 | | Re: DAT voting page up [DAT]
|
|
(...) Hmm. We'd just make a new primitive, including the stud, the indent beneath the stud, and the ndis's around them (maybe the entire 10x10LDU surface). 1 16 0 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 4-4edge.dat 1 16 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 4-4edge.dat 1 16 0 0 0 (...) (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Java LDraw/LDLite
|
|
Greg Williams wrote in message <36D6A432.8476B943@m...ng.com>... (...) features (...) done 3d (...) else's (...) for (...) As (...) free (...) Greg, this would be awesome. I think we need an option like this for Ldraw to really take off. Just think (...) (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) Would using the curved primitives work well or badly (since they are just angled polygons)? Steve (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | RE: concave polys and LDraw
|
|
(...) There was a thread about it back in June 1998 ("LDraw and quads"), I don't think we ever decided if quads were allowed to be concave. It seems that LDraw first transforms the 4 vertices and then fills the four-sided polygon or triangle (if one (...) (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Java LDraw/LDLite
|
|
(...) standard (...) To me, that would be the primary advantage of a Java version[1], I haven't played with LDraw much because the biggest thing that put me off is the parts database, half the models I look at seem to have missing parts and when I (...) (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: Java LDraw/LDLite
|
|
I actually thought of this long ago and mentioned it to LDraw Master James himself. He didn't sound very interested in it at the time because he didn't think java was fast enough to support it. I sorta dropped the idea after that. I'm glad Todd made (...) (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
Todd Lehman wrote in message ... (...) You can't. Even with a part in hand you can't because how do you know every part thru the ages is the same. A case in point, I just did an inventory of all the parts I have and found two 45 1 x 2 slopes that (...) (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
Todd Lehman wrote in message ... (...) Old version tiles didn't have these grooves and LDraw, to my knowledge, doesn't model it because of precision. Case in point ... (...) <FLAME><FLAME THROWER><AIR SUPPORT><ICBM> Nuff said Roy (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Modeling without the real element -- bad
|
|
all my parts are designed to be usable. if they are out by a large amount or are unusable then i will fix it. (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
Paul Gyugyi wrote in message <36D655B5.93F4637D@g...yi.com>... (...) That sounds great Paul. What I've been doing is working with the internal scripting of Rhino to stripe and weld the internal structure. Since I use the DATs via DXF conversion and (...) (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: baseplate
|
|
i have obtained the information i seek so do not worry. (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Modeling without the real element -- bad
|
|
Todd Lehman wrote in message ... (...) without (...) to (...) Whoa, big boy. Calling someone careless when they are doing the best they can is pretty ... oh how did you put it... ah, yes... anal-retentive. Shall that be "mother's milk" or "milk of (...) (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Part Numbering Crisis in LDraw
|
|
Paul Gyugyi wrote in message <36D65C66.E5F7A69@gy...yi.com>... (...) to (...) part/tracking (...) This is certainly true with metallic elements, but with clear I don't think so since ABS resin or any plastic resin I've seen is basic clear amber (...) (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Modeling without the real element -- bad
|
|
(...) Sure, but it's not like the modelers are payed to make the parts. Personally, my motivation for making a new part is the enjoyment I feel from being able to use it in a model. But, to take the part 32140.DAT as an example agian, this (...) (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Modeling without the real element -- bad
|
|
(...) Why wouldn't rejecting flawed parts improve the quality of the parts? It's not like they'd never get in -- they'd just get fixed right away. --Todd (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Java LDraw/LDLite
|
|
Might it be great in 12 months though? --Todd (...) (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | RE: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) I'm glad you think so, beacuse I was going to suggest that to you, when you made the coins ;-) (...) You can have a hint of how to model the numerals by looking at L3P's primitive substitute for stud.dat (in any L3P generated POV file). /Lars (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Modeling without the real element -- bad
|
|
(...) I'm sure this happens all the time. A lot of the current LDraw elements are wrong, in some way. Some examples, from the top of my head: - The teeth of the Technic gear cogs are too wide. In real life, the width is 10 LDU, but on the LDraw cogs (...) (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) i have fixed it because i built kings mountain fortress on the part and all the studs are in place (...) it was a small oversight on my part. even if i had the part in front of me then i still could have missed the stud (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: baseplate
|
|
Would that be the space-baseplate? (...) (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Part Numbering Crisis in LDraw
|
|
