 | | Re: Black seems wrong in ldconfig.ldr
|
|
(...) I agree that something of that sort would be a good idea, but in the case of my metallic colors, I actually hand-tweaked the settings for each metallic color. They aren't all the same. This was done partially to differentiate between chrome (...) (21 years ago, 13-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Black seems wrong in ldconfig.ldr
|
|
(...) Why not use the optional MATERIAL bits from this old discussion (URL) come up with a modified ldconfig.ldr? Then implement some code in LDVIEW to enable your metallic lighting goodies when ldconfig.ldr contains the proper MATERIAL settings. (...) (21 years ago, 13-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Black seems wrong in ldconfig.ldr
|
|
(...) Given that ldconfig.ldr is part of the LDraw parts library, I was referring to the color reference on the LDraw.org site (noted in another message). However, it might make sense to use the colors above, since they came directly from Lego, and (...) (21 years ago, 13-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Black seems wrong in ldconfig.ldr
|
|
(I switched to FTX due to an unusually long link.) (...) I was referring to the one at ldraw.org (URL) (LDraw definitions at the bottom). I believe that the LDraw color definitions there came from some version of the LDraw FAQ. When I said (...) (21 years ago, 13-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Black seems wrong in ldconfig.ldr
|
|
(...) In fact the official LEGO colour chart mentioned here (URL) uses 27, 42, 52 for black. ROSCO (21 years ago, 13-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Black seems wrong in ldconfig.ldr
|
|
(...) (er, which official color chart?) (...) Uh, Travis, it's *black*. It's *supposed* to be dark. People have questioned/complained that it's not 'true black' (ie, 0,0,0). You might be right about the origin of the 33 value, but I believe I was (...) (21 years ago, 13-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Black seems wrong in ldconfig.ldr
|
|
Sorry to immediately post a follow-up to my own post, but I just noticed that RubberBlack is defined with the same 33,33,33 color (not surprisingly), and I feel it needs to be updated as well. --Travis Cobbs (21 years ago, 12-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Black seems wrong in ldconfig.ldr
|
|
The ldconfig.ldr file currently being distributed with the parts library seems to have the wrong definition for black. It uses 33,33,33 as the RGB color, when the official color chart uses 51,51,51. Two things to note. First, 33,33,33 comes out (...) (21 years ago, 12-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Friction pins no friction?
|
|
It struck me as odd that the 3673 Technic Pin (no friction) and the 4459 Technic Pin with Friction looked identical. Why are they the same? Where is that friction? I feel there should be a line of connect primitives that clearly show this friction. (...) (21 years ago, 12-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposed changes to MOTM Submission guidelines
|
|
(...) I still like the idea of all the renderings being the same with the same camara positions and 1-3 special views suggested by the author. -Orion (21 years ago, 10-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposed changes to MOTM Submission guidelines
|
|
(URL) anyone have *any* feedback on these ideas? Orion? Please let me know (even in a private e-mail if you want) if you think these are viable alternatives or if they're totally not worth considering! I'd appreciate any comment! Thanks, --Ryan (URL) (21 years ago, 8-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposed changes to MOTM Submission guidelines
|
|
(...) I think this is a moot point, but... The rule could be written so that a contributor must allow/license their work for publication on the contest website, for people to view/examine in relation to the contest, but not for further (...) (21 years ago, 8-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Need partnumbers and some partnames
|
|
(...) I think putting Motor Cutout in the keywords would work, if we can't reasonably fit it in the part title. (...) OK, I think Stop and Proceed are OK for the names. (...) So the light bulb can be physically removed from the complete part? But (...) (21 years ago, 8-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposed changes to MOTM Submission guidelines
|
|
(...) Here's the correct link: (URL) (21 years ago, 7-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposed changes to MOTM Submission guidelines
|
|
(...) Are they available on the net? According to the Wayback Machine (URL) were once at (URL) but that link is dead now. Don (21 years ago, 7-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: December MOTM/SOTM Winners, January Voting Open
|
|
(...) Actually you can view the current month's contestants without being a member of the website. Simply go to the contests page at LDraw.org: (URL) (21 years ago, 7-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposed changes to MOTM Submission guidelines
|
|
(...) Yes adding unoffical parts into the .mpd file is doable and it is being polite to due this if you are using unoffical parts and making your model public. -AHui LDraw Help Desk (URL) (21 years ago, 7-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposed changes to MOTM Submission guidelines
|
|
(...) Sounds fair enough. I for one would be unlikely to pick through the .ldr file for every entrant anyway, but it would be cool to get a closer look at the winning entry. (...) This is true enough, although I still can't see why a rendering (...) (21 years ago, 6-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposed changes to MOTM Submission guidelines
|
|
(...) I agree entirely with Orion here. And I also think that making the LDR file available for the winning entry would be a great idea, but *only with the permission of the entrant.* I recommend it be strongly encouraged. (...) [snip] (...) I (...) (21 years ago, 6-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposed changes to MOTM Submission guidelines
|
|
(...) The one problem I see here is that the contest allows unofficial parts (or unofficial versions of parts), which the coordinator might not have, and different submitters might want to use different versions of unofficial parts. The problem goes (...) (21 years ago, 6-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
