Subject:
|
Re: LSynth and string
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad
|
Date:
|
Tue, 26 Apr 2005 15:11:52 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1487 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad, Steve Bliss wrote:
> In lugnet.cad, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> > In lugnet.cad, Steve Bliss wrote:
> > > In lugnet.cad, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> > > > In lugnet.cad, Kevin L. Clague wrote:
> > > > > LSynth implement's Larry's string cross section (no use ducking Larry) to create
> > > > > string using the hose synthesis class (this means splined strings with nice
> > > > > smooth curves).
> > > >
> > > > Umm... you REALLY should use a better string element than mine! It is really not
> > > > very accurate as it doesn't model the three strands at all. It was just a quick
> > > > hack, and it has fixed colors, if LEGO ever do red or white string it won't
> > > > work.
> > >
> > > Will it be a problem if LEGO ever do green string? ;)
> >
> > er... ya. Didn't they actually DO green string already or am I misremembering?
> >
> > > At this time, using the best available string element seems like the way to go.
> > > AFAIK, Larry's string is the best.
> >
> > That's pathetic.
>
> Is this one any better?
> http://www.ldraw.org/cgi-bin/ptdetail.cgi?f=parts/x572b.dat
>
> It does have the advantage of actually being submitted to the Parts Tracker, and
> now it's certified for the next release.
Those certainly are advantages. I just crashed MLCad trying to use it in a model
so I could play with the color so it took me a while to look at it. Honestly, I
don't think it does any better at modeling twisting than I did. I at least have
some changes in cross section as you go. But you have rounded ends which is
better. I guess now that you showed me yours I think mine is a little better.
(not much) I could submit it I guess.
I guess this gets down to this... for a feature that's what, 2 LDU total in
cross section, how much detail do you need? To model the twisted strands
accurately will take a LOT of polygons (you'd presumably use toroidal or
cylindrical sections that were somehow pieced together or something, I dunno,
haven't thought about it enough) But... Is it worth it?
This is sort of the same question you asked me about those torsos I was working
on way back when, (er, which I never finished the last one, ran into quad2dat
problems) is it necessary to have 1000 polygons in a torso print? Maybe not.
I honestly don't know.
Sometimes I wish we had an allowance for different resolutions in the same part,
the way the game engines drop polys and switch to shading as objects are farther
away, etc.
But then parts would be 19 times more complicated to model!
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: LSynth and string
|
| "Larry Pieniazek" <larry.(mylastname)@...e.DOT.com> wrote in message news:IFK7Js.p6p@lugnet.com... [ ... snipped ... ] (...) part, (...) farther (...) Not really relevant to this discussion but Cary Clark's TrackDraw application does this! Mike (19 years ago, 26-Apr-05, to lugnet.cad)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: LSynth and string
|
| (...) Is this one any better? (URL) does have the advantage of actually being submitted to the Parts Tracker, and now it's certified for the next release. Steve (19 years ago, 26-Apr-05, to lugnet.cad)
|
20 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
|
|
|
|