(...) Well, to be honest, I just want to get a firm consensus on the best way to number these things. Something that will (hopefully) be agreable to the majority of users. Something I can use without greying too many more hairs. The real problem is (...) (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Part Numbering Crisis in LDraw
|
|
I recall hearing once that the chrome parts had to be made from a different mold than non-chrome parts because the coating added some thickness. So on the chrome version, e.g. the plastic studs would be a little smaller. Also, I'd expect molds for (...) (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Java LDraw/LDLite
|
|
WinCE's java support is really very poor. -gyug (...) (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: My proposal for new element orientation
|
|
That won't work all the time. In the L3G0 library, the rule was the vertical axis should pass through the center of the bottom-left stud when the brick is held such that the "LEGO" logo is right-side-up, and the bottom of the brick rested on the (...) (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Modeling without the real element -- bad
|
|
(...) What if they slip past Terry, not being noted as "mockups" and it takes someone a long time to notices that they're incorrect? (...) Does that imply that carelessness and LDRAW do mix? (...) Precision/decimal accuracy are one thing -- that's (...) (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
I've thought about this also. A while back we discussed adding a feature that would remember the file and line number for each pixel in an LDLite-created image. You could use this information to strip out non-visible lines before exporting to POV, (...) (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Modeling without the real element -- bad
|
|
I'm quite happy to have pieces be mockups. If it is recognizable, it does the job of recording and communicating the model. IMO, perfection an LDRAW do not mix. Two decimal points? Rounding errors? 16 colors with _dithering_? Type 5 lines that may (...) (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) Yes, at the resolution of LDRAW, the logo would show up as stray pixels of high contrast, and not look good at all. But in photographs/rendering, having those logos makes all the difference in the world. It's IMHO the reason MegaBlocks always (...) (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Part Numbering Crisis in LDraw
|
|
(...) I am *SOOO* happy that Terry and Joshua (and others) are anal-retentive enough and pedantic enough -- and thorough enough -- to bring this sort of thing up. Just imagine what a mess it would all be if nobody cared... This is really cool, guys! (...) (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) (Isn't it quadruple clips?) (...) Nope, it's not. Nope nope nope. Seriously, Jonathan, go buy some LEGO. Seriously. Or ask someone to snail mail you a crystal ball for heaven's sake. You shouldn't have to ask questions like this. Questions (...) (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Modeling without the real element -- bad
|
|
(...) I'm not sure how a rule like that could be strictly enforced, but you could certainly put down a foot and declare from here on out that modeling pieces blindly is verboten because they (a) cannot possibly be 100% correct except in extremely (...) (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) Without the actual element in front of you, how can you be 100% sure that you've actually fixed the problem? (...) Have you asked yourself why you missed this in the first place? --Todd (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) i have fixed that and send the fix to terry. also i added a missing stud at the edge next to the ramp. (...) i will fix this asap (...) i will not fix those (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) i have fixed that and send the fix to terry. (...) i will fix this asap (...) i will not fix those (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
well... my raised baseplate is that accurate and is finished. (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Part Numbering Crisis in LDraw
|
|
Sproaticus wrote in message ... (...) My vote would be to use the part number that people can see with out takeing apart the boat, i.e. the 30086 number. The 30087 number is only of value if you take the boat apart. Somthing I feel very few people (...) (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) need (...) You should measure with a ruler or with lego parts (or for detailed parts people have resorted to calipers). With a plate and a brick, you can make pretty accurate measurements based on wall thickness (4 ldu), plate thickness (8 (...) (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Part Numbering Crisis in LDraw
|
|
Terry K wrote in message <36d5fd53.5480877@lu...et.com>... (...) seemingly (...) number (...) both (...) I thought you had to break the two halves apart to get at the 30087 number. Do you have to break it apart? If so can you use them afterward? If (...) (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
jonathan wilson wrote in message ... (...) go (...) need (...) Its precise enough for me. Since we already know that LDraw itself is not accurate, but it is precise. Roy (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
jonathan wilson wrote in message ... (...) done (...) You know, I've never looked at the bottom since you usually can't do anything with the bottom of a baseplate. Matter of fact I don't think I've ever looked at any of the real ones I have other (...) (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Part Numbering Crisis in LDraw
|
|
