 | | Re: Some Words To BFC
|
|
Reflecting on (my impressions of) what Steve, Mike, and Rui have been saying, it seems we have two possible directions to go. One direction, which Steve has developed, assumes we will have some files which are BFC compliant, and some which are not. (...) (25 years ago, 4-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev) !
|
| |
| | Re: BFC: LITS 2
|
|
(...) OK, I just stated that this isn't written as said above, maybe it would be clearer if it was, but I undestood it from the "proposed spec". [...SNIP...] (...) [Mind Drill ON 8) ] I got that, but you keep on thinking about it, without trying the (...) (25 years ago, 4-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Some Words To BFC
|
|
(...) I also have taken a rest somewhere in discussion, due to lack of time. the simpler the better. (...) Well it seems that you (Leonardo, maybe someone else) didn't understand the difference between an invert matrix and the goal of the current "0 (...) (25 years ago, 4-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Some Words To BFC
|
|
Leonardo Zide <leonardo@centroin.com.br> wrote in message news:38E9FB24.AD5CD6....com.br... (...) The (...) in (...) winding is (...) side (...) That works for box5, but how about 1-4cyls? -John Van (25 years ago, 4-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Some Words To BFC
|
|
(...) If the matrix for the box5 inside the part is inverted, wouldn't it work ? Leonardo (25 years ago, 4-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: MOTM April
|
|
Great job, Tom! -John Van Tim Courtney <tim@zacktron.com> wrote in message news:38e975e8.279526...net.com... (...) (25 years ago, 4-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Some Words To BFC
|
|
Leonardo Zide <leonardo@centroin.com.br> wrote in message news:38E9EDA0.2C97D9....com.br... (...) Meaning we (...) It's not just a matter of knowing that a part is "wrong" and fixing it. The problem is primitives where either the inner faces or the (...) (25 years ago, 4-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Some Words To BFC
|
|
(...) That's why I droped out of the BFC discussion a long time ago, we are making this a big issue with proposals for a new extension when we could make things much simpler. If you know that a part is wrong, instead of adding a "0 INVERSE" (...) (25 years ago, 4-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | ldraw.org going down for a few minutes
|
|
I'll be moving the machine hosting www.ldraw.org and hugin.ldraw.org in a few minutes. The machine shouldn't be off-line more than fifteen minutes. Play well, Jacob ---...--- -- E-mail: sparre@cats.nbi.dk -- -- Web...: <URL: (URL) > -- ---...--- (25 years ago, 4-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Influencing what parts people work on
|
|
(...) This is something that different Guild members have different opinions about. I've discussed my own views on this in the past... I tend to lean against it but others may not. My sense is that if our actions increase the number of parts (...) (25 years ago, 4-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Some Words To BFC
|
|
(...) <SNIP> Sure that is possible, I could imagine having a seperate tool for this, or even implementing it as a helper-function inside MLCad which does something like a BFC conversion. This solution would definitly be a better aproach. Michael (25 years ago, 4-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Some Words To BFC
|
|
If you 're able to correct wrong things in a model so BFC can be used, is it than not possible to make a program that goes over al your parts once and corrects all the parts so that all your models will be automatically correct? Michael Lachmann (...) (25 years ago, 4-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Some Words To BFC
|
|
Hy, I finaly got internet-access here, and could follow the discussions about BFC. Some words I would like to say first: I think it doesn't make sence to blame Steve about BFC stuff, since I asked him if the spec is in a state that we could try it. (...) (25 years ago, 4-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Influencing what parts people work on
|
|
(...) Nice sets you have created there, where can I get the dat files? Regards John (25 years ago, 4-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Influencing what parts people work on
|
|
So, this is a good time to re-iterate the purpose of the Gnu Public License (GPL): it makes gratis stuff stay gratis. Even more importantly, if you word it correctly, you can force anyone who creates an element that uses stud.dat to release their (...) (25 years ago, 4-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | MOTM April
|
|
Just a quick note to announce the latest Model of the Month: Tom McDonald's Hangar 33. Take a look at: (URL) timcourtne ICQ: 23951114 (25 years ago, 4-Apr-00, to lugnet.announce, lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw) !
