Subject:
|
Re: LDGlite and LPub (and maybe ldview?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad
|
Date:
|
Fri, 15 Oct 2004 22:26:03 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1238 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad, Steve Bliss wrote:
> At least part of the reason is that Gray is a fairly common color; Clear is
> more rare (for most parts). When parts where shown in gray, it was sometimes
> confusing whether it was gray-the-actual-color or gray-the-default-color.
> Using a less-common color reduces the amount of confusion.
>
> The only way to completely avoid confusion would be to find a color that
> would not be confused with an actual LEGO color. That's a challenging
> proposition these days.
How about a transparent brown? TLC already has an official trans-brown
(smoke/trans-black), so there's not much risk of them ever using that.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: LDGlite and LPub (and maybe ldview?
|
| (...) Not that my opinion goes for everyone but I think a solid color looks better. A transparent render show all the back edge making the image appear jumbled. To be honest I don't see how using grey, yellow, red or any other solid color is (...) (20 years ago, 16-Oct-04, to lugnet.cad)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: LDGlite and LPub (and maybe ldview?
|
| (...) At least part of the reason is that Gray is a fairly common color; Clear is more rare (for most parts). When parts where shown in gray, it was sometimes confusing whether it was gray-the-actual-color or gray-the-default-color. Using a (...) (20 years ago, 15-Oct-04, to lugnet.cad)
|
52 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
