| |
i know that the torus generator generated part looks kind of shit but i know
nothing about circular maths (trig?). steve tells me that the helipad and road
curve 7 studs have both been made with the generator... have you seen those yet
tery? do they suffer the same problems?
here is what i will do:
i will make the 8-stud unpatterened road plates completly in color #16. i will
also make the patterned 8-stud straight, t-junction and cross. i will use the
torus generator to generate the small curves on the corners. i will hardcode
the road surface itself as well as the area just outside the green lines where
there are no studs in color #7
i will make the area under the studs color #17. this will allow people to use
them in green. i will submit all these parts.
i will submit the curve as posted to cad.dat with the extra studs removed
unless i can figure out a bettre way to do it.
i say we see what the ldraw community at large thinks about the part. if they
are happy with the use of the torus generator then that is ok.
if they vote it down then that will prove that the torus generator should not
be used for large curves.
no-one has ldrawn any part that requires large curves yet so i have nothing to
go on except steves parts, made with his torus generator.
i have not seen those so i do not know what the quality is like...
|
|
| |
On Tue, 6 Apr 1999 08:25:45 GMT, "jonathan wilson" <wilsonj@xoommail.com> wrote:
> i know that the torus generator generated part looks kind of shit but i know
> nothing about circular maths (trig?). steve tells me that the helipad and road
> curve 7 studs have both been made with the generator... have you seen those yet
> tery? do they suffer the same problems?
I didn't use the torus generator program on the new parts. I wrote a couple of Visual Basic
routines that I used on the new pieces, which generate circular rings and edges. I've included the
routines below, but I haven't done anything to package these up for people who aren't VB
programmers. If you have VB, you can use these routines by copying them to a standard module,
running your project, hitting Break, and invoking the routines from the Immediate window.
BTW, I used iStep=16 in the parts I did, which is only 4x the resolution of the existing LDraw
primitives (that's a hint to the primitive committee). It looks pretty good, but the line segments
can be seen on the curved-road plate.
Steve
=== VB Routines follow =============================
' GenEdge and GenTorus are the two routines to call directly.
' Example (entered in Immediate window):
' ? GenEdge(100, 0, pi/2, 24, 32)
' ? GenEdge(150, 0, pi/2, 24, 32)
' ? GenTorus(100, 150, 0, pi/2, 16, 32)
Public Const Pi = 3.14159265358979
Public Type P3D
X As Double
Y As Double
Z As Double
End Type
Public Function GenEdge(ByVal Radius As Single, ByVal StartAngle As Single, _
ByVal StopAngle As Single, ByVal C As Single, _
ByVal iStep As Long) _
As String
' Generate polygonal approximation of a circular arc with center (0,0,0), in the XZ plane,
' radius Radius, color C, between StartAngle and StopAngle, with iStep segments.
Dim Theta As Single
Dim IA As P3D
Dim IB As P3D
Dim i As Long
Dim iStepCount As Long
Dim sBuf As String
IA.X = Radius * Cos(StartAngle)
IA.Y = 0
IA.Z = Radius * Sin(StartAngle)
sBuf = ""
For i = 1 To iStep
Theta = StartAngle + i * (StopAngle - StartAngle) / iStep
IB.X = Radius * Cos(Theta)
IB.Z = Radius * Sin(Theta)
sBuf = sBuf & "2 " & C & " " & FormatTriple(IA) & FormatTriple(IB) & vbCrLf
IA = IB
Next i
GenEdge = sBuf
End Function
Public Function GenTorus(ByVal InnerRadius As Single, ByVal OuterRadius As Single, _
ByVal StartAngle As Single, ByVal StopAngle As Single, ByVal C As Single, _
ByVal iStep As Long) _
As String
' Generate approximation of circular torus section with center (X,0,Z), inner radius
' InnerRadius, outer radius OuterRadius and color C, with iStep segments.
' The generated figure will lie in the positive Z half-plane.
