 | | Re: LGEO update
|
|
(...) Nevermind. The problem was that the beta version of L3P needs to be installed. There's no mention of this on your site. -Mike (16 years ago, 29-Nov-08, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: LGEO update
|
|
(...) L3PAO complains when I direct it to the location of this archive. Are there any incompatibilities between the two I should worry about? -Mike (16 years ago, 29-Nov-08, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: LDraw (and LDraw.org) questions
|
|
(...) Awesome! Thanks! -Mike (16 years ago, 29-Nov-08, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: Mesh Enhancer?
|
|
(...) Could you please send me a copy as well? The whole domain where the site was hosted seems to be down. -Mike (16 years ago, 29-Nov-08, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.technic, FTX)
|
| |
| | MOC Updates
|
|
I've updated my digital MOCs page. None of the models are new, but they are all freshly rendered using radiosity and are all available for download. (URL) hope you like them! -Mike (16 years ago, 29-Nov-08, to lugnet.announce.moc, lugnet.cad.dat.models)
|
| |
| | Re: Unified installer
|
|
(...) Ah, I clicked on the "Download" link (bolded) on the ldraw.org sidebar and didn't see it anywhere. It is listed in the "Getting Started" section instead. -Mike (16 years ago, 29-Nov-08, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: Unified installer
|
|
(...) The LDRAW ALL-IN-ONE-INSATLLER does this already. The user gets to choose 1 of 3 options. 1) BASIC install which installed LDRAW Part libary, MLCAD, and LDVIEW 2) INTERMEDIATE which installs BASIC + L3P, L3PA, LPUB, LGEO and POV-Ray 3.1g and (...) (16 years ago, 28-Nov-08, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: Unified installer
|
|
(...) This problem has been indintified a long ago, but a quick solution was blocked by the fact that several of the included part files are historicly not licenced for distribution in another form then included within the original LDraw Package. In (...) (16 years ago, 26-Nov-08, to lugnet.cad, FTX)
|
| |
| | Unified installer
|
|
I think the way that the LDraw utilities are installed is a bit complicated for novice users, especially children or parents of children. Essentially, the current scheme asks users to first install the resources required by the software, and *then* (...) (16 years ago, 25-Nov-08, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: Opinions needed for Color and Edge Values
|
|
(...) I completely agree that changing the colour codes at this stage is a terrible idea. However I have nothing against duplicating them. One thing we do need is to maintain, alongside the LDraw codes, mapping lists to other known systems such as (...) (16 years ago, 25-Nov-08, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: Opinions needed for Color and Edge Values
|
|
(...) Since MLCAD (and other programs) do not support color codes above 511, a different approach to reading TLG colors is needed. However, I have to strongly agree with Philo. Changing color codes that have been defined for years is not a good (...) (16 years ago, 25-Nov-08, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: Opinions needed for Color and Edge Values
|
|
(...) We should be able to have TLG names as a language file, since every TLG color value should map to every BL (BrickLink) color value. I certainly understand the drive to have them in the file in one form or another. Perhaps the most benefit can (...) (16 years ago, 25-Nov-08, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: Opinions needed for Color and Edge Values
|
|
(...) I am _strongly_ against that. Imho this is the same mistake LEGO did a few years ago with the stone colors. What would be the point of defining a standard (ldconfig.ldr) to change it at the first drawback? Colors 70..72 are defined for more (...) (16 years ago, 25-Nov-08, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: LDraw (and LDraw.org) questions
|
|
(...) This has never been implemented. The SteerCo has had some discussions about also considering to use the wiki for the OMR but never reached consensus. IMHO I'd rather have a module for the CMS taking for granted that I'm not talking about a (...) (16 years ago, 25-Nov-08, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: Opinions needed for Color and Edge Values
|
|
(...) I'd like to hear some opinions on how we do define backwards compatibility? Considering that most user built their models using MLCad (no idea which color numbers are supported by Leo, Bricksmith or SR3D) which comes with very limited color (...) (16 years ago, 25-Nov-08, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: Opinions needed for Color and Edge Values
|
|
(...) The "besides the color code" isn’t a collateral damage but the main problem! We cannot ship the TLG numbering in a simple language file. Think about a blue car colored with LDraw code 1. Loading the TLG colors as language file you would (...) (16 years ago, 25-Nov-08, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | LDraw (and LDraw.org) questions
|
|
A couple of questions regarding LDraw and LDraw.org. 1) Will the LDraw specification ever support normal vectors to facilitate polygon smoothing? 2) One of the pages on LDraw.org mentions an Official Model Repository. Where can I find this? Thanks! (...) (16 years ago, 25-Nov-08, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: Opinions needed for Color and Edge Values
|
|
In lugnet.cad, Scott Wardlaw wrote: You use in your description the attribute SPECKLE that is not yet official. So if we use that (I recommend that) we have to update the article (URL) as well. Only as a reminder. cu mikeheide (16 years ago, 24-Nov-08, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: LGEO update
|
|
(...) Sorry, I was mixing up different files. The error in 32062 was that the declare for "32062_clear" said "32064_clear". Maybe you have already fixed it. The one with the missing semicolon is actually lg_4262. It is on line 493. (16 years ago, 24-Nov-08, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: Opinions needed for Color and Edge Values
|
|
(...) This is done with two exceptions to follow the BL naming scheme. Teal is not one of the BL color names, but the color values for LDraw Teal are almost the same as Dark_Tuquoise, according to Peeron and my own observation. Light_Red is also not (...) (16 years ago, 24-Nov-08, to lugnet.cad)
|
