 | | Re: New Parts Category? Sport?
|
|
(...) I would if I had a HP set with a Quidditch hoop. Quidditch is a sport, so it fits in perfectly anyway! ;) John (21 years ago, 1-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: New Parts Category? Sport?
|
|
(...) I dont see a problem with the exception of the holders and 8x8 bricks as these can be used for not sport models. But the basketballs, gloves, etc.. are very specific in their use and therefore would warrent a sport category. Steve is the parts (...) (21 years ago, 1-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: New Parts Category? Sport?
|
|
(...) Don't you mean "Quidditch Hoop" ;-) William (21 years ago, 1-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | New Parts Category? Sport?
|
|
Hi all, While perusing the parts library last night, I noticed that none of the pieces specific to LEGO Sports (Basketball and Soccer/Football) have been modeled yet. I may start a few of them soon, but would like to know if we should agree on a (...) (21 years ago, 1-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Announcing LEGO Digital Designer 1.0
|
|
(...) Just one simple question - MacOS X support? Do you intend to provide support for MacOS X? Thanks, Ed Cox (21 years ago, 1-May-03, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: New parts and question about metal parts
|
|
(...) You cannot stick parts with studs in the bottom tubes, 'cause these plates (2x8, 4x8 and 6x8) don't have bottom tubes. Their functionality is less then the later created plates. The difference in functionality between these plates is bigger (...) (21 years ago, 1-May-03, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Parts Library (was Re: Announcing LEGO Digital Designer 1.0)
|
|
How complete will the parts library for this program be? Will it include all the parts TLC has 3d computer models of or will it be limited somehow? What about decorated/printed parts? Minifig parts & accessories? Stickers? Sails and capes and such (...) (21 years ago, 1-May-03, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Announcing LEGO Digital Designer 1.0
|
|
I can see this being a great thing as long as: 1.it doesnt have any artificial limits on it 2.the LXF file format is documented and there are no restrictions on using it (ref the TLC patents mentioned earlier in the thread) 3.it has support for all (...) (21 years ago, 1-May-03, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Announcing LEGO Digital Designer 1.0
|
|
(...) Isn't that redundant? [ -> .off-topic.geek ] (21 years ago, 1-May-03, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Lego XML?
|
|
(...) I've thought about this, because most LDraw-programs (ie, LDLite, L3Lab, MLCAD, L3P, ldglite, LDView?) provide a way to code color-values directly in some RGB method. My issue is that different systems (computer systems, graphics systems) (...) (21 years ago, 1-May-03, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: Crazy, OK Heretical Idea ...
|
|
(...) Uh, you might want to recheck that enthusiasm. Right now, AFAIK (and I haven't double-checked, so you might want to try it), *only* LDLite will render all of the LDLite meta-statements. They definitely are not allowable in parts submitted for (...) (21 years ago, 1-May-03, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: Crazy, OK Heretical Idea ...
|
|
I just did a double take : ) YEA, vertex lists ! I was working up to proposing just this sort of addition to the standard. Since these already exist can they be grandfathered into the 1.0 document that Orion has prepared ? -JSM PS. I was so annoyed (...) (21 years ago, 1-May-03, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: Crazy, OK Heretical Idea ...
|
|
(...) Yes! LOD would be very useful. There are several general purpose LOD methods out there, but again we may be able to improve performance or ease a renderer's job, by supplying even more information in a part file. Polygons, could be flagged as (...) (21 years ago, 1-May-03, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: Crazy, OK Heretical Idea ...
|
|
(...) I would think that some sort of 'material' definition would definitely be useful, to give these (reflection etc.) types of hints to a renderer. I'm not sure that 'textures' themselves are required, but then again, Textures may be a better way (...) (21 years ago, 1-May-03, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: Crazy, OK Heretical Idea ...
|
|
(...) Since Jason brought this up -- *is* there a method for material/texture mapping in z-buffer renderers like LDraw? TLG is using more 'special treatment' materials in their parts, and it would be very nice if LDraw could keep up. I'd be a very (...) (21 years ago, 1-May-03, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: Crazy, OK Heretical Idea ...
|
|
(...) OK, so that leads to one of my desires in an upgraded (or different) GDL: level-of-detail control. Basically, there should be language elements that allow authors to flag the priority of different elements in a file -- so the main outside body (...) (21 years ago, 1-May-03, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: Announcing LEGO Digital Designer 1.0
|
|
(...) I don't think that's really a fair and answerable question. As a parts designer, I'd rather work in the format that is (a) the least work for me and (b) gives me the results I want. As a parts designer, I'm not terribly concerned about (...) (21 years ago, 1-May-03, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: Crazy, OK Heretical Idea ...
|
|
(...) That's my impression also. They seem to be oriented towards (relatively) lower polygon counts, and increased usage of textures. They use the textures to achieve the details so that they don't need to bog down the system with more vertices and (...) (21 years ago, 1-May-03, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: LDRAW.org is back ... kinda
|
|
(...) *cough, cough* That's true, for certain values of 'RSN'. Steve (21 years ago, 1-May-03, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: Significance of stud orientation
|
|
(...) That happened because, until yesterday or maybe today, all the files were very out-of-date on ldraw.org. The unofficial download file should be OK now. Steve (21 years ago, 1-May-03, to lugnet.cad)
|