Dim Theta As Single
Dim IA As P3D
Dim IB As P3D
Dim OA As P3D
Dim OB As P3D
Dim i As Long
Dim iStepCount As Long
Dim sBuf As String
IA.X = InnerRadius * Cos(StartAngle)
IA.Y = 0
IA.Z = InnerRadius * Sin(StartAngle)
OA.X = OuterRadius * Cos(StartAngle)
OA.Y = 0
OA.Z = OuterRadius * Sin(StartAngle)
sBuf = ""
For i = 1 To iStep
Theta = StartAngle + i * (StopAngle - StartAngle) / iStep
IB.X = InnerRadius * Cos(Theta)
IB.Z = InnerRadius * Sin(Theta)
OB.X = OuterRadius * Cos(Theta)
OB.Z = OuterRadius * Sin(Theta)
sBuf = sBuf & "4 " & C & " " & FormatTriple(IA) & FormatTriple(IB) _
& FormatTriple(OB) & FormatTriple(OA) & vbCrLf
IA = IB
OA = OB
Next i
GenTorus = sBuf
End Function
Public Function FormatTriple(A As P3D) As String
FormatTriple = NumStr(A.X) & BLANK & NumStr(A.Y) & BLANK & NumStr(A.Z) & BLANK
End Function
Public Function NumStr(ByVal nVal As Single) As String
Dim iTemp As Long
iTemp = nVal * 1000
If iTemp = 0 Then
NumStr = "0"
Else
NumStr = Trim$(Str$(iTemp / 1000))
End If
End Function
|
|
| |
In lugnet.cad.dev, wilsonj@xoommail.com (jonathan wilson) writes:
> no-one has ldrawn any part that requires large curves yet so i have
> nothing to go on except steves parts, made with his torus generator.
> i have not seen those so i do not know what the quality is like...
In the absence of example, surely you still have common sense to go on?
Approximating a very large circle using increments of pi/12 radians either
isn't appealing to common sense or shows a lack of common sense.
--Todd
|
|
| |
In lugnet.cad.dev, wilsonj@xoommail.com (jonathan wilson) writes:
> i know that the torus generator generated part looks kind of s###
> but i know nothing about circular maths (trig?).
Unless you're 14 years old, that's very sad.
> [...]
> i will submit the curve as posted to cad.dat with the extra studs
> removed unless i can figure out a bettre way to do it.
> i say we see what the ldraw community at large thinks about the part.
> if they are happy with the use of the torus generator then that is ok.
> if they vote it down then that will prove that the torus generator
> should not be used for large curves.
> [...]
You would ask the community to lower its standards of quality rather than
raising your own?
--Todd
|
|
| |
jonathan wilson <wilsonj@xoommail.com> wrote:
> i know that the torus generator generated part looks kind of shit but i know
> nothing about circular maths (trig?). steve tells me that the helipad and road
First of all, it's been 12 years since I last did any higher level
math, my junior year in high school when I did trig. So I don't think
there's any shame in not knowing (or remembering) anything about it.
Then again, I don't think that ignorance of lack of understanding of
this sort of thing means your parts that are so painfully bad ought to
be given a pass. If you don't have the skillset required to perform
this task, fine - neither do I.
> i say we see what the ldraw community at large thinks about the part. if they
> are happy with the use of the torus generator then that is ok.
> if they vote it down then that will prove that the torus generator should not
> be used for large curves.
See what the ldraw community thinks? I think what several people have
tried to say to you in various levels of politeness is that this part
in particular sucks. There is NO need to vote on it - the idea that
you think it should even be put up for a vote is ridiculous.
I'll be honest here - I don't participate in the voting for parts,
although I do mirror them on one of my websites. I don't vote because
I just don't have an eye for catching the tiny mistakes that Steve,
Terry, and the rest seem to catch right off. But I don't need any
special attention to detail to see what's wrong with this baseplate.
It reaches out and slaps you in the face, screaming, "Gee, I look like
crap, don't I?" Sorry, but it does.
Now do I have any meaningful helpful suggestions for you in your
efforts as a parts author? Nope, sure don't. I know others have,
though.
I can echo what others have said, though, about your obvious lack of
understanding of the standards to which the group here tries to hold
itself. In simple terms, it would seem that if the minimum quality
that most want to have in a part that gets a yes vote is 10, you seem
to be willing to push through parts that rate about a 1, if not less.
Sorry if that comes across as harsh, but you don't seem to be clueing
into the more subtle suggestions and comments people have made.
