the term was "master suite" was coined from. Big Ass Bed Room sounds much better, but since "primary" is the new norm. ok. lol

Per the ever wise Yoda, it's easy enough to call any room whatever you want. To date, Chief doesn't have: wine room home theatre media room W.C. shower pantry linens chimney mass HVAC duct Elevator steam room sauna pool bath outdoor shower Rooms which we all typically use, but they're not there on the drop down menu. On a side, does anyone still use the designation "Master Bed Room"? I noted in both X14 and X15 that it isn't there anymore. Probably because CA doesn't want any issues with possibly using an insensitive term. We live in a politically correct part of the US and even though every house has an entourage of staff, and live in help (au pairs), the new phrase is "primary bedroom" vs. Master which is consider a no-no. Even the home improvement shows have stopped using it.

Balcony is the best method. Won't count towards living space. Builds like a room. Has ceiling but no base boards. Change flooring to deck boards. Nice and easy.

https://www.dezeen.com Best architectural reference website on the web. The designer for that is really interesting.

So if you go to the cad shapes, there is an option for hexagons which can be made 12 sided or more. The design looks like it gets split in half and then the center point is extended. I see what you're doing. I would try an auto-roof on a pure geometrically shaped deck with headers. In other words, build that roof in a new plan, and make it perfection. Valleys all equal and fascias all at the same height. Then copy and paste, and drop the new roof over your slightly irregular footprint. Manually adjust the valleys to bear down on the offset center support. It's a cool idea and highly unique. You'll get there. My thoughts are that the valleys and pitches want to be the same for the most part. Your drawing shows a constant fascia height. Making varying pitches means that the valleys get set higher and lower. It's gonna get tricky. Something needs to be a tad uniform.

Each facet (fascia) on this thing wants to follow the outside wall... which means that the inverted valleys should be all equal. On the drawing, they can come from each outer corner of the gazebo. Meaning that the valley rafters land on the outer posts obviously. The center of the gazebo is offset and that's where the valleys get extended and make this a unique challenge. Either way, it's do-able. Framing flat looks like the design intent would be different... since the "look" appears to involve a funnel-like feel from the interior.

Thanks again Ryan. I noticed that... meaning X15 runs like a top and without Rosetta. Regarding the OP's post... knowing the operating system can be helpful as well as CA version. It could be an X14 issue. ...anyway, thank you for visiting the forum. It's always reassuring when staff and software managers are monitoring the posts. All the best ~ Val

This was a Staff recommendation:

That's interesting Ryan. Thanks for tip. A user in another thread had recommended this method, and the glitchy rendering behavior calmed down. I'm going to turn it (rosetta) off and see what that does.

A similar question has come up with other users when trying to render, and using Rosetta has been the fix. Go to Applications. Find Chief Architect. Right Click, and click on the "Get Info" option. Good luck with that ~ and welcome to the forum.

Interestingly David, on one computer there were zero issues. Another had the error messages. It must be fluke of som e kind.

Same here - meaning same findings as tundra_dweller. Wound up opening Chief data base libraries in X14. Made a copy of the folder and saved to desktop. Opened Chief data base libraries X15 and removed data base library folder. Moved X14 data library into place. Bingo. All good. Observation... when setting up X15, most but not all library items made the transfer. My user library did not. That's why I had to go this route. Other have reported the same. Note: After going through this somewhat unique library transfer, allow some time for X15 to "load" all of the data. It takes about 5 or more minutes, and then everything should be fully stocked and ready to go.

If you know it's bullet proof, then all good. Either way, more often than not, it's a great idea to have that peace of mind, not just for the designer but for the owner. Each state can vary regarding the need to have a licensed professional provide review and approval. But when a building department is asking for certification of load bearing, whether it be lateral or gravity loads, it means that they don't want to assume the burden of risk.

