 | | Re: Parts editing made easy, anyone?
|
|
(...) (I'm going to try not to sound like a jilted lover here, bear with me) If you're not already a parts author, you have to ask for permission to submit a part to the Parts Tracker. I've been told translated-from-other-CAD (i.e. messy) parts (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jan-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Parts editing made easy, anyone?
|
|
(...) No DAT part can provide a perfect render without using some substitutions - flat polygons just can't do perfect curved surfaces. But that's another issue. I have recently finished re-authoring Ben's wheels (URL) (waiting for his OK before I (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jan-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Parts editing made easy, anyone?
|
|
(...) I should probably find then for what is LDraw library aimed at. If it's something like as perfect as possible renders or some quick mockup prototyping. (...) Wouldn't it be possible to be the parts as accurate as possible and then (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jan-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Cross platform GUI
|
|
Well I'm kind of of pissed. ** begin rant ** Curious to find an acceptible substitute for Java, I was looking into cross platform GUI toolkits. GTK+ came to mind but alas no Mac support for the latest version. Then I thought of Qt. I visited the Qt (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jan-05, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Parts editing made easy, anyone?
|
|
(...) Well, rendering time gets affected too, right? It's harder to build a model if it takes MLCad 20 seconds to redraw once... Oh, you mean for the rendering in POV when doing the animation? Well, file loading time, memory consumption, etc. etc. (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jan-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: l3p as open source
|
|
(...) A nice thing about open source would be that it would be possible for other people to work on ports to different architectures other than the microsoft-based platform. While emulators may exist to allow people to get by for the time being, (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jan-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Parts editing made easy, anyone?
|
|
(...) If for nothing else, to permit them to be used as the basis for the manual creation of similar parts, and abstraction into resuable sub-components. Not a strong reason, but worth considering. (...) To use just one example - the STUD primitive (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jan-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Parts editing made easy, anyone?
|
|
(...) Yes, since it is text based. Also, a most new authors learn by examining the code. (...) Unneccessary memory usage and file size. (...) L3P (and other converters/viewers) detect these primitives and convert them to smooth objects (e.g. L3P (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jan-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: l3p as open source (was: Re: Anatomy of a POV file (e.g. L3P suggestions))
|
|
(...) Why don't you create your main scene file that never changes and then just include the l3p output file into your scene file. I believe Lars is working on options that leave out the povray code that is required to be in the main file (like (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jan-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Parts editing made easy, anyone?
|
|
(...) Why? Is the .DAT file supposed to be readable by humans? Why? ;) What's wrong with the larger number of polygons? What positives (from the side of the automated rendering process) does bring the existence of primitives? What's wrong with the (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jan-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
