Subject:
|
Re: LDraw-to-Raves (was: POV in Part)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dat.parts
|
Date:
|
Thu, 17 Jul 2003 16:20:44 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1945 times
|
| |
|
|
"Michael Horvath" <mhorvath2161@juno.com> wrote in message
news:HI33p4.1w9H@lugnet.com...
> Just to drop in my 2 cents,
> I think putting them into one file would be better.
Isn't very flexible, is it?
> Also, could you put up a quality comparison chart? Three shots of a • couple of
> parts, each, so we can compare?
Before you go and render, think of this:
LDraw: rectangles and triangles that make up lego parts, converted to meshes
(triangles) for POV-Ray, some other (but not all) POV primitives also used.
Looks good in LDraw editor but some parts not that great in POV. Parts are
hollow. Still supported and developed by many.
LGEO: real POV-Ray parts using POV-primitives and CSG, no conversion, round
is round not squarish round. Quite complex code. Some LDraw parts are
subtituted for LGEO parts. Parts not hollow. No support or development what
so ever.
Anton's Parts: real POV-Ray parts using POV-primitives and CSG, no
conversion, round is round not squarish round. Code not so complex. No LDraw
to POV conversion (yet!). Parts not hollow. Support and development still in
progress not only by Anton but also others (but still quality checked by
Anton)
What do you want? Parts that look good in your LDraw editor or parts that
render as real as possible? A library that isn't updated for 4 years or one
that still is updated and refined as we speak?
He, I'm Dutch, so for me the choice is obvious ;-)
Jeroen
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
 | | Re: LDraw-to-Raves (was: POV in Part)
|
| (...) [snip comparision of libraries] Many parts look about the same, whether their code came from LDraw or Anton's library. Also, there are a number of small differences between the versions of the some parts in the two libraries. Sometimes Anton's (...) (21 years ago, 18-Jul-03, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
| | | Re: LDraw-to-Raves (was: POV in Part)
|
| (...) I partially agree here, it may not be very flexible but it is better for file systems that use minimal cluster sizes... ;-) (...) Jeroen, I know what I want, and that is renders that look good. Of course us still not having an MLCAD-like (...) (21 years ago, 20-Jul-03, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: LDraw-to-Raves (was: POV in Part)
|
| Just to drop in my 2 cents, I think putting them into one file would be better. Also, could you put up a quality comparison chart? Three shots of a couple of parts, each, so we can compare? Thanks, Mike (21 years ago, 15-Jul-03, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
42 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
|
|
|
|
