 | | Re: NonCA-parts in need of re-writing
|
|
(...) submitted to the PT: (URL) monitoring the PT activities but it would be useful to drop me a line when submitting a re-written part so I can remove it from the list. w. (19 years ago, 2-Jul-07, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: realistic minifig heads with ldraw and povray?
|
|
Hi guys, thank you very much for so many good answers in a very short time. I found Anton Raves converter page yesterday. In the end the converted data was useless for me and his documentation is unreadable on a Windows PC :-( As so many others Lutz (...) (19 years ago, 2-Jul-07, to lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: Change to existing policy on embedding POV-Ray code in Official Files
|
|
(...) Since I've contributed exactly two official parts to the LDraw library (neither of them with inlined POV-Ray code), I'm sure that my opinion carries more weight than anyone's on the subject... :) For some time it has been argued that the use (...) (19 years ago, 2-Jul-07, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Change to existing policy on embedding POV-Ray code in Official Files
|
|
(...) I'd _like_ to see a meta-language for basic shapes defined in their primitives (the current naming system would be fine if it was consistent) as that could be used in converter software of all hues. I also realise this isn't likely to happen (...) (19 years ago, 1-Jul-07, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Change to existing policy on embedding POV-Ray code in Official Files
|
|
(...) At the risk of reigniting this argument, I still hold to the original reasons for disallowing EmPOV: - The POV-RAY SDL is not under the control of the LSC. This means that if the POV-Ray Team decides to depreciate a command (which they have (...) (19 years ago, 1-Jul-07, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
