Subject:
|
Re: New colours in Ldraw?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad
|
Date:
|
Fri, 8 Oct 2004 12:45:29 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1233 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad, William Howard wrote:
> In lugnet.cad, Steve Bliss wrote:
> > In lugnet.cad, Travis Cobbs wrote:
> > > but is it really a good idea to be using a new color in a part so soon
> > > after it has been made official? You can pretty much guarantee it will
> > > look wrong in every current program if you do so.
heh - I hadn't really caught the irony that the new codes will look alright in
ol' LDraw, but will (currently) bomb in almost any newer program. :)
> So what colour would you use if not the official colour? Ok, so it may look
> wrong until the programs are updated to reflect what Lego is doing with it's
> colour palette, but is this really a valid reason not to use official LDraw
> colours in official LDraw parts that are accurate reproductions of official
> LEGO parts? IMHO no!
Especially since we've now established an official way to communicate LDraw.org
color definitions to programs. The lack of support for the new colors will
hopefully be a temporary problem, until programs are updated.
> > > Also, I though official parts had to look correct when rendered by LDraw.
> > > (Mind you, I'm not sure this requirement is such a good idea any more, but
> > > I thought it was the case.) Is it now OK to use colors in parts that
> > > aren't supported by the original LDraw?
>
> OK, so that's saying that the LDraw organisation is going to ignore new Lego
> colours? Isn't this a bit of a "head in the sand" approach? Whatever your
> own personal view on LEGO's new colour palette, ignoring it does not seem to
> be a viable option IMHO.
I think we're far from ignoring new colors. Maybe a little slow, but we're not ignoring things. :) As far as color use in the parts library goes, about the only reason for specific colors to get into the files is because they appear on patterns. In most of these cases, we use a dithered equivalent to the needed color.
> OK, so what colour numbers should be used in official LDraw parts when the
> official LEGO part contains these colours?
Many of these colors have suggested equivalents from the dithered range.
> And if these are different to the
> colours represented by numbers 17 through 30 shouldn't those numbers be
> dropped to avoid confusion?
Previously, they were listed as "LDLite" colors, not LDraw colors. That
designation doesn't really apply any more. The new color codes aren't built
into LDLite, and they are now official LDraw.org designations. So it seemed
appropriate to list them as the LDraw codes.
I can change the notation on the color page, or make a note that certain colors
should not be used in official part files.
> Backward compatibility is an admirable goal, but there comes a point where it
> has to be re-evaluated.
I think we all agree on that. I don't think we're at a breaking point right
now, but we are moving in that direction. But if we drop backwards
compatibility, it won't be because of color definitions. There are more serious
issues than that.
Steve
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: New colours in Ldraw?
|
| (...) ditto (...) So what colour would you use if not the official colour? Ok, so it may look wrong until the programs are updated to reflect what Lego is doing with it's colour palette, but is this really a valid reason not to use official LDraw (...) (20 years ago, 8-Oct-04, to lugnet.cad)
|
20 Messages in This Thread:
 
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