Hi JT, This is just a caution on assuming risk, which you don't want and shouldn't have to take on - merely to benefit your client. The waiting period is not within your control, and this should not be a burden placed squarely on you. If something goes wrong with the project, are you willing to assume the cost and nightmare of having to remediate an issue? Don't do it on your own even if you have the know-how. Your client should be respectful of that. You will also thank yourself later in case anything happens like a once in a blue moon windstorm and the house experienced some lateral movement. Having said that, see if you can get an engineer. There must be more than a handful in your area. Many surveyors have engineering resources in-house. The ones who design septic systems usually also have civil backgrounds. My two cents... all the best.

You're quite welcome. As you become more immersed with the program, the imported texture files can be quite handy. Chief has a wonderful library, but on occasion, new found textures can take the 3D models to the next level which needless to say, is often quite important.

DB is correct as always. The library has scalloped shingles. See example. I chose the blue and colored it yellow. Texture and color have been made to be in sync so that the blue shingles would be a taupe. Or... you can find a texture by going Google images. Import a jpeg for bmp of your choice to a folder and save. Then just change the texture for your rendered view by browsing textures and going to the saved folder. Attached are examples of : A.) a colorized chief texture and B.) the imported texture option. BTW... (Are you using the tool which looks like a rainbow?) That's the one to use for clicking on a material when the camera view is open, and for altering the properties. Also... welcome to the forums. Just noted this was your 1st post. You may want to add to your signature (using X14 and computer hardware) for future help. It's sort of an unwritten protocol so that folks can be of of help in case that would assist them in troubleshooting. Many good folks here. ~ all the best.

This has been an X14 issue to a degree as well. Zoom extent. ...or you can say "come out come out wherever you are", and then hit zoom extent.

Yes... the dots per inch reduction is a huge help, even if the reduction won't necessarily blur the PDF print. I have an old trick... Since a PDF (printed by Chief) can be customized. I made a custom 4" x 6" email size many years ago. This way, the resolution can be in the 600 dpi range, and if a client or whomever is looking from an iPad, the results are super crisp. This also knocks the digital print down to a range where even a 40 or 50 pages set can be mailed. This is with the full understanding that the receiving party won't be printing! Just viewing. With the cost of prints these days at over $3.00 for a colored 24 x 36, most GC's and their subs just share via email, and use BlueRay to do take-offs. Even the 11 x 17 colored client prints are pricey. The paperless method also keeps Greta Thunberg happy. Thanks for the extra info... It's always a pleasure to keep gaining more perspective. I've been using Chief since 2000, but you can never learn enough. Thank you!

I preferred the original format as well. But it was easy enough to arrange the settings to the "old" way. You just gotta be careful to avoid inadvertently dragging your mouse over each 'box" because they can get shifted out of place easily. There's definitely an upside to the new one however. For example, when it provides options to downloaded things which might be available at the Digital Locker.

Thanks Joe. I never send PDF's to layout either. They never even get saved to my plan files. But you are 100% correct. (I think you may not have completely understood what we were going back and forth over). What I was doing is sending a 'static' camera view to the layout page only (and keeping the live viewport out of the layout boundaries). Along the lines of what you are saying, the "live" camera view should never be saved in layout. Just the image file. Otherwise, when going to print, the PDF becomes enormous. Static views and jpegs will hold the Chief Architect PDF print as low as 10megabytes or less on average. Thanks again Joe. I remember you from the old days, and from the original forum from when Tim was one of the original Jedi's. Your words of wisdom are always appreciated. All the best ~ Val

Thanks again Jason. Yep... back in X1, the 1st time I sent a full viewport to a 24" x 36" sheet along with a handful of other view, the Chief Architect printer made the PDF to something way over 50MgB. I couldn't even email it. So this method of saving the camera "image" views on a layout is great, because the when the project is printed, the size is significantly reduced. Anyway.. .should anyone be reading this thread in the future, they may pick up on a good tip, ...aside from learning that the X15 download may not introduce all of your older X14 data. That's why the program had a breakdown. Me too. lol Thanks to fellow forum-ites, there's always good camaraderie and support! Much appreciated. -Val