Subject:
|
Re: Alternate 6208 B-Wing Escort Fighter
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Thu, 8 Feb 2007 21:23:18 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
3844 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Travis Cobbs wrote:
| |
In lugnet.cad.dev, Don Heyse wrote:
| |
In lugnet.cad.dev, Travis Cobbs wrote:
| |
I have to wonder if I’m partially to blame. Perhaps the part author was
using LDView (thumbnail is linked to bigger image, generated by LDView):
Everything looks great there.
|
Yeah, your default settings tend to hide certain surface flaws. Your
light source (where is it by the way?) and smooth shading are as effective
as dim lighting and heavy makeup. Perhaps not the best thing for a parts
designer to be using. But if you zoom in for a closer look, even in
ldview you can still see the bumpy waffled surface when you spin those
parts around. And even smooth shading doesn’t completely hide the
wrinkles close up.
|
My light is a directional light pointing in exactly the same
direction as the camera.
|
Ah yes, the trusty helmet mounted flashlight look. Too much glare for
me. I prefer the sort of lighting delivered by the mid-afternoon sun,
beaming down from high over the left shoulder. But that’s a personal
preference, I suppose.
| |
In LDView 3.1, you can actually override this with an undocumented
command line option. I hope to have light direction (single
directional light) as a new feature in LDView 3.2. Some future
LDView might support more arbitrary lighting (including multiple
light sources).
|
Nice idea to have it configurable. Don’t forget to consider the old
light.dat method that’s been kicked around for just about forever.
| |
| |
I wonder if there’s a way to get ldview to use a different set of
preferences when the user is obviously looking at a part?
|
I could probably do that, but the smooth shading is actually useful
when editing a part, because it can highlight missing (or incorrect)
conditional lines. It’s not fool-proof, since correct conditional
lines don’t necessarily result in smooth shading. On the other
hand, I suspect that most part authors that use LDView for
inspection of their parts would prefer to have the smooth surfaces
look good in LDView.
|
You’re probably right, but that doesn’t make it a good idea to use
only one source for visual verification.
I think just about every couple of months I point out the “part in
process” picture on this page as the closest to what I’d consider an ideal part
development environment. LDView plays a prominent part, but it’s
assisted quite a bit by l3lab. Now some things look positively
hideous in l3lab, but that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t look. Actually
I think maybe the two ldview windows in that picture might be running
with different settings. That’d be an acceptable solution for a
part designer who prefers the default ldview settings. Just make
sure to open a 2nd window with flat shading and some of the other
fancy stuff turned off, to reveal the hidden flaws.
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Alternate 6208 B-Wing Escort Fighter
|
| (...) My light is a directional light pointing in exactly the same direction as the camera. In LDView 3.1, you can actually override this with an undocumented command line option. I hope to have light direction (single directional light) as a new (...) (17 years ago, 8-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev, FTX)
|
10 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
