robdyck

Oh crap. I always use the bottom and the left! That's how I preferred it when framing. Measure, then mark, then 'x'. I dislike the idea of measuring, then marking, then backing up for the 'x'. And since we read left to right...why go backwards. There's lots of other builders here, I wonder what they prefer? And no, no way to specify it that I know of.

A custom line style might be the only way and it would be awkward. That's the only way I can think of, other than individual letters.

It's definitely subjective but the 'pop' comes from you. Personally, I like my elevations to look 'cartoonish', just like my renderings! I use color, so that really helps. I prefer notes and schedules for materials instead of text. I like subtle shadows, especially on the FRONT. I never use edge or pattern line defaults; always by layer and by material. Customized fonts, never 'arial' or whatever Chief's font is.

Thanks Ross! I appreciate that.

@RenerabbittThe espresso machine is plugged in?? Now you're taking it too far!! Or...not far enough; where's the crumbs on the floor and an open bag of bread on the counter? And there should be splash marks on that window behind the sink. Kidding of course. Nice work!

Not a perfect fix, but quick. Chief Architect Premier X11 2019-10-29 10-01-01.mp4

@DH7777 tsk, tsk, tsk. You gotta learn about layer set and saved plan views. It'll make things much easier!

Start with getting rid of the hole in your floor and specifying the room as open below.

Labels, NO. Object, Yes.

Of course there's a learning curve with PBR but I really don't have any 'setup' time anymore. Almost everything just got 'dropped in'. All my settings, and scene conditions are saved either in defaults or in my library. I didn't spend even 15 minutes on this; the only things not part of the actual plan are the plants, the car, the fence. Those 3 things took less than 2 minutes to add. Interestingly enough, I find PBR more predictable that RT. If I were being paid extra for a rendering for a home, I'd use RT or outsource to someone proficient with Lumion, or Twinmotion or Thea. However, in my market, my clients don't want to spend anything extra on 3d. That leaves me with a choice: I could tell them that I can't deliver any renderings without additional fees, or I can learn how to deliver (what I think are better than acceptable) renderings for virtually no additional time and exceed their expectations. And I'll point out that visualization is the claim, not photorealism. I'm in Alberta so photorealism would require a jacked up F350 and I haven't yet found a 3d model of a truck that truly meets my redneck expectations! Perhaps you should post an example of an exterior RT that one could be proud of and elaborate on the camera, lighting and RT settings you use.

Forgiveness has been granted! Physically Based Rendering is a rendering technique. It's built-in to Chief and available for most camera types.

There is no terrain in that interior render. Same home, but 2 separate files for interior and exterior to help reduce file size, surface count, and lighting confusion (both mine and the computer's). Sunlight set to 500 Lumens.

That blueness is caused by the color of my backdrop, mostly a blue sky with a few clouds. If I change it to a sunset type of backdrop for example, it would be a bit pinkish or orange. I'd be all over Lumion if I had paying customers!

As a matter of fact I do!

PBR exterior. Time to render: 3 seconds. This is the real advantage. Great results for almost no effort which is needed for customers who won't pay for renderings. Small tip / note: the 'color' of the backdrop will affect the 'tone' of the shadows and materials slightly.

Both have pros and cons. That being said, IMO nothing outweighs the speed of PBR. Raytraces can produce great results, but getting there is very slow. All the lighting will need to be different than in a PBR which can make it confusing, and you'll need to wait a fairly long time to see the effect of any change. Then, if the change is not desirable, you'll need to repeat the waiting process. So, separate lighting scenes are critical for separate saved cameras.

Aonther option is to connect a short invisible wall segment using a 'room divider' wall type perpendicular to the railing. Then reverse the layer direction of one side of the railing. It should create a newel at that junction. Simply center that wall segment in the room, or dimension it for a more specific placement. The newel would be placed without the invisible wall segment, just by reversing the layer direction, but the invisible wall segment gives you a simple 'slide' to move that connection where you'd like it. Of course, your railing must be reversible! Chief_Architect_Premier_X11_2019-10-26_08-31-56.mp4

And you are so kind!

Have you tried making your offending wall a 'through wall' at both its start and end?

I don't know...and that's why I don't like it in this instance. In the example above, I have 2 soffits to create the lowered ceiling, because it needs to wrap around the corner and a soffit can't have a break. On the short side, the soffit isn't being cut by the wall, but on the door side, the soffits are being cut by the wall, even though they're touching in plan view. I have no issue with the soffit tool, but its behavior here suggest to me it's not quite right for this application. I just like using the tools where I know what's drawn in plan view will give me the desired result. It skips the messing around. I'm not saying it can't be done with a soffit, but why hunt for all the various checkboxes until you get the desired result, when there's quicker, simpler, more predictable options. I just like the quickness of creating a room polyline, convert to psolid, open and define, done. For the bath, create room molding for the crown, and perfect, predictable edge control.

It's weird...that works if the material region is created in the attic, but not on the actual floor! At least that's what I found. Good to know, another tool in the tool box.

You can do both, just create copies of the perimeter and new layers to help you separate some of those lines, and use the drawing order tools to help with display. Reference layers in your saved plan view are also available to help manage display.

And here's why I don't like soffits for this application. I'd rather use a psolid for the ceiling, and make a room molding for the crown. A light still works, you just need to offset it. These items are faster IMO than messing around with soffits, material regions, etc. But as mentioned, there's often many ways to skin a cat!

Here's why I lean towards p solids over material regions. The material region is slower, and that's without cutting the finish layer. Chief_Architect_Premier_X11_2019-10-23_12-35-17.mp4