--
Lego Shop at Home: 800-835-4386 (USA) / 800-267-5346 (Canada)
www.lugnet.com/news/ - A great new resource for LEGO fans worldwide
|
|
| |
you are all right. this part is crap.
we really need to get a decent way of making large discs,rings,not disks etc
come on all you math wizzes. get cracking.
|
|
| |
thanks for the vb routines. do i have your permission to package them into a
utillity for the ldraw parts making community at large?
i amy be writing it in delphi (converting your algorithim to delphi in the
process). it will be called ldcg (ldraw circle generator). can you possibly
come up with a matching routine to create disk and not disk primitives?
|
|
| |
On Tue, 6 Apr 1999 08:25:45 GMT, "jonathan wilson" <wilsonj@xoommail.com>
wrote:
> i know that the torus generator generated part looks kind of shit but i know
> nothing about circular maths (trig?). steve tells me that the helipad and road
> curve 7 studs have both been made with the generator... have you seen those yet
> tery? do they suffer the same problems?
"Kind of" is a gross understatement.
If the parts Steve sent me were done using the torus generator, then he did a
*LOT* of very careful post-processing. Steve would _NEVER_ send me a part that
looked like the baseplate you posted in cad.dat.
> here is what i will do:
> i will make the 8-stud unpatterened road plates completly in color #16. i will
> also make the patterned 8-stud straight, t-junction and cross. i will use the
> torus generator to generate the small curves on the corners. i will hardcode
> the road surface itself as well as the area just outside the green lines where
> there are no studs in color #7
> i will make the area under the studs color #17. this will allow people to use
> them in green. i will submit all these parts.
> i will submit the curve as posted to cad.dat with the extra studs removed
> unless i can figure out a bettre way to do it.
> i say we see what the ldraw community at large thinks about the part. if they
> are happy with the use of the torus generator then that is ok.
> if they vote it down then that will prove that the torus generator should not
> be used for large curves.
I have said it before, and I guess I need to say it again - I WILL NOT add
parts to the vote that look like crap. It is a waste of my time.
If you cannot figure out what the word "quality" means, then stop making parts.
> no-one has ldrawn any part that requires large curves yet so i have nothing to
> go on except steves parts, made with his torus generator.
> i have not seen those so i do not know what the quality is like...
The quality is excellent. Like other parts Steve has done. The curves are
smooth and solid, well rendered at different resolutions and angles. Like
parts should be. And if I _do_ have a nitpick about something, Steve promptly
corrects the problem.
You made the positive step of asking for feedback and opinions on parts you
make. But then, instead of _fixing_ the parts, you simply dismiss the
criticism by saying you don't know how to do something, or blame the errors on
the tools used to make it.
As Onyx, said it "isn't about quantity, it's all about *quality*".
No one is impressed by the deluge of crappy parts. And, judging from the
constant postings asking for part numbers, I assume you have many more to come.
I hope you will slow down and reassess your actions.
-- Terry K --
|
|
| |
jonathan wilson <wilsonj@xoommail.com> wrote:
> you are all right. this part is crap.
> we really need to get a decent way of making large discs,rings,not disks etc
> come on all you math wizzes. get cracking.
"Get cracking" ?
Am I the ONLY one who sees a good deal of what Jonathan posts as
overly demanding, if not downright rude?
Did I miss something or did this whole community stop being a bunch of
talented volunteers working to help each other and others out?
As an aside, I'm a Castle nut as many of you know. I sure would like
to have all the Castle-specific parts created yesterday. They're not,
though, and that's ok. Me, I'm just _GRATEFUL_ for the parts I do
have.
Gratitude is a cool thing, isn't it?
--
Lego Shop at Home: 800-835-4386 (USA) / 800-267-5346 (Canada)
www.lugnet.com/news/ - A great new resource for LEGO fans worldwide
|
|
| |
i hope my post to lugnet.cad.dat will satisfy you. it is now possibly up to
voting starndard. i am sorry for being rude. but i am now learning how the
whole ldraw official parts thing operates and what is expected.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.cad.dev, wilsonj@xoommail.com (jonathan wilson) writes:
> thanks for the vb routines. do i have your permission to package them into a
> utillity for the ldraw parts making community at large?
>
> i amy be writing it in delphi (converting your algorithim to delphi in the
> process). it will be called ldcg (ldraw circle generator). can you possibly
> come up with a matching routine to create disk and not disk primitives?
Before packaging up Steve's code or algorithm into something else (even if
he did give permission to do so), wouldn't you want to make sure that you
fully and completely understand basic trigonometric principles, so that you
may be able to carefully test the conversion? Surely you don't expect
people here to test the code for you, as you expect people here to find
mistakes in the garbage parts you post.
