Subject:
|
Re: How accurate need bricks to be?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad
|
Date:
|
Tue, 24 Sep 2002 18:09:01 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
886 times
|
| |
|
|
I asked about the accuracy at the bottom of the bricks
http://home.hetnet.nl/~niels-karsdorp/ldraw/question.htm
Chris answered:
> Yes, this is the "rule" we try to apply - if the detail is functional, then it
> should be included, if decorative or an artifact of the moulding process then
> it may be ignored.
> Historically we have been even less concerned about the detail on
> the underside of bricks (such as 700).
In the case of brick 700,
I know that the old versions did NOT have any tubes at the bottom.
Is that something that should be modeled?
I don't have any of those olde 700s, but I might locate one.
(Hopy my grandparents still have the box of lego...)
Niels Karsdorp
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: How accurate need bricks to be?
|
| (...) Yes, I believe the presence or absence of tubes should be modelled as this does impact the functionality. The ribs are less important, IMHO, but if I were modelling this part _now_ I would include them. Chris (...) (22 years ago, 25-Sep-02, to lugnet.cad)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: How accurate need bricks to be?
|
| (...) Yes, this is the "rule" we try to apply - if the detail is functional, then it should be included, if decorative or an artifact of the moulding process then it may be ignored. So in your two examples, I would expect to see the small lugs on (...) (22 years ago, 21-Sep-02, to lugnet.cad)
|
13 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
|
|
|
|
