DzinEye

Try to select the 'exterior room' which should border the whole exterior of the plan. When you do it will highlight just as an interior room would, but based on what you're saying it should leak into the interior of the room you're having issue with. Seeing where that leak happens should tell you where the wall problem is that is not properly closing off the room.

I thought this too, and was about to say so, but before I did decided to try the Edit Text button on my PDF editor (PDF-Xchange) and I was flabbergasted to see that all the text fields were individually selectable and editable.... Even the Watermark! So much for THAT offering any protection unless you flatten...

I have PDF-Xchange where there's a checkbox for 'Print as Image' which flattens it. In Chief, there is a Print Image option right below Print in the print drop-down... I haven't used it, but I suspect that is what it will accomplish. Personally I would probably print from Chief normally, then re-print using Adobe or other and looking for that Print Image option

I'm rather guessing that the issue is that if there's more than one room under the floor that needs adjusting then the problem crops up. Maybe you can set the walls that break up the room below the area to 'no room definition' and see what happens. EDIT: Nope... I put in lower floor walls and what I did above still works... not sure what you're experiencing.

I think this is what you're trying to achieve?... if so, I just got rid of the air space and adjusted the lower ceiling height in the structure tab so it was the same as the other area.

Hey...that's a great idea!

This happens not just with CMU but with Concrete and ICF wall types too. Interestingly enough, it does not happen with Glass block wall type... which I kind of figured would have masonry attributes. If you move the concrete or cmu to the exterior layer, then the ceiling finish will stop. I used 1/16" glass for the main layer. I'm not suggesting this is a work-around... just saying how it works. It seems there is some hidden code within material definitions which controls these things. It may be one of those things that they could change the coding to match how it works for fir framing, but then we'd have other issues pop up?... I dunno. Worth asking Chief I think...

Build a roof hole polyline around your dormer... like ~12" beyond it's walls... just rough it in. Now you will see that your dormer walls will go down to the ceiling framing. Now select the main roof plane that the dormer is placed in, open it and select No Special Snapping. Now snug your roof hole up to the outside of your dormer walls. If you don't turn off special snapping, then the roof hole will automatically snap to the inside of the dormer and cut off your walls at the roof level.

I've thought this many many times. Appreciate the tips for helping speed the process too guys, but I really think this is worthy of a suggestion. It would be nice if a full list of available libraries popped up which had check boxes we could select and easily see what we've already selected.

Ok. I figured you did at first, but then began wondering if you might need to avoid posts going through the roof surface. The way I mention will work...as will Mick's, though the rail will be right at the outer edge with that method.

Hmmm... I guess it's one of those 'eye of the beholder' things. I kind of prefer the X13 render... though the extra time is a downer. I did notice this glitch in your Beta render too which disappears in the final version render. Nice model/render BTW... what's that material you have on the FP?

Well... is the question how to model it to look right, or how to actually build it? Granted, for many chief users this is one in the same, but certainly not always for me. Quickly to model it, note that the bottom of the rail as you have it is at the ceiling level... so just add to the height of the railing wall the height of the roof structure thickness, then you can even raise the bottom rail that thickness. This may actually even represent how it would be built, if you don't mind tearing up roof to fasten the deck posts to the roof joists.

Ahh... it appeared from the pic you attached in your OP that you only wanted the beam in that one section dropped

I make a mean jello salad Hahaha...omg... where'd you dig that up?!?! blechh

Thanks for elucidating Rob... fair enough...I can't disagree with any of your reasoning, especially #6.... but I try not to design anything akin to jello salad... that is pretty gross. I think of it more as the gravy on my meat is also on the mashed potatoes, and all is good.

I've successfully done multiple buildings in one plan many many times. I tried the sybmol method once and was just frustrated by it. Curious why you feel so adamant about not doing it?

Define that wall section without a beam in the dbx and manually draw the beam

I believe this is the same issue MarkMc just asked about ... perhaps it was in suggestions, but Michael suggested the solution which was to set the hardware offset to zero. I'll see if I can find the OP and post it.. Yep.. it was in Suggestions

You forgot the skyhook method...

Did you try it?? Absolutely it works...

Long-standing issue getting snaps to objects in elevation and section. Use Cad Detail from view... do your Point to point dimension there, then cut and paste it into your section... Or just use the cad detail if you don't need a live section

Did you play with the 'adjust sunlight angle' options? If you select sun follows camera then you should get shadows automatically, but you can fine tune manually

Use the closed sided stringers option then the exagerated tread overhang won't apply to the side. Edit: While the 'closed sided' stringer does the trick I actually used the custom stringer option and set the above and below numbers to zero to reduce the stringer size as much as possible. ( I hid the stringer so you could see the tread size and overhang)

Well... as per your pic, generally the tread gets fairly narrow in a 'ladder' stair....but I was able to get what you want..

^^^... yep.. But sure would be nice if Chief corrected these in their libraries