robdyck

If Automatic Height is checked, then why are you concerned about the height? The only point to those boxes is to provide 2 different points of reference when manually adjusting the height. Also noticed that Chief's "Help" has used the wrong terminology for this section (riser should be replaced with "tread"): Select Top Riser for the Top Height value to describe the height of the top riser.

https://www.chiefarchitect.com/videos/watch/48/creating-layouts-and-construction-documents.html Go to 20:20 of the video. Paste "Editing Layout Views" into help and press enter.

It is with a bit of work. You can take another section view from within the cabinets, create a cad detail from view, then select the shelving lines and copy/paste-in-place those lines into the correct elevation view. Then, assign them a dashed line style as they represent a hidden object.

It makes me feel so good to see that Error for another user! I had started to get the impression that it was just me! I had no issue distributing those plants...this time!

That control button has always worked that way. The "Top Tread" button has always been temporary, a one time, each time type of usage. It's not sticky!

Larry, I made a symbol out of the terrain and roads, then turned off those layers. That dropped the time for a perspective full overview from 20 seconds to 1 second. I also removed the normal map from the terrain perimeter texture. All views now generate in 1 second.

Not once you know how!

It especially embarrassing when many other diy design apps have better basic 3d representation. I got sent a 'plan' from a prospective client with 3d views that was far far better than Chief's 3d viewer. Even the Houzz 3d app has a better basic presentation. Screwing around with raytracing on every job (for free) is not the answer!!

Huh? With something other than material regions?

If I'm not mistaken, that's not a feature. That model will have been "manipulated" by pulling the roof plane away from it's proper edge. Then, additional roof planes will have been modeled to the left to show as the underlayment and the seathing.

You crack me up!

I agree with you. And if I'm not mistaken this issue still exists when using an elevation view that utilizes a rendering style with line drawing displayed. Below are 2 comparisons showing the on-screen and a pdf. Watercolor technique with line drawing weight of 5. I had to guess and check my way to a decent pdf. PDF: On Screen:

Some sample images with a very light weight; from Beta (before it worked correctly?!) I really liked the light weight. And as Rene pointed out, it makes a mess out of 3d plants.

From Help: Mitre Ends of Angle Walls Specify how wall corners that are not right angles are framed. 90° corners are not affected by these settings. Select Mitre Plate Ends to mitre the ends of the top and bottom plates. If unchecked, top and bottom plates will be butted together. Select Rotate End Studs to rotate the studs closest to mitre ends to the angle of the mitre. If unchecked, studs will remain perpendicular to the angle of the walls. Select Horizontal Frame Thru to frame through the horizontal walls in plan view, butting vertical walls against them. If unchecked, walls that are vertical in plan view will frame through.

None of my angle walls are showing mitered corners. I thought I'd check to see if it's working correctly for others before I send this to Tech Support.

You'll need to set a shallow frame depth (try 2-3" or so) in order to be able to recess the windows that much. And that refers to recessing the frame. Chief won't allow the sash to be inset more than 12".

That sounds like you just volunteered me without asking!

Try checking 'through wall' at start and end.

Build foundation will follow the default settings including the defaults for the garage room type. You should be able to specify a monolithic foundation for the garage in the garage room dbx and the foundation should build accordingly. It does for me. I often use 2 different foundation types quite often but for attached garages. I never build a detached garage in the same plan file as the house.

Here's some images I produced. I made a copy of the plan file, 1 for X12 and 1 for X13. In X13, the only change I made to the saved cameras was to turn off refraction and cap live samples. FWIW, I don't think it's reasonable to expect the same results with PBR in X13 as the rendering engine is different and it is designed to work with refraction. IOW, it ain't the same, so how can it be the same? Here's my results. X12 X13 X12 X13

Zip it up, or use dropbox or something similar. I've got a bit of time to take a look this morning...

I'd suggest using landings, starting on the left side of your staircase. Once you've drawn them out they can be copied and reflected to the opposite side of the stairwell. A bit of math and planning before you start with the actual landings will ensure that you don't need to make any adjustments. I find using landings (instead of actual winder stairs) is a bit easier for dimensional control to ensure code compliance, which varies significantly from one jurisdiction to another.

I've exported to several different file types. .3ds works better for me for importing into SketchUp.

Posting the plan. That would eliminate guessing.