Subject:
|
Re: Why LDraw.org doesn't use ldconfig.ldr ???
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad
|
Date:
|
Thu, 4 Oct 2007 18:36:46 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
7285 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad, Travis Cobbs wrote:
| |
In lugnet.cad, Steve Bliss wrote:
| |
OK, that wasn’t so hard. The script should be fixed now. I’ve pushed
through re-renders for 58119 and x919. All other parts are queued for
re-rendering, all images should be updated in a short time.
If anyone wants to look at the ldliterc.dat file, you can grab a copy at
http://www.ldraw.org/library/unofficial/ldliterc.dat
|
Maybe it’s just me, but the parts on the tracker now seem to be very light.
I looked at the ldliterc.dat above, and color 7 has the same setting as what
is in ldconfig.ldr. However, the actual color being rendered seems too
light. For example, here is an image from the part tracker:
Here is the same part rendered in LDView (with ldconfig.ldr turned on, and an
attempt on my part to approximate the light angle used in ldglite):
Here it is from LDView with no lighting:
Note also that the images on the part tracker didn’t seem to be so light
before. Does ldglite do something weird with colors when it’s using
ldliterc.dat, Don? Or are the internal ldglite colors perhaps all somewhat
dark to counteract bright lighting parameters?
|
The actual truth may be lost to the sands of time, but I believe
the ldlite colors were possibly copied from the original LDRAW colors,
and the ldlite Windows lighting code was matched to that? I know
I did a good amount of twiddling in the early days of ldglite coding to
adapt the opengl material and lighting parameters to achieve what I
considered nice shiny looking bricks with bright colors using the ldlite
colors as is. I think you’re correct that I ended up with some fairly
bright lighting params. Perhaps a bit too much ambient light?
Now I don’t remember exactly how the official ldconfig.ldr colors were
arrived at, but they *are* significantly different from the ldglite colors.
Perhaps they’re intended for a dimmer lighting model. Whatever, they
certainly look a bit washed out and dull in ldglite. I suppose I
should compare my lighting model code to yours to quantify the difference.
Meanwhile, perhaps the official ldliterc.dat file should be modified to
use the original ldlite colors where they already exist? (Edge colors
could still be set to black to make the majority happy)
Don
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Why LDraw.org doesn't use ldconfig.ldr ???
|
| (...) I'm pretty sure the ldconfig.ldr colors are designed to match the brick colors when no lighting is used (as in the second LDView picture above. If the ambient and diffuse terms add up to more than 1.0, the original colors end up getting washed (...) (17 years ago, 4-Oct-07, to lugnet.cad, FTX)
| | | Re: Why LDraw.org doesn't use ldconfig.ldr ???
|
| (...) I'm open to improving the unofficial ldliterc.dat colors, but I don't expect we want to use all the default ldlite colors -- unless they were tuned away from the original LDraw (ie, 4-bit VGA) colors. The other issue is if we the built-in (...) (17 years ago, 4-Oct-07, to lugnet.cad, FTX)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Why LDraw.org doesn't use ldconfig.ldr ???
|
| (...) looked at the ldliterc.dat above, and color 7 has the same setting as what is in ldconfig.ldr. However, the actual color being rendered seems too light. For example, here is an image from the part tracker: (URL) Here is the same part rendered (...) (17 years ago, 4-Oct-07, to lugnet.cad, FTX)
|
43 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
|
|
|
|