--Todd
|
|
| |
In lugnet.cad.dev, cjc@NOSPAMnewsguy.com (Mike Stanley) writes:
> jonathan wilson <wilsonj@xoommail.com> wrote:
> > you are all right. this part is crap.
> > we really need to get a decent way of making large discs,rings,not disks etc
> > come on all you math wizzes. get cracking.
>
> "Get cracking" ?
>
> Am I the ONLY one who sees a good deal of what Jonathan posts as
> overly demanding, if not downright rude?
>
> Did I miss something or did this whole community stop being a bunch of
> talented volunteers working to help each other and others out?
>
>
> As an aside, I'm a Castle nut as many of you know. I sure would like
> to have all the Castle-specific parts created yesterday. They're not,
> though, and that's ok. Me, I'm just _GRATEFUL_ for the parts I do
> have.
>
> Gratitude is a cool thing, isn't it?
Well said. Yes, Jonathan is spoiling a lot of the fun here.
--Todd
|
|
| |
On Wed, 7 Apr 1999 14:06:18 GMT, "jonathan wilson" <wilsonj@xoommail.com>
wrote:
> i hope my post to lugnet.cad.dat will satisfy you. it is now possibly up to
> voting starndard. i am sorry for being rude. but i am now learning how the
> whole ldraw official parts thing operates and what is expected.
Looking at the latest version, right off the bat I notice that the color bleeds
past the edges of the curve lines. And the color does not extend to the edge
of the piece on either end of the curve.
And that is just a quick look, with no indepth analysis.
Can you not see those obvious flaws?
-- Terry K --
|
|
| |
i am fixing all of the problems that people are telling me about.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.cad.dev, wilsonj@xoommail.com (jonathan wilson) writes:
> i am fixing all of the problems that people are telling me about.
Indeed, this is the real problem, isn't it.
<FLAME ON>
Jonathan, you are a hack. You publish garbage parts, then you rely on the
goodwill and talent of others to find your mistakes. Then you whine about
it, rather than thanking people and apologizing for wasting their time.
If you are so clueless, so dense, and so untalented that you can't even see
your own glaring errors before publishing your parts, then you have to ask
yourself whether you really have any business creating parts in the first
place.
If you are so shameless, so lazy, and so arrogant that you do see the errors
but think that you can fool people, then you have a serious attitude problem
which you should check at the door.
<FLAME OFF>
--Todd
|
|
| |
At 12:21 AM 4/10/99 +0000, Todd Lehman wrote:
> <FLAME ON>
>
> Jonathan, you are a hack. You publish garbage parts, then you rely on the
> goodwill and talent of others to find your mistakes. Then you whine about
> it, rather than thanking people and apologizing for wasting their time.
I couldn't agree more. Even sitting on the sidelines of this thread I can
see clearly that this is nothing but bull.
> If you are so clueless, so dense, and so untalented that you can't even see
> your own glaring errors before publishing your parts, then you have to ask
> yourself whether you really have any business creating parts in the first
> place.
Correct. The baseplate looks like it wouldn't even make it into a
Megablocks product line. To make that much of a stink about a part that
has obvious errors suggests obvious errors in the creator of the part.
> If you are so shameless, so lazy, and so arrogant that you do see the errors
> but think that you can fool people, then you have a serious attitude problem
> which you should check at the door.
True true true! This has been evident for a long time, not just with this
part. But I do say that the creation of this part has brought forth the
full beast for all to see. Jonathan, give it a rest -- please spare us the
whining. Don't expect us to wait on you hand and foot because you can't
see your own flaws.
> <FLAME OFF>
Or is it..
</flame> ?
:)
Keep Building!!
-Tim <><
http://www.zacktron.com
AIM: timcourtne
ICQ: 23951114
You've seen their sites and read their posts, now see their faces:
RTL/LUGNET Legofest 1999: http://www.zacktron.com/legofest/
LEGO: SP++++c(6973)[ip++++ bt2++++ ex+++ ft+++ sp+++ ut++]
AQ+++(6175)[an+++ as++ hn-- sr--] TO++[ob+ dv+ tc-- tt-- tjr.---] TC++ CA+
PI+ BV--- DU--- HM--- S+ LS>+++ #++++ Hal M+ A+ YB82m
|
|
| |
Tim Courtney <tcourtney@avenew.com> wrote:
> > <FLAME OFF>
> Or is it..
