 | | Re: Question about "stickers"
|
|
(...) You make the sticker whatever size it actually is. If it's 40 LDU wide and extend to the edges then that's what you make. A sticker is just like any other part: it must be modelled as close to the real life part as possible (including size). (...) (19 years ago, 13-Aug-05, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Question about "stickers"
|
|
(...) Hi Mark, I agree with Tim. I don't think this should be a set standard, you should make the stickers a size that looks good. In your case, I think I prefer the 1LDU inset, but it's really up to you. The 0.25 LDU is just to try & make sure the (...) (19 years ago, 12-Aug-05, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Question about "stickers"
|
|
I am also not on the LSC but I think that Tim's remarks make a lot of sense. (19 years ago, 12-Aug-05, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Question about "stickers"
|
|
(...) --SNIP PIC-- Hi Mark, I would assume that if it is a user created sticker you can put it where you want. For official stickers I assume you make them the same size as the original sticker. Which sort do you mean? I suspect the 0.25 LDU is (...) (19 years ago, 12-Aug-05, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Question about "stickers"
|
|
So far, the only standard I've found about modeling sticker "parts" is that they should be 0.25 LU off the surface of the piece they will be "stickered" to. What about width & length compared to the surface? I.E: sticker for shields - should they (...) (19 years ago, 12-Aug-05, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: have these pieces been CADed?
|
|
(...) It's worth noting that the parts aren't certified yet, and in fact have a hold vote in their common sub-file. So if the next official update is soon, then it's probably unlikely that these parts will be in it. --Travis (19 years ago, 29-Jul-05, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: have these pieces been CADed?
|
|
(...) No, the primary PT admin (Chris Dee) has been off on holiday until recently. -Orion (19 years ago, 29-Jul-05, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: have these pieces been CADed?
|
|
Let's just hope that not too much time and energy goes into this 'steering committee election thingy... (URL) (19 years ago, 29-Jul-05, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: have these pieces been CADed?
|
|
(...) Read this: (URL) Niels (19 years ago, 29-Jul-05, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: have these pieces been CADed?
|
|
(...) (URL) good right link>. (URL) good left link> (...) thanks! any idea when they'll be official? i figured they were by now & i just didn't get the update. also, any idea when the next official update will be on Ldraw? Jeff (19 years ago, 29-Jul-05, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: have these pieces been CADed?
|
|
(...) Mmhhh... bad link for left part. Here is the good one: (URL) (19 years ago, 28-Jul-05, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: have these pieces been CADed?
|
|
Should be: (URL) left> and (URL) right>. Oops! :) (19 years ago, 28-Jul-05, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: have these pieces been CADed?
|
|
(URL) left> and (URL) right>. (19 years ago, 28-Jul-05, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, FTX)
|
| |
| | have these pieces been CADed?
|
|
i can't seem to find files for these on LDraw, Peeron, or on the reference pages here @ LUGnet. (2 URLs) Jeff (not Lcad experinced to draw either) (19 years ago, 28-Jul-05, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Type numbering of parts with different types
|
|
(...) Well, first off, using 'Type X' should be the notation of last resort. The prefered way to note variations of parts is to include a descriptive notation. Sometimes, a descriptive notation is not practical (for whatever reasons). In this case, (...) (19 years ago, 26-Jul-05, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Type numbering of parts with different types
|
|
When reviewing some parts with different types, I noticed some had the type number in arabic numbers (like 'Type 1', 'Type 2') in the part titles, while others used roman numbers (like 'Type I, 'Type II'). For consistancy, what kind of numbering (...) (19 years ago, 26-Jul-05, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: New part: Trailer Base 4 x 16 x 1
|
|
(...) I have only looked at the official parts library and the parts tracker to see if this part existed. (...) Yes, my part is BFD:ed and uses the latest primitives and has the same kind of orientation as the other trailer base of that time (...) (19 years ago, 23-Jul-05, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: New part: Trailer Base 4 x 16 x 1
|
|
(...) We can use the part number x726, which I already have "reserved" for this part. See (URL) I assume your part is BFD:ed and makes much better use of primitives than mine, originally authored back in 1998. Most likely better oriented than mine, (...) (19 years ago, 23-Jul-05, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: New part: Trailer Base 4 x 16 x 1 [DAT]
|
|
Tore made the ramp and I find it good enuf. .dat attached... (URL) 0 Ramp for trailer 0 Name: 727.dat 0 Author: Tore Eriksson 0 Unofficial Element 0 KEYWORDS Legoland 2 20 0 78 20 -5 90 2 24 -20 0 78 -20 -5 90 2 24 20 -5 90 20 -5 78 2 24 -20 -5 90 (...) (19 years ago, 22-Jul-05, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, FTX)
|
| |
| | New part: Trailer Base 4 x 16 x 1
|
|
I have created another new (old) part: Trailer Base 4 x 16 x 1 It's on the parts tracker as x510.dat (URL) left out the inforcementrib underneat, which is nonfunctional in CAD. I used the same orientation as the other trailer base (968.dat). (...) (19 years ago, 22-Jul-05, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: New part: Brick 1 x 8 without Centerstuds
|
|
(...) Isn't it strange that this part hasn't been created yet? I took for granted it was made a long time ago. /Tore (19 years ago, 22-Jul-05, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | New part: Brick 1 x 8 without Centerstuds [DAT]
|
|
I noticed that the old 1 x 8 brick without centerstuds has not been created for LDraw, yet. This part is not even listed in the Peeron database either. This variant is used in the CA period a lot, although I have a red brick which seems ABS to me. (...) (19 years ago, 22-Jul-05, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Stickers in different colors
|
|
How do you create stickers in Ldraw? And would these render out to POV? I've tried a couple of things, but either the programs don't work well or the stickers don't render out. (19 years ago, 21-Jul-05, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Stickers in different colors
|
|
I found a sticker with black town car grille pattern in good condition, so I'm going to create this sticker in LDraw. This sticker has been used in a few different colors: * Black pattern on yellow surface (set 646) * Black pattern on red surface (...) (19 years ago, 21-Jul-05, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | part 2347 [DAT]
|
|
im sure someones been waiting for this just as long as I have. 0 Excavator Bucket 3 x 6 with Teeth 0 Name: 2347.ldr 0 ROTATION CENTER 0 0 0 1 "Custom" 0 ROTATION CONFIG 0 0 2 24 -59 13 -53 -60 13 -53 2 24 -60 13 -61 -60 13 -53 2 24 -60 13 -61 -56 13 (...) (19 years ago, 9-Jun-05, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Stickers from set 386 [DAT]
|
|
Hello, I have created the stickers from set 386 (Red cross helicopter and ambulance). The stickersheet contains multiple copies of 3 different stickers: Large red cross Small red cross Text L-386 The sticker sheet contains the number 004631, so I (...) (19 years ago, 4-Jun-05, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: 1-8tang.dat?
