 | | Re: Voting now open for April's MOTM and SOTM contests
|
|
(...) I tend to enjoy a camera angle of 55 for perspective renderings, the default (67, I think) has too much perspective. -Tim (21 years ago, 6-Apr-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Voting now open for April's MOTM and SOTM contests
|
|
(...) Well, I attempted to do that with ldglite a year or two ago: (URL) it has a few bugs, and a new L3P release with lots of handy new command line options seemed imminent at the time so I put it on the backburner. I think it should work ok to (...) (21 years ago, 6-Apr-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Voting now open for April's MOTM and SOTM contests
|
|
(...) A few teething problems are perhaps to be expected. Setting the latitude to 30° and the camera angle to 20 gives a reasonable view of all sides. Cheers, Allister (21 years ago, 5-Apr-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: April MOTM &SOTM Contest
|
|
Orion, I can sympathize. I still feel like I'm just stumbling through POV-RAY myself. May I suggest using L3P and L3P-Add-On (in case you're not already using them)? These help me tremendously. As far as camera angles go, I almost never use a height (...) (21 years ago, 5-Apr-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Voting now open for April's MOTM and SOTM contests
|
|
(...) I think most people won't fault you at all, the goal of a leval playing field is a very good one. MoTM should be about the models, not the renderings. I was able to decide which model I liked best nonetheless. (...) I am a total novice at this (...) (21 years ago, 5-Apr-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Voting now open for April's MOTM and SOTM contests
|
|
(...) I'm well aware of my knowledge limitations regarding good camera position, settings, etc. I'm open to suggestions and/or training. I apologize for the way the renders turned out this month, I was hoping for a good start to the new format. (...) (21 years ago, 5-Apr-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Web-based LDraw viewing
|
|
(...) Hello Mike and Orion. The ActiveX controls generate distrust, but by the moment I have not found a better method (waiting for a good implementation of opengl for java), and that occupy a space as small as 80kb. Time ago I had present the Java (...) (21 years ago, 5-Apr-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Voting now open for April's MOTM and SOTM contests
|
|
(...) As an entrant, I have one comment. I understand the desire to to render all models with the same setting but I think those settings need to be tweaked a bit. The default camera settings allow for a perspective effect, but at close range, they (...) (21 years ago, 5-Apr-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Naming Technic Liftarms
|
|
(...) Hi Steve!.. How is it going since we last talk? Anyway, here are the names that I use in my personal database: Technic Brick Technic Half Beam Technic Half Beam Liftarm Technic Beam Technic Beam Liftarm Technic Beam Liftarm Double-Bent Which (...) (21 years ago, 5-Apr-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.db.brictionary)
|
| |
| | Re: Naming Technic Liftarms
|
|
(...) Two alternate thoughts (which I'm pretty sure have been mentioned before): 1. Stick with 'liftarm' for the half-width parts, and 'beam' for full-width parts. 2. Use 'liftarm' for parts with crossaxle holes, and 'beam' for parts with only (...) (21 years ago, 5-Apr-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.db.brictionary)
|
