 | | Minifig Ice Pick
|
|
Hello everyone. Any body know if there is a dat file for the minifig Ice pick part # x170? Thanks in advance. (21 years ago, 6-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | New part: Technic Link Chain Old [DAT]
|
|
0 Technic Link Chain Old 0 Name: x.dat 0 Author: Niels Karsdorp <nkp@dds.nl> 0 Unofficial Element 0 BFC CERTIFY CW 1 16 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 16 rect.dat 1 16 0 0 10 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 stud.dat 1 16 0 0 -10 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 stud.dat 1 16 8.5 7.5 16 (...) (21 years ago, 7-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: [LSC] Colour Definition meta-statement
|
|
(...) I'm not sure you're right there. I think Steve may have been trying to achieve a specific dithered look, different from the effect created by the pre-defined metal code in say ldview or ldglite, probably to better differentiate some static (...) (21 years ago, 6-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: [LSC] Colour Definition meta-statement
|
|
(...) Whoops. Silly me. It's amazing the tricks memory can play on you ;-). (...) While this is still probably do-able, I think my original argument about the possible creation of future tags still holds (unless you're also agreeing to the enforced (...) (21 years ago, 6-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: [LSC] Colour Definition meta-statement
|
|
(...) Well, I don't think that qualifies as an argument for its inclusion in the new !COLOUR statement, since those are already covered by the more precise pre-defined materials. --Travis Cobbs (21 years ago, 6-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: More color problems
|
|
(...) One way is to insert a (dim) lightsource exactly at the camera point - this way everything you can see is also lighted. By making this light dimmer than other lights, you can still have shadows, but not so articulated. -- Anders Isaksson, (...) (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Developers! What softwares? ([LSC] Colour Def...)
|
|
(...) Why not just RGB instead of the not too intuitive VALUE? (I mean, it colud be any parameter value) Developers, what softwares will be updated to support this? L3P? ML-Cad? L3Lab? LDView? ...? /Tore (21 years ago, 6-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: LDraw.org Bylaws - new proposed clauses
|
|
(...) After giving some thought to this - I can't think of alternate wording that would really do the issue justice, and not end up unnecessarily lengthy and awkward. If we start looking for CoI under every rock, I think that's taking it too far. My (...) (21 years ago, 6-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: [LSC] Colour Definition meta-statement
|
|
(...) I don't want to specify that some parameters are order-specific, and others aren't. I'd rather they are all one way or the other. Goes back to easier 'correct' parsing. However, I'm sure the entries in ldconfig.ldr will always have their tags (...) (21 years ago, 6-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: [LSC] Colour Definition meta-statement
|
|
(...) Actually, the spec says just the opposite, that tags (keywords) are not case-sensitive: (...) That seems reasonable. Steve (21 years ago, 6-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: [LSC] Colour Definition meta-statement
|
|
(...) Actually, I've most recently used dithering to simulate chrome/metal/metallic parts. Steve (21 years ago, 6-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: [LSC] Colour Definition meta-statement
|
|
(...) OK, I'm alright with that. (...) If that's a needed parameter, I'd rather have it follow the METALLIC keyword. (...) I'm ok with that, too. Is '50%' really an adequate description? There can be many brush patterns... Steve (21 years ago, 6-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: [LSC] Colour Definition meta-statement
|
|
(...) There had been discussion previously about differentiating true comments from meta-statements. The LSC agreed that it seems like a good idea to start prefixing meta-keywords with a punctuation mark, and we chose !. And !COLOUR is shorter than (...) (21 years ago, 6-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: [LSC] Colour Definition meta-statement
|
|
(...) Actually, I was considering the possibility of (patterned) parts including custom color definitions, which would only apply to that part. (...) That's a good question. Think about this: what if file A also has some surfaces hard-coded to color (...) (21 years ago, 6-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Naming of parts
|
|
(...) By this metric, (URL) not a wing. That's reasonable. If 2413 were a wing, then so would (URL) they are the same shape, essentially. (...) I agree. There are, however, times when that is not possible---for example, (URL) undoubtedly similar (...) (21 years ago, 6-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: More color problems
|
|
(...) No, those 2 lines have to do with the type of light in the scene. Have a read in the POV Scene help file for an explantion of ambient and diffuse light. -Orion (21 years ago, 6-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: More color problems
|
|
(...) Which makes sense when you compare the two renders and notice that the second one (with the IoR at zero) has a much more crystal-like sceptre. I don't know how much of an L3P-produced POV file is original POV code and how much is (...) (21 years ago, 6-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: More color problems
|
|
(...) You're right, I was mistaken. The IOR deals with the transparency. -Orion (21 years ago, 6-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: More color problems
|
|
(...) I don't know POV, but I do know that index of refraction (IoR) shouldn't have any effect on reflections. Perhaps it does, but it shouldn't. You need do decrease the reflectivity, not the IoR. The IoR controls how much light bends when it (...) (21 years ago, 6-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: More color problems
|
|
(...) L3P generates exactly the same color definition for 47, 0x06FFFFFF and 0x03FFFFFF, so normally it shouldn't matter which color you use. However, you include "ldraw_radiosity.inc" which again includes "LDRAW_RAD_COLORl.inc", and in this file (...) (21 years ago, 6-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.ray)
|
