 | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Steve Bliss wrote:
> In lugnet.cad.dev, Orion Pobursky wrote:
>
> > 1.) Nothing is wrong with the part. The stud logos are added by an external
> > program and are not part of the DAT code. This is, therefore, a limitation of
> > the external program and not of the part itself.
>
> That is my opinion. The programs should be changed, rather than the
> parts.
Yes. But I'm not as willing as you are to see files changed, I guess
> One thing to consider: even if we 'fix' all the part files so that all
> studs render non-mirrored logos, mirrored logos can still occur. For
> example, if someone created a left-hand wing for an airplane, they might
> make the right-hand counterpart via a mirrored reference to the left
> wing:
> 1 7 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 leftwing.ldr
> 1 7 0 0 0 -1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 leftwing.ldr
> In this scenario, L3P will render mirrored logos on the right wing's
> studs.
>
> However, I'm willing to go with the idea outlined by Chris and Dave! I
> think that is a reasonable compromise, despite what I said in the past
> about extra work and extra subfiles.
>
> Also, if we're going to add any meta-statement (as Tore suggested), how
> about adding a single statement for the file header:
> 0 STUDSGOTHISWAY 0 0 1
> where the three parameters give a vector, indicating the 'up' direction
> for stud-logos. That way, rendering programs could fix mis-rotated
> studs, as well as fixing mirrored studs.
I think mirrored is more of a concern than misrotated, but that's just me.
Would this meta work though? In other words, are there any parts that have studs
*with logos* in different, non parallel planes? We have lots of parts that have
studs in different planes, but IIRC, all of them tend to use the technic/stud
with missing center for non coplanar (or at least non parallel) studs. (for
example, all the brackets http://guide.lugnet.com/partsref/bracket/ share this
behaviour, as do all the bricks with side studs that I checked...)
> > I'm axious to get a resolution on this since many otherwise good part are being
> > held up because of this issue.
>
> I definitely would not hold a part because the studs aren't all lined
> up!
Me either! I'll reiterate, I don't like the solution proposed by Dave! I say
programattically or not at all would be the preferred approach.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.cad.dev, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> Me either! I'll reiterate, I don't like the solution proposed by Dave!
Ouch--painful use of Dave!
Oh, well. I knew my solution wasn't perfect, but it solved the immediate
problem (while admittedly creating others).
I'll still probably use it in my blasphemous clone.dats, if it's all the same
to you folks.
> I say programattically or not at all would be the preferred approach.
I'll likewise reiterate that it would definitely be nice to have a program
take care of it. I think the studlogo is a sufficiently nice little confection
to keep, even if it's not part of the original LDraw canon.
Dave!
| | | | | | |
