To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.cad.dat.partsOpen lugnet.cad.dat.parts in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 CAD / LDraw Files / Parts / 6051
6050  |  6052
Subject: 
Re: Should pattern be like we -think- they should be?
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.cad.dat.parts
Date: 
Tue, 16 Jan 2007 04:08:56 GMT
Viewed: 
3412 times
  
In lugnet.cad.dat.parts, Matthew J. Chiles <mattchiles@gorge.net> wrote:

On Mon, 15 Jan 2007 22:44:38 GMT, you wrote:

In lugnet.cad.dat.parts, Michael Heidemann wrote:
I got a hold vote some time ago to the part:
http://www.ldraw.org/cgi-bin/ptdetail.cgi?f=parts/3004p07.dat

I do not agree with Steffen.

I think we should try to be realistic.

What is your opinion? And what is the opinion of the admins?

cu
MikeHeide

Personally I prefer parts to look as they look not as they "should" look.
Sometimes you can even use these imperfections to achieve good effects.

Tim

You know, this piece typifies the problem with the process and why no
new parts get published, at least from my view.

- snippage -

I want useable parts, not perfect parts.  After all, that is what Lego
gives us.

-Matt :)

I'll agree 85% with Matt. As a casual LDraw user, I'd love to see new parts
being available more quickly, which might be done with a more streamlined
process. What I agree with Matt about is perhaps redefining the level of
"acceptable" standards for parts authoring. From my own experience with various
things, it takes X effort to reach 85% perfection, and at least X effort again
to achieve the final 15%. If 85% gets more usable parts into circulation, I
would be happy with that (although I'm sure some others would require more
stringent quality). My definition of 85% would be parts that would render at
high resolution with no visible defects.

The answer to the current question seems fairly obvious to an outsider like me:
duplicate (within reason) what TLG has produced, not what you THINK they
should've produced.

And no, I don't author parts, or intend to start... but I'll continue using
'em.

- Kelly's USD$0.02.



Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Should pattern be like we -think- they should be?
 
(...) You know, this piece typifies the problem with the process and why no new parts get published, at least from my view. The burden of detail required for approval is too onerous. In this particular part the ice cream is fine either way - as the (...) (17 years ago, 15-Jan-07, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)

20 Messages in This Thread:









Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR