 | | Re: Question about "stickers"
|
|
(...) Well, specifically I'm working on modeling the stickers from set 0375 (Fort with Knights aka the Yellow Castle), in particular the shield and vest stickers. But since I do not own an actual copy of set 0375, I can't measure the actual (...) (19 years ago, 16-Aug-05, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | New Part: 4071 Fabuland Door with Frame 4 of 4 [DAT]
|
|
4 of 4 0 Fabuland Door with Frame (Shortcut) 0 Name: 4071c01.dat 0 Author: Imre Papp (ipapp@geometria.hu) 0 Unofficial Element 0 frame 1 4 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 4071a.dat 0 door closed 1 14 48 84 -14.5 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 4071b.dat 0 door half open (...) (19 years ago, 13-Aug-05, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | New Part: 4071 Fabuland Door with Frame 3 of 4 [DAT]
|
|
3 of 4 0 ~Fabuland Door 0 Name: s\4071bs01.dat 0 Author: Sybrand Bonsma 0 Author: Imre Papp (ipapp@geometria.hu) 0 Unofficial Element 0 BFC CERTIFY CCW 0 -- hole and deco edges 2 24 -43 -49 -2.5 -43 -28 -2.5 2 24 -43 -28 -2.5 -42.65 -26.16 -2.5 2 24 (...) (19 years ago, 13-Aug-05, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | New Part: 4071 Fabuland Door with Frame 2 of 4 [DAT]
|
|
2 of 4 0 Fabuland Door 0 Name: 4071b.dat 0 Author: Sybrand Bonsma 0 Author: Imre Papp (ipapp@geometria.hu) 0 Unofficial Element 0 BFC CERTIFY CCW 0 -- outer surfaces 2 24 0 75 2.5 -99 75 2.5 2 24 -99 75 2.5 -99 -75 2.5 2 24 -99 -75 2.5 0 -75 2.5 2 (...) (19 years ago, 13-Aug-05, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | New Part: 4071 Fabuland Door with Frame 1 of 4 [DAT]
|
|
Dear List, Please find attached in this and in the next posts the "Fabuland Door with Frame" part. Since it consists of two detachable subparts (the frame and the door ), they are modelled in 4071a.dat and 4071b.dat respectively, with 4071c01.dat as (...) (19 years ago, 13-Aug-05, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | 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)
|
