 | | Automatic unofficial part detection?
|
|
Hi all, Some visitors to my site have asked whether it'd be possible to include in the ldraw model files that I provide the unofficial parts used in them. As this is a very sensible request, I was wondering if there is any way to do this (...) (21 years ago, 7-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | PoV-Ray ignoring 'translate'?
|
|
I'm sure you're all getting sick of me by now. Bear with me...this animation should look pretty cool when it's done. While we were watching the superbowl this year, one of my relations commented on the little animation used to introduce the players (...) (21 years ago, 7-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.ray, FTX)
|
| |
| | 3 new primitives for Technic Link Chain Old [DAT]
|
|
I forgot to include the three new primitives, I created for the Technic Link Chain Old: 3-8ring1.dat 3-8ring5.dat 3-8rin12.dat 0 Ring 1 x 0.375 0 Name: 3-8ring1.dat 0 Author: Niels Karsdorp 0 Unofficial Primitive 0 BFC CERTIFY CW 4 16 1 0 0 0.9239 0 (...) (21 years ago, 7-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: LDraw.org Bylaws - new proposed clauses
|
|
(...) Not sensing any disagreement here - so if no one's spoken up by the end of the weekend, I'm going to add these clauses to the drafts and call for ratification. -Tim (21 years ago, 7-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: More color problems
|
|
(...) That's a good idea. Unfortunately the sky sphere also creates a goodly amount of light, creating shadows of its own. The spotlight seems to have taken care of the stone look to the minifig, so I think I'll just stick with it the way it is. (...) (21 years ago, 7-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | 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)
|