> </flame> ?
> :)
Well, it probably depends on whether it's an HTML tag or something
else.
I personally read it as Johnny Storm activating his Human Torch
powers.
Just a moment of levity. I totally agree with Todd about the more
serious issues.
--
Lego Shop at Home: 800-835-4386 (USA) / 800-267-5346 (Canada)
www.lugnet.com/news/ - A great new resource for LEGO fans worldwide
|
|
| |
At 02:04 AM 4/10/99 +0000, Mike Stanley wrote:
> Tim Courtney <tcourtney@avenew.com> wrote:
> > > <FLAME OFF>
> > Or is it..
> > </flame> ?
> > :)
>
> Well, it probably depends on whether it's an HTML tag or something
> else.
>
> I personally read it as Johnny Storm activating his Human Torch
> powers.
Not knowing comics or cartoons (whichever..) I was not familiar with
that...but sounds cool :)
> Just a moment of levity. I totally agree with Todd about the more
> serious issues.
Yes, so do I.
Keep Building!!
-Tim <><
http://www.zacktron.com
AIM: timcourtne
ICQ: 23951114
You've seen their sites and read their posts, now see their faces:
RTL/LUGNET Legofest 1999: http://www.zacktron.com/legofest/
LEGO: SP++++c(6973)[ip++++ bt2++++ ex+++ ft+++ sp+++ ut++]
AQ+++(6175)[an+++ as++ hn-- sr--] TO++[ob+ dv+ tc-- tt-- tjr.---] TC++ CA+
PI+ BV--- DU--- HM--- S+ LS>+++ #++++ Hal M+ A+ YB82m
|
|
| |
In lugnet.cad.dev, Jonathan Wilson writes:
> you are all right. this part is crap.
> we really need to get a decent way of making large discs,rings,not disks etc
> come on all you math wizzes. get cracking.
Of all the unmitigated gall. "Cracking"? Speaking for myself, you are a
sanctimonious prig. Those of us that don't make parts (this includes you)
appreciate all the effort and talent that goes into the improvement of Ldraw
and it's library. Look at the quality of the rest of the parts that are
submitted and the care taken to ensure they are as accurate as possible. How
dare you try to pollute that process and dilute the quality of that library
with this trash. Stop.
Ben Vaughan
buster@marsbase.com
www.marsbase.com
----------------
The few, the proud,...the plastic.
|
|
| |
All,
Events in the past few months has led up to the point where several typically
cool-headed individuals have blown their tops. All this anger and frustration
is aimed at one individual in particular, and is counter-productive.
Recent lambasting of Mr. Johnathan Wilson has proven to be no good, and I am
convinced that further beratement would only lead to an increased level of
frustration and anxiety. These kind of tensions can only hinder progress on
the LDraw project. My participation in this collective anger has caused me to
delve into some serious soul-searching.
Consider: The debate is over a computer tool for a children's toy. True,
Legos can become quite a powerful medium of expression in the right hands, and
it's doubtful that a real child would seriously use LDraw, but the basic
premise remains. This is about having fun.
Doesn't the word Lego derive from "play well"? Isn't this advice that we all
need to heed, this author included? I'm not saying that excellence should be
sacrificed to appease a select few. But we pollute the project to continue
James' work by continuing in these personal attacks.
There are better ways of handling the situation. If the noise level is a
problem, then remove the source of the noise until it subsides. If Mr.
Wilson's working patterns are a problem, then we need to either reject his
work with a simple "no", or help to improve his work, or both. But the way we
have reacted indicates that Mr. Wilson has some control over our actions.
This is not the case. We need to find a solution, and fast, before this forum
turns into a needless flame war. We don't all need to be friends, but we can
sure be a hell of a lot more friendly.
There is little more I can say on the matter. I am not a parts author, nor do
I aspire to become one, so I cannot help much. I am ashamed of the spiteful
feelings which I felt that I had to express. Therefore, the best action I can
take on the matter is to ignore Mr. Wilson. I will endeavor to do this, and I
implore you to do the same.
Cheers,
- jsproat
|
|
| |
In lugnet.cad.dev, buster@marsbase.com (Ben Vaughan) writes:
> In lugnet.cad.dev, Jonathan Wilson writes:
> > you are all right. this part is crap.
