 | | Re: Automatic unofficial part detection?
|
|
(...) I guess that is the origin of all my troubles ... At the risk of testing your patience (a flu keeps me from being very coherent today) - how would I be able to see parts whose files are outside those dirs in the Mlcad parts library window? (...) (21 years ago, 7-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: Animation posted now
|
|
(...) Here we go. Very unlike the Superbowl version but it is a cool exercise in using PoV-Ray's animation features. Still a long cry from Steve's stuff. :) (URL) to maintain a fairly low bitrate (256KB) and high clarity I had to use the Indeo 5.1 (...) (21 years ago, 7-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.ray, lugnet.animation)
|
| |
| | Re: PoV-Ray ignoring 'translate'?
|
|
(...) Miguel, Awesome, thanks a lot. I had boosted it up to 37 in testing and saw no increase...now I know why. Thanks!! Animation shall be posted soon, hopefully today. (21 years ago, 7-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: Automatic unofficial part detection?
|
|
(...) You could just MPD the model. MPDWorkshop will include in the MPD any parts that are not in the P or PARTS folders. This is how I distribute my models the official sets. Note that this will only work if you haven't mixed the unofficial parts (...) (21 years ago, 7-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: PoV-Ray ignoring 'translate'?
|
|
Hi Mike, Your increments are too small. Try translate <0,0,70*clock> It worked for me! (21 years ago, 7-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | 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)
|