(...) time (...) Some things to think about: It would be irritating in Ldraw to have to page through lists that look like this: xxxxx.dat Blah blah blah X blah Tr. Yellow-Green yyyyy.dat Blah blah blah X blah Gold zzzzz.dat Blah blah blah X blah (...) (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
wht the raised baseplate: for example the "walls" of the small 4 stud area go up 3 bricks and accross 1/2 a stud area. is this accurate enough or do you need to measute with a ruler? (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Part Numbering Crisis in LDraw
|
|
(...) Hmmm.. well, we *could* have them all... use 30086 and 30087 as the two parts of the dinghy... then have part 4106548 simply reference the two "subparts" and have this "element model" hard-coded in yellow... anyone wanting to use a different (...) (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
here is what i will do to my non-patterned parts. bar 7 x 3 with double clips: no changes baseplate 32 x 32 raised with ramp: as i said the baseplate has been fixed and sent. regarding the problem with the bottom doesn't the cnayon plate need to be (...) (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Part Numbering Crisis in LDraw
|
|
(...) This is my vote. If 4106548 is always yellow, without exception, hard-code the yellow color in the .DAT. (but see below) A possibly more sensible alternative is to do parts 30086 and 30087 each as color 16, and do a (...) (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Part Numbering Crisis in LDraw
|
|
Everyone, We are facing a major problem in numbering parts in LDraw. For quite some time I have been trying to follow a 3 rule plan for numbering pieces: 1. Full accuracy when possible 2. Use official TLG numbers if we have them 3. Use temporary (...) (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | STOP Voting!
|
|
Sorry folks, The CGI server I was using for vote processing seems to have crapped out. So until I get a fix for it, please hold off on trying to do any voting. -- Terry K -- (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) Assuming they pass the vote, then yes, you can send fixes. See Jonathan? This is what happens (and will happen) when you don't have real-life examples to work from. You may think they are accurate, but you really don't know. -- Terry K -- (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Modeling without the real element -- bad
|
|
(...) No, there is no strict rule. More of a common sense rule. But apparantly, common sense is not always sufficient. How could I possible enforce such a rule? And there would always be valid exceptions to it (see John VanZ's post) (...) Sending (...) (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Modeling without the real element -- bad
|
|
(...) Some of the parts you sent me were representations of parts that are complex in real life. Complex meaning that they have fine details that _should_ be modeled. (...) And even those "simple" parts are deficient. The magnifying glass is a good (...) (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
Bram Lambrecht wrote in message (...) Hear, hear. Or is it here, here. Shrug..... Roy (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) the (...) much (...) If you added the numbers on the bottom of the pieces (which even appear in different sizes and different spots on the piece depending on the age) you would have to model the indentation under each "solid" stud too. Can you (...) (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Modeling without the real element -- bad
|
|
people are saying that some of the parts i have made are very complex. which ones are being refered to? i deliberatly attempted simple parts like the magnifying glass, signal holder (i pulled the face from the metal detector) etc. i attempted the (...) (26 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | concave polys and LDraw
|
|
just realized that LDraw doesn't like concave polys... so now i get to hack a test routine into MAX2DAT... anyone done one of these??? i think i have the formulas for it, so i'll give it a shot... but the 6580 wheel is done...all except for optional (...) (26 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | (canceled)
|
|
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) sure. is this a serious problem? (26 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Modeling without the real element -- bad
|
|
regarding my raised baselpate it is now (in the version i sent to terry last night) it is now mabie only 3-4ldu out maxumum ,if that, the fix adds a stud along the bottom of the piece next to the ramp (i discovered that there was one missing) also (...) (26 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Java LDraw/LDLite
|
|
(...) It's probably even easier now, with the new 2D graphics API finished (1), and a 3D API in the works. I don't claim to know how these work (or even if they're useful for anything :-) but I've seen the 2D API favorably compared to the (...) (26 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
that would be my fault. all the things that i have seen regarding the lighting bricks are wrong then terry, if the lighting bricks get in or what ever then can i send you the fix? (26 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Modeling without the real element -- bad
|
|
Todd Lehman wrote (...) that (...) haven't (...) just (...) Any station this net ... any staion this net ... is this thing working? Can anybody hear me? Darn thing must be on the blink again. Any station this net this Romeo Oscar Yankee. I say (...) (26 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
Steve Bliss wrote in message <36d5afa3.15421162@l...et.com>... (...) Okay, I see that I was shooting for a kill and all I got was a dent. My point was to be made by what I'm calling the lot number, it may be the position number of the part on the (...) (26 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Modeling without the real element -- bad
