 | | Re: *** LDView Version 2.1 Released ***
|
|
(...) Thanks. I'm glad you appreciate it. (...) By default, zooming is limited in such a way that the camera can never get closer to the model than its calculated radius. The previous calculated radius was based on a rectangular box around the (...) (21 years ago, 7-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: December MOTM/SOTM Winners, January Voting Open
|
|
(...) Actually you can view the current month's contestants without being a member of the website. Simply go to the contests page at LDraw.org: (URL) (21 years ago, 7-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LPub/LSynth/Mega-POV Question
|
|
(...) Yes, the gaps are where the wires bend more. I figured that the bending was responsible for the gaps. (...) Hmmmm...going through all the gaps and trying to fix them probably won't work. I am fully synthesizing my models, so there is ALOT of (...) (21 years ago, 7-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: *** LDView Version 2.1 Released ***
|
|
(...) Wow! Congratulations! At some point i have believed LDView is at a climax and can't improve further. How wrong i was. The improvement is constant, far beyond what i could imagine on my old hardware. It seems i can zoom much deeper with this (...) (21 years ago, 7-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposed changes to MOTM Submission guidelines
|
|
(...) Yes adding unoffical parts into the .mpd file is doable and it is being polite to due this if you are using unoffical parts and making your model public. -AHui LDraw Help Desk (URL) (21 years ago, 7-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: LPub/LSynth/Mega-POV Question
|
|
(...) Synthesised wire and tubing, if I recall correctly, is achieved by placing a large number of "primitive" elements along the spline that defines the centerline of the desired shape, aligned so they are tangential to the spline at that point, (...) (21 years ago, 6-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: LPub/LSynth/Mega-POV Question
|
|
(...) I'm no expert in maga-pov or lpub, but if everything else looks ok, I'd just erase these white spots with Photoshop or whatever picture editing software you use. Would this be more work than remodeling the cables, or less? hth Allister (21 years ago, 6-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposed changes to MOTM Submission guidelines
|
|
(...) Sounds fair enough. I for one would be unlikely to pick through the .ldr file for every entrant anyway, but it would be cool to get a closer look at the winning entry. (...) This is true enough, although I still can't see why a rendering (...) (21 years ago, 6-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | LPub/LSynth/Mega-POV Question
|
|
Hello, I’m doing some rendering for Building Instructions, and am coming across a little problem that I am not quite sure how to resolve. Here is the big picture: I am doing extremely high quality BI’s, using LPub, which means that the resolution is (...) (21 years ago, 6-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposed changes to MOTM Submission guidelines
|
|
(...) I agree entirely with Orion here. And I also think that making the LDR file available for the winning entry would be a great idea, but *only with the permission of the entrant.* I recommend it be strongly encouraged. (...) [snip] (...) I (...) (21 years ago, 6-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposed changes to MOTM Submission guidelines
|
|
(...) The one problem I see here is that the contest allows unofficial parts (or unofficial versions of parts), which the coordinator might not have, and different submitters might want to use different versions of unofficial parts. The problem goes (...) (21 years ago, 6-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposed changes to MOTM Submission guidelines
|
|
(...) I got the point, but I'm not completely convinced. Anyhow, I really only suggested the LDRotM contest because I'm afraid the model sellers might be influential enough to eliminate even the *option* of publishing the LDR files in the MotM (...) (21 years ago, 6-Jan-04, to lugnet.inst, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: December MOTM/SOTM Winners, January Voting Open
|
|
(...) Er... No soup for you, Dave! At least not the way it's currently implemented, I don't think. Why wouldn't you want to be able to vote, though? Do your civic duty, Dave! More seriously, sounds like a good suggestion, maybe Orion can fix it. (21 years ago, 6-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: December MOTM/SOTM Winners, January Voting Open
|
|
(...) But what if I just want to look at the pretty pictures, without voting? Dave! (21 years ago, 6-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: December MOTM/SOTM Winners, January Voting Open
|
|
(...) It is necessary to have a logon to the website in order to vote using the website functionality, which has been the mechanism in place since the contest was relaunched on the new site, which supports user logon and requires it for access to (...) (21 years ago, 6-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: December MOTM/SOTM Winners, January Voting Open
|
|
(...) Am I missing something, or is it necessary to be a member of LDraw.org in order simply to view the Models and/or Scenes of the Month? If so, how long has this been the case? Thanks for any info. Dave! (21 years ago, 6-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposed changes to MOTM Submission guidelines
|
|
(...) irrelevent. (...) Kevin (21 years ago, 6-Jan-04, to lugnet.inst, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposed changes to MOTM Submission guidelines
|
|
(...) Actually Don, I agree with all those points and am in favor of authors having the option to post their DAT/LDR/MPD files along with the images. My point is that within the scope of a completed model, having a contest on how the model is (...) (21 years ago, 6-Jan-04, to lugnet.inst, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposed changes to MOTM Submission guidelines
|
|
(...) I agree. I like Orion's last proposal that allows for DAT/LDR/MPD to be available along with the views. If people don't want to share, and it diminishes their ability to win, that is their choice. A highly superior model without DAT/LDR/MPD (...) (21 years ago, 6-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposed changes to MOTM Submission guidelines
|
|
(...) Don, I thought about this for a while and have decided to retract my positive swing on this. The whole, dat required or not discussion is somewhat moot IMHO. For a given complete physical model there are only so many reasonable ways the model (...) (21 years ago, 6-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
