Subject:
|
Re: POV in Part
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dat.parts
|
Date:
|
Wed, 11 Jun 2003 20:09:28 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2210 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dat.parts, Orion Pobursky wrote:
> I'm not too keen on this idea. While POV-Ray is a nice tool and freeware,
> I'd like to avoid dedicating ourselves to one tool,
I agree to that, but since POV-code will be between IFPOV and IFNOTPOV codes
will it matter that much?
> not to mention the size increase on all the files.
There I disagree: the reason I ask is because of the macaroni-brick. I tried
(fairly succesfull) to write the main part as POV-code and it is just 35 lines
and half of them only contain a "}". True you'll get LDraw-code + POV-code but
since POV has more primitives POV-code will be smaller.
I'm not saying all bricks should contain POV-code; standard bricks, tiles and
plates are fine by me and some less standard parts are beautifull programmed
too. But in some cases I think a part would benefit from having some POV-code in
it. Look at the 9V train motor wheels for example.
> If all you want is nice looking parts for POV try
> a combo of L3P,LGEO,and Anton Raves Lego POV library.
Hmm, there are 2 problems: the LGEO lib hasn't been updated for a long time and
Anton's parts are different from the LGEO parts (take a look in the code of both
libs and you'll see). I would opt for Anton's lib (hè, he's Dutch too you know!)
since that is bigger now than the LGEO lib.
Jeroen
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: POV in Part
|
| (...) I'm not too keen on this idea. While POV-Ray is a nice tool and freeware, I'd like to avoid dedicating ourselves to one tool, not to mention the size increase on all the files. If all you want is nice looking parts for POV try a combo of (...) (21 years ago, 11-Jun-03, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, FTX)
|
42 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