|
|
Todd Lehman wrote in message ... (...) that (...) haven't (...) just (...) them, (...) should (...) There are some exceptions to an otherwise good rule. For example, the new Technic Link which appears on the Y-wing. If I find out from someone how (...) (26 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Modeling without the real element -- bad
|
|
(...) Indeed. In fact -- and maybe I'm reading too much into this -- but I'm surprised that there isn't a strict rule against submitting parts that have been modeled without having them in front of you. (Mock-ups noted as such being a valid (...) (26 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Java LDraw/LDLite
|
|
(...) It's surprisingly easy. Java actually doesn't suck! :) You just allocate a buffer, designate it as being a graphics buffer, and call functions to do graphics primitives. Here's an example -- not probably a great example because it's 3 years (...) (26 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Java LDraw/LDLite
|
|
(...) How do you draw (pixels) in Java? Are there built-in functions, or would it require platform-specific code, or what? Or graphics library, perhaps? Steve (26 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) It's not *that* hard to go from the line drawings to raised forms. Especially since each numeral only needs to be done once. That LEGO logo and copyright notice, now. Those are a whole different level of challenge. Steve (26 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Java LDraw/LDLite
|
|
(...) Another benefit of a Java version is that it's *much* easier to write networkable apps with Java than with C / C++. Parts updates can be automagically downloaded and installed from a "parts server"; alternatively, individual parts could be (...) (26 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
Steve Bliss wrote in message <36d579c3.1627208@lu...et.com>... (...) The point here would be that line drawings would not be accurate since the part numbers I've seen are raised and moulded as are the lot numbers and some even have copyrights (...) (26 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: My proposal for new element orientation
|
|
(...) This would contradict some existing standards. For example, all 2xN bricks and plates currently have the N oriented on the X axis. Under the stud-logo orientation, they'd have to all be rotated 90-degrees. Also, the stud-logo should be (...) (26 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
LDraw and LDLite have the same problem, but to a lesser extent. That's why it's so important to remove the blank-face on decorated elements. Steve (...) (26 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) Except the actual text-parts are done in negative-space. There aren't any drawing commands for them in the part-file. If you delete the 3004.dat reference, the text disappears (because the background shows through where text should be). Steve (26 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) Well, duh. Why didn't I think of that? Steve (26 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) Well, that all makes sense. What it needs is some optional lines, not hard-lines. No biggie. Like you said, this part goes inside the other (and as far as I know, won't attach to any other brick any other way). (...) I don't think this needs a (...) (26 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) You know, these wouldn't be so hard to do... I've already made files with line-drawings of all the numerals. Just need a hyphen, and (I think) an L and R, and we're good to go. Steve (26 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
Lars C. Hassing wrote in message (...) Geez, Lars, ( smacking my head with a very large blunt object ) I hadn't thought of that one! Oh, well, back to the drawing board. Thanks for the idea it may save me some debugging time. Roy (26 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
jonathan wilson wrote in message ... (...) on (...) Some POV Ray libs can render the logo on the studs and round the edges of the bricks, but I usually render without these, mainly because my renderings will never likely be that close up, but also (...) (26 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
Terry K wrote in message <36d4f44c.3127860@lu...et.com>... (...) about is (...) have (...) by (...) you (...) This is certainly true, but with some research dimensions can be determined by comparison with known parts via this very discussion and (...) (26 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) Hi x996 / x998 Do the 1 x 8 light bricks really look like this - what set are these from. On the Blacktron II Base the two 1 x 8 light bricks are identical with the lights midway between studs - and the studs have hollow tops. Chris Dee (26 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | RE: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) Thank you for your effort Terry. Here are some comments from "l3p -check". /Lars WARNING "2552.DAT" Line 479: Identical vertices: 2 24 -150 0 10 -150 0 10 WARNING "2621.DAT" Line 204: Identical vertices: 4 16 36 8 -66 40 8 -63 36 8 -66 33.78 8 (...) (26 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | RE: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) 71427.dat Electric 9V Mini-Motor uses box3#8p.DAT (Note the p!) /Lars (26 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | RE: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) Yes, there is a huge amount of studs hiding inside other bricks. Anybody got an intelligent algorithm? This would be applicable for