|
|
(...) (URL) (...) Thanx :-) Niels (19 years ago, 1-Jun-05, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: 1-8tang.dat?
|
|
(...) but the current 1-8tang on the PT has 3 hold votes. This part (...) changed since december last year. Is someone willing to correct (...) It would be rather handy to give us a direct link to this primitive. And then, nice (URL) retro (...) (19 years ago, 31-May-05, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives, FTX)
|
| |
| | 1-8tang.dat?
|
|
I am working on a part and I actually need something like a 1-8tang primitive, but the current 1-8tang on the PT has 3 hold votes. This part hasn't been changed since december last year. Is someone willing to correct this primitive? Niels (19 years ago, 31-May-05, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
|
| |
| | Re: CCW vs CW
|
|
(...) If it's not a whole lot of trouble, I would recommend it. (The conversion can be made automatic, as long as the individual files clearly state CW or CCW correctly.) Speaking as a computer graphics professional, I can say for sure that being (...) (19 years ago, 13-May-05, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives, FTX)
|
| |
| | CCW vs CW
|
|
The (URL) Language Extension for Clipping (BFC)> states in the Parts Library Guidelines section that Primitives should always use CCW winding. However some of the primitives use CW, for example (URL) rect.dat>. Should these be rewritten? Would it be (...) (19 years ago, 12-May-05, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Part requests: Lots and lots of parts
|
|
(...) I have posted these parts on ldraw part tracker (URL) 44292.dat> (URL) 44308.dat> I plan to modelize the following parts (URL) Wheel Technic 14 x 70 mm Futuristic> + (URL) matching tire> (URL) BIONICLE claw> (URL) BIONICLE hook> (19 years ago, 4-May-05, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Part 41770 certified but missing sub-file??
|
|
(...) Doh! I thought I had already installed the latest parts update. My goof. (19 years ago, 28-Apr-05, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Conditional lines on sloped wedge parts 43720 and 43721 [DAT]
|
|
(...) Good idea with a twist primitive (twist.dat ?). Perhaps it would be simpler if it were only in one octant: 2 24 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 24 0 0 1 1 1 1 2 24 1 1 1 0 1 0 2 24 0 1 0 0 0 0 POV code would be: //x - yz = 0 quadric { <0,0,0>, <0,0,-1>, (...) (19 years ago, 27-Apr-05, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | 6 sided string "primitive" with emphasis on primitive! [DAT]
|
|
Since there was some discussion about this... I posted the 4 sided one here (URL) of these are very "good" as in high fidelity, they totally do not model that the string is 3 twisted cylindrical/toroidal shapes, but for black string they work pretty (...) (19 years ago, 26-Apr-05, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Conditional lines on sloped wedge parts 43720 and 43721
|
|
(...) Hey, thanks testing it out. You're right about the conditionals zig-zagging a bit. I still have the feeling that if the surface were pinned down to the concave green line those zig-zags would go away. But I couldn't decide whether to divvy it (...) (19 years ago, 26-Apr-05, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Conditional lines on sloped wedge parts 43720 and 43721 [DAT]
|
|
(...) The following are the appropriate conditionals for Don's surface. Playing with it you can have angles where the conditionals seem to go too far, but it's certainly much better than the current ones. (Note that the last 4 conditionals are only (...) (19 years ago, 26-Apr-05, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Conditional lines on sloped wedge parts 43720 and 43721 [DAT]
|
|
(...) Nice, I like the idea of the quadric primitive, but we want to add some curvature to the LDRAW version, right? I fiddled a bit with the part a few days ago, starting with the two triangles outlined by your primitive. I didn't exactly finish, (...) (19 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Conditional lines on sloped wedge parts 43720 and 43721 [DAT]
|
|
(...) Looks good. Should we create a new primitive with the next dimensions:? 2 24 0 0 1 0 1 1 2 24 1 0 -1 0 1 -1 2 24 0 0 1 1 0 -1 2 24 0 1 1 0 1 -1 and a POV-quadric version in the coming L3PPARTS. As the outer twisted surface of the parts with (...) (19 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Part 41770 certified but missing sub-file??
|
|
(...) I believe that is because s/41770s01.dat was certified and released in previous parts update (in this case 2004-04), and the parts tracker only displays dependencies that are currently on the tracker. This is not a problem, if the subpart has (...) (19 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