> > we really need to get a decent way of making large discs,rings,not
> > disks etc come on all you math wizzes. get cracking.
>
> Of all the unmitigated gall. "Cracking"? Speaking for myself, you
> are a sanctimonious prig. Those of us that don't make parts (this
> includes you) appreciate all the effort and talent that goes into the
> improvement of Ldraw and it's library. Look at the quality of the rest
> of the parts that are submitted and the care taken to ensure they are as
> accurate as possible. How dare you try to pollute that process and
> dilute the quality of that library with this trash. Stop.
Ben,
Just a side note -- it recently came to light that part of the problem in
Jonathan's parts might be related to .cad.dat posting problems -- at least
things like missing studs...still gathering info. This probably doesn't
affect the overall general opinion but it's something to keep in mind.
Jonathan,
On another thread you asked how you might improve your quality levels.
Something you might want to consider is stepping back and choosing a single
part -- any single part (but not bunch of parts at once) -- and working on
it until it is truly beautiful and amazing. Then, if you can demonstrate
mastery of one part, you put yourself on more solid ground with respect to
earning the respect of your parts co-authors/peers. Maybe just in general,
you might want to slow down a bit and work on one part at a time (i.e. focus
your energies).
--Todd
|
|
| |
In lugnet.cad.dev, Todd Lehman writes:
<snip>
> Ben,
> Just a side note -- it recently came to light that part of the problem in
> Jonathan's parts might be related to .cad.dat posting problems -- at least
> things like missing studs...still gathering info. This probably doesn't
> affect the overall general opinion but it's something to keep in mind.
Hrmmph. Todd, I understand what you are saying, and I suppose there might be
a problem with the submittal process (I've had some problems with it also you
might remeber), so I'm willing to let that go, but it doesn't forgive the
*attitude*. I probably have gotten my feathers ruffled, but this situation
just bugs me. Here endith the rant. <g> Thanks for being the calming
influence.
Ben
Ben Vaughan
buster@marsbase.com
www.marsbase.com
----------------
The few, the proud,...the plastic.
|
|
| |
At 09:57 PM 4/10/99 +0000, Ben Vaughan wrote:
> In lugnet.cad.dev, Todd Lehman writes:
> <snip>
>
> > Ben,
> > Just a side note -- it recently came to light that part of the problem in
> > Jonathan's parts might be related to .cad.dat posting problems -- at least
> > things like missing studs...still gathering info. This probably doesn't
> > affect the overall general opinion but it's something to keep in mind.
>
> Hrmmph. Todd, I understand what you are saying, and I suppose there might • be
> a problem with the submittal process (I've had some problems with it also • you
> might remeber), so I'm willing to let that go, but it doesn't forgive the
> *attitude*. I probably have gotten my feathers ruffled, but this situation
> just bugs me. Here endith the rant. <g> Thanks for being the calming
> influence.
I can see that it doesn't make up for the attitude, but that doesn't mean
the attitude is unforgiveable. It is obviously your choice to forgive
Jonathan or not and that is totally up to you (but is reccommended). This
issue appears to be resolved, so lets move on. The situation bugs me too -
how often have you seen me turn on the full flameage? :) But still, lets
let the flames dwindle and go forwad to more pleasant things.
Yes, Todd, thanks for being the calming influence.
Keep Building!!
-Tim <><
http://www.zacktron.com
AIM: timcourtne
ICQ: 23951114
You've seen their sites and read their posts, now see their faces:
RTL/LUGNET Legofest 1999: http://www.zacktron.com/legofest/
LEGO: SP++++c(6973)[ip++++ bt2++++ ex+++ ft+++ sp+++ ut++]
AQ+++(6175)[an+++ as++ hn-- sr--] TO++[ob+ dv+ tc-- tt-- tjr.---] TC++ CA+
PI+ BV--- DU--- HM--- S+ LS>+++ #++++ Hal M+ A+ YB82m
|
|
| |
i am now using the ldraw circle creator program i wrote. the laest incantations
of my parts are accually looking better.
> Something you might want to consider is stepping back and choosing a single
> part -- any single part (but not bunch of parts at once)
thanks for the idea.
i think i will pick the raised baseplate first, as that is the part i have
already worked on the most.
|
|
|
