 | | Re: Does LDD's LDraw importer actually work?
|
|
(...) This is the file that LDD exported: 0 exported 0 Author: LEGO Digital Designer 3.0 1 71 -190 -24 -190.0000152587890625 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 3005.dat 1 14 170 -24 210.0000152587890625 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 3005.dat The two bricks are about 20 studs (...) (15 years ago, 22-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad.ldd, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The future of LDraw?
|
|
(...) First, let me make it clear that I am not a supporter of this policy (the fact that I have to write "policy" makes me feel a tad ill, to be honest). I was reporting, not defending. You quoted the most relevant portion of what I wrote. "The (...) (15 years ago, 22-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: Does LDD's LDraw importer actually work?
|
|
(...) I've never had it properly confirmed but I'm fairly certain the problem with import is that the overlap detection is way too overzealous. Which means that when you read in a file it decides the parts conflict and can't be there. It's (...) (15 years ago, 22-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad.ldd, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The future of LDraw?
|
|
(...) How widespread a problem is that, though? I know that some parts do indeed have two numbers, but this would seem a glitch that should have been resolved eight or more years ago, no? I mean, when you can turn a brick over and say "Yep, it's a (...) (15 years ago, 22-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Does LDD's LDraw importer actually work?
|
|
I recently had a Bricksmith user write asking for help importing an LDraw file into LDD. (He was using LDraw because LDD made it very difficult to build his model.) But when he attempts to import the LDraw file, he sees at most the first brick of (...) (15 years ago, 22-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad.ldd, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Developing LDBoxer Again
|
|
(...) Thanks, Tim! Along with a couple of bug fixes, support for the two other categories is now implemented. Right now, I'm creating the studless parts for the \B folder. Without them, LDBoxer would still not be able to boxer them. /Tore (15 years ago, 21-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Developing LDBoxer Again
|
|
(...) --snip-- (...) This sounds like an excellent development. I had to hand alter some of my Boxer'd MOCs to get the bottom detailing back in. And I think I forgot some. Tim (15 years ago, 21-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: The future of LDraw?
|
|
(...) That's a really good explanation of why the 'rules and regulations' have grown alongside the part library and software. Tim (15 years ago, 21-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: The future of LDraw?
|
|
(...) I wanted to make sure people weren't turned away from LeoCAD because they might think they'd be dependent on third parties to provide a parts library, that's just not true, so people SHOULD check it out. It's certainly my LCAD tool of choice (...) (15 years ago, 21-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | BrickHelper v1.1 released
|
|
Hi guys, Just thought I would announce the release of BrickHelper v1.1. This is my utility program that lets you list the parts inventory of creations made in LDD, and export that inventory to a Bricklink wanted list, which you can then upload to (...) (15 years ago, 21-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad.ldd)
|
| |
| | Re: The future of LDraw?
|
|
(...) Nod. But if the people responsible for LUGNET don't want it to gradually fade away and become even less relevant, changes are needed. Without them, other sections won't return either. I note that there's a facebook discussion group started on (...) (15 years ago, 21-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | LDBoxer Available at SourceForge
|
|
(...) I've played around a little with my old LDBoxer program. The new version auto-boxes a lot more safe-to-box parts than previous versions. Added support for parts without studs and parts without bottom details (URL) Replace button is made (...) (15 years ago, 21-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: The future of LDraw?
|
|
(...) Yes that is correct, but importing the files is not using them directly, as most other LDraw programs do. And for folks that have multiple parts folders, that can make a big difference. ROSCO (15 years ago, 21-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: The future of LDraw?
|
|
(...) LeoCAD directly imports LDRAW parts. There's no need to wait for an update of its database. It is as simple as downloading from the parts tracker, and then importing into LeoCAD itself. Some folks don't like to manage parts at that level, but (...) (15 years ago, 21-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: The future of LDraw?
|
|
(...) Welcome back. My issue with that is that it's out of the hands of LDraw. It's hard to expect the people responsible for LUGNET to make big changes when it's pretty much just one small section that is active. Tim (15 years ago, 20-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: The future of LDraw?
|
|
In lugnet.cad, Dave Schuler wrote: --snip-- (...) I think I see a bit better what you were getting at (and what Tore is getting at too which is the same issue I think). I kind of do agree with you both that making new parts is too hard due in part (...) (15 years ago, 20-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: The future of LDraw?
|
|
(...) Actually, there has been an 'entry tool' around since 1998 - BlockCAD (www.blockcad.net). While it's using part definitions of its own, and has a lot of limitations (studs up only, fixed rotation of parts, no Technic) you can save models in (...) (15 years ago, 20-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: The future of LDraw?
|
|
(...) Thank you Orion. I've finally found the presentation I made some time ago and if you're interested you can download it here: (URL) in Spanish, but that should not be a problem. Any suggestions/addition...provements are welcome. Jetro (15 years ago, 20-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: The future of LDraw?
|
|
(...) There is also LeoCAD, which has some great features MLCad doesn't have. It sufferes from not being able to use the official parts library (directly), but it's database is regularly updated. And as a bonus it's available for Linux too. I'm (...) (15 years ago, 20-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | (Re)activating Lugnet? (Was: The future of LDraw?)
|
|
(...) I must admit that I didn't know that it isn't possible to get a membership on Lugnet anymore. That's not good. (...) Luckily I keep plenty of backups - also of mission-critical cookies. (...) Yes. What will it take to allow people to get (...) (15 years ago, 20-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.admin.general)
|
