 | | Re: Using MPD syntax in official part files
|
|
(...) Sure, doing the right thing in terms of putting the code in the most advantageous location is always worth the effort. (...) Hey, it's all about namespace management, right? As a parts author, I avoid using subfiles unless there is a fairly (...) (15 years ago, 10-Feb-10, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: "Dither" colors in patterned/sticker parts
|
|
(...) There seems to be support for RGB and also for "Dithered" colour out there. The problem that we always faced are caused by applications that do not follow our ideas and so we go limiting our aims. I feel we should stop doing in that way (...) (15 years ago, 10-Feb-10, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: "Dither" colors in patterned/sticker parts
|
|
(...) Time for a cadfight! :) /Tore (15 years ago, 10-Feb-10, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: *** MLCad V3.30 ***
|
|
(...) How about just "use the 'dithered' range but apply LDConfig on top of them, overriding any colour that gets in the way"? -Santeri (15 years ago, 10-Feb-10, to lugnet.cad.mlcad)
|
| |
| | Re: "Dither" colors in patterned/sticker parts
|
|
(...) DOH! I forgot to include -- Part of the reason I think RGB colors are not the way to go is because they don't solve the real problem -- there are a good number of patterns that can't realistically be modeled in LDraw. Anything with gradients, (...) (15 years ago, 10-Feb-10, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: "Dither" colors in patterned/sticker parts
|
|
(...) Steve, our opposing positions on RGBs are known. What I seek in this very moment is your position on the second question in this post: (URL) "No password, not a single CA-header edit on your agenda nor a library update since ... was it 2004 or (...) (15 years ago, 10-Feb-10, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: *** MLCad V3.30 ***
|
|
(...) I can confirm that. While the LSC may have dithered over the spec, we certainly didn't drop "dither" intentionally. (Mind you, given the number of referenced specs we had to ratify first before we could get onto "the biggie", I'm surprised we (...) (15 years ago, 10-Feb-10, to lugnet.cad.mlcad)
|
| |
| | Re: "Dither" colors in patterned/sticker parts
|
|
(...) Not sure where you're going with that. I think adding RGB colors to official parts would not be a net improvement to the parts library system. It has nothing to do with backwards compatibility or conservatism. Steve (15 years ago, 10-Feb-10, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: *** MLCad V3.30 ***
|
|
(...) I think Travis' wording may be confusing. Don't use "the old dither algorithm". MLCad 3.30 draws colors 256-511 as *solid* colors. That's better than using the stippling algorithm from previous MLCad versions. (No new/current software stipples (...) (15 years ago, 10-Feb-10, to lugnet.cad.mlcad)
|
| |
| | Re: "Dither" colors in patterned/sticker parts
|
|
(...) Joshua, got a link for you: (URL) (15 years ago, 10-Feb-10, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: BTW, Dither What Colors...?
|
|
(...) Of course, I mean the blending, not the dithering... (15 years ago, 10-Feb-10, to lugnet.cad.mlcad)
|
| |
| | BTW, Dither What Colors...?
|
|
(...) Hmm. "You may think this is easy, but wait 'til I've explained it to you!" (One of my father's favourite standard joke.) I don't know how much difference it will make, but current standard colors are much better than the 16 original LDraw (...) (15 years ago, 10-Feb-10, to lugnet.cad.mlcad)
|
| |
| | Re: "Dither" colors in patterned/sticker parts
|
|
(...) Your passive-aggressive whining wears thin, Willy. Your chief target laughs it off, but you keep at it. What little sense of community there might be is not helped by this behavior or attitude. This approach says a lot more about you (and (...) (15 years ago, 10-Feb-10, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Warning: Printing Bug in MLCad!
|
|
Hi, sorry to say, but I just found a bug in MLCad which is caused by the actual compiler I'm using. When you start printing preview in MLCad it is crashing when part lists are printed. I'm working on that .... Michael (15 years ago, 10-Feb-10, to lugnet.cad.mlcad)
|
| |
| | Re: *** MLCad V3.30 ***
|
|
"Travis Cobbs" <tcobbs@REMOVEgmail.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:Kxn3yE.p2D@lugnet.com... (...) So I will take over parts of the build in color table in the range of 256 to 511. During this step the programm will convert these dittered colors (...) (15 years ago, 10-Feb-10, to lugnet.cad.mlcad)
|
| |
| | Re: "Dither" colors in patterned/sticker parts
|
|
(...) I apologize for dreaming out loud. For a sec I've forgotten that we are a conservative community - at least some of us. (...) No password, not a single CA-header edit on your agenda nor a library update since ... was it 2004 or 2005? Steve, (...) (15 years ago, 10-Feb-10, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: *** MLCad V3.30 ***
|
|
(...) As it happens, the LSC has been dealing with this very issue for the past few months. There is no mention made of dither colors in any of the current LDraw specs (including the official parts restrictions). They somehow got dropped (...) (15 years ago, 10-Feb-10, to lugnet.cad.mlcad)
|
| |
| | Re: Using MPD syntax in official part files
|
|
(...) I can see that, although a great deal of care would need to be taken to make sure that the MPD sub-files had no chance of being useful in another part. (...) I can definitely see that. (...) I totally disagree with this as an argument for (...) (15 years ago, 10-Feb-10, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Using MPD syntax in official part files
|
|
(...) I was about to write the same thing, but you beat me. I think it's a great idea! I can think of two potential problems: 1. Programs that create seams between parts but not models. (Are there any more than L3P?) Depending on how they are (...) (15 years ago, 10-Feb-10, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Using MPD syntax in official part files
|
|
(...) I think eliminating part-specific subfiles would be a nice file-management benefit, if nothing else. I expect that reducing the number of part-specific subfiles would speed up the part-approval process, always a good thing. The most important (...) (15 years ago, 10-Feb-10, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, FTX)
|