LDLite too and save a lot of unnecessary rendering. However, watch out for transparent bricks... /Lars (26 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | RE: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) POV-Ray certainly requires a LOT of memory when using the L3P -q3 option. Parsing time increases very much. However, the rendering time isn't that much longer as one could have feared. Probably because POV-Ray has some efficient internal (...) (26 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | RE: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) Yes, but from the LDraw triangles and quads alone it requires some heavy analysis to decide whether to add or subtract the small offset. I think we have some patterned inverted slopes... /Lars (26 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | RE: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) No. I should have been more specific: If two surfaces coincide, the viewing ray will due to small numerical inaccuracies sometimes hit the one surface first and sometimes the other surface first. If the surfaces are colored differently (...) (26 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Java LDraw/LDLite
|
|
Todd Lehman wrote in message ... (...) Why thank you =) (...) Indeed - I've got a guitar tabulature editor written entirely in Java and it runs as happily on a Win32 box as my friend's Linux box and apparently another friend's Mac. Rumour has it (...) (26 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) I am not worried about part numbers on the parts. What I am concerned about is the overall accuracy of a part that is modelled from a picture. If you have followed l-cad for any time at all, you recall much discussion about part dimensions. (...) (26 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) Perhaps because it would be too small to resolve clearly when rendering - and would add greatly to rendering times. -- Terry K -- (26 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) Well, "Pattern" just sort of became a standard way of identifying a patterned part. "Logo" I think should refer more to a specific type of pattern. Necessary? I don't know. But I seem to be blindly following the convention. (...) In a perfect (...) (26 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | hose spreadsheet
|
|
what ever happended to the flexable hose generating spread-sheet? did it get finished? is it avaliable? where can i get a copy? (26 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | baseplate
|
|
does anyone have the baseplate 32 x 32 raised with ramp as a real bit of plastic? if so could they please tell me the arangement of studs in the "pit" in the middle so I can fix my part (when i fix this i will remove the needs work tag) (26 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) i had lego when i was young but i do not have any internions to buy lego any time soon because if i got back into it it would cost a fortune. also regarding the details noone has modeled the small imprinted lego logo on parts (26 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: MAX2DAT version 1.0 complete
|
|
onyx wrote in message ... (...) Well it sounds like a great addition to Ldraw utilities. Good work. Just wish I could use it myself. Roy (26 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
jonathan wilson wrote in message ... (...) battery (...) My thought on that would be yes if the part can be opened or exposed somehow in the model it is used in. I've actually been trying to come up with a program that with strip the unexposed or (...) (26 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
Terry K wrote in message <36d4980d.635296@lugnet.com>... (...) don't (...) you (...) having (...) Geez, Terry, its all relative. I've yet to see anyone try to model the few imprinted part numbers there are. Besides, if we start getting too picky (...) (26 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
i deliberatly chose simple parts such as the magnifying glass and the crystal ball. also i will consider borrowing parts. (26 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) don't (...) i have been using the instructions from kl.net, catalog pictures and pause magazime set guide as ny main source of information. they seem to work. for examlpe take my raised baseplate. it is now completely fixed. i have build kings (...) (26 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Java LDraw/LDLite
|
|
[followups set to lugnet.cad.dev] (...) Steve! Whoa, heavy....like...WAY COOL IDEA!!!!! How come nobody's ever suggested this yet? (Or have they?) I mean, forget all about making a Mac clone of LDraw or any other specific platform -- even Linux -- (...) (26 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | MAX2DAT version 1.0 complete
|
|
well, i completed all of my goals to release MAX2DAT as version 1.0. the converter now handles both 3DSMAX 1.x and 2.x ASCII file formats... i cleaned up some of the face/edge creation with culling routines to avoid redundancy... it seems to work (...) (26 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
I apologize in advance if I missed the discussion on this, but is the word "pattern" at the end of lots of the parts really necessary? It seems rather redundant. Especially in parts that already have "logo" in their names. Also, maybe the "needs (...) (26 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
Steve Bliss wrote: <snip> (...) If we were using the correct brick code, this would be white. Since we're instead using the xxxxPyy code, it can be anything the modeller wants. IRL, the element has appeared (at least) thusly: 1x2 Brick: White, Green (...) (26 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