|
| |
| | Re: Influencing what parts people work on
|
|
Just a thought.. I noticed that Jonathan B. Knudsen has released rendered instructions for some (all? not sure) of the robots from his book: (URL) Jonathan 'influenced' some decisions to make a few parts for his use in his book. Of course these (...) (25 years ago, 4-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Identifying connections (Was: L3PLiTE?)
|
|
(...) I first thought about adding all kinds of connections but the studs are the most useful for modelling and polygon reduction (unless someone wants to write a full forward kinematics simulator). The studs are the most easy connections to check (...) (25 years ago, 4-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: Influencing what parts people work on
|
|
(...) I have to agree with John and Tore, all the parts/software I wrote in the past were done without expecting to get anything back. I don't want to be rude but we are fine doing everything for free and I'd like to keep things that way, I know (...) (25 years ago, 4-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Influencing what parts people work on
|
|
(...) I hope this works because this will finally get some of those castle decorated elements I have been wanting for ages. (25 years ago, 3-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Influencing what parts people work on
|
|
(...) This might be the encouragement I need to dive further into parts development. However, I would need to have a copy of the part, and I doubt I would be able to work on anything too complicated right away (ex, no (...) (25 years ago, 3-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: BFC: LITS 2
|
|
(...) No, it isn't. BUT, there is very little functional difference between what is currently written and the suggestion above. As far as the function of a rendering engine is concerned, there is no difference -- if a file doesn't specify the (...) (25 years ago, 3-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Influencing what parts people work on
|
|
The reason why I haven't responded to this thread earlier was the complicated language that kept me from fully understanding what the point is. What I now understand about the guild is: * You are fueled by frustration over the juniorisation of (...) (25 years ago, 3-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: L3PLiTE?
|
|
(...) It should be not only flexible, but also generic ! by this I mean, don't assign relations with actual parts to define the connection types. Try to define the physical/mechanical property, and not particularities in some uses. (...) So these (...) (25 years ago, 3-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Influencing what parts people work on
|
|
As you know, I tend to see *everything* in terms of paying for it, or at least motivation, at any rate. I think John raises some good points and I don't have answers, but I do have some musings. (...) You made those parts for your own reasons, which (...) (25 years ago, 3-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: L3PLiTE?
|
|
Steve Bliss <blisses@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message news:h5chescbu4k2ib5...4ax.com... (...) Speaking of minifig arms... Does the minifig modeler rotate the arms around the x axis? Or does it rotate on the angled axis that actual minifig arms (...) (25 years ago, 3-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Influencing what parts people work on
|
|
Larry Pieniazek <lar@voyager.net> wrote in message news:FsEvqJ.1pI@lugnet.com... (...) to (...) designing (...) with (...) done (...) "paid" (...) to (...) pay (...) benefit (...) I see both plusses and minuses to such an arrangement: Plusses: 1. (...) (25 years ago, 3-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Influencing what parts people work on
|
|
(...) Oops, I'm responding in public. Oh, well. I think my comments are fodder for the public, anyway. Jonathan Knudsen has already shown that it's possible to get parts drawn on request. I know he got at least three respondents, probably more. And (...) (25 years ago, 3-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Type-5 conditional edge line
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Fredrik Glöckner wrote: [snippety] (...) Yes, your conditional line should be fine. When the triangles are viewed like: 4 /|\ / |.3 / .| /. | 2----1 points 1 and 3 are on the same side of the 2-4 line, so the conditional line will (...) (25 years ago, 3-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Influencing what parts people work on
|
|
(...) followed by silence from everyone else. Wrong group? Drop me a note if you think I should have posted this somewhere else... Thanks! The charter for cad.dat.parts didn't quite seem to fit. ++Lar (25 years ago, 3-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: What is BFC meta command ? [DAT]
|
|
(...) The best thing to do for now is to make sure that you are writing clean code. The big difference with BFC-able files is there's a sense of 'front' and 'back' for polygons. So you need to make sure that your part files are written to (...) (25 years ago, 3-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: L3PLiTE?
|
|
(...) I seem to remember there was a fair amount of discussion on the connections/hot-points issue. My contribution to the discussion amounted to this, more or less: Because of the large number of ways LEGO pieces can be inter-connected, we need to (...) (25 years ago, 3-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Identifying connections (Was: L3PLiTE?)
|
|
[ FUT lugnet.cad.dev ] Leonardo: (...) I think it is time to think about identifying connections. What about using an empty piece named "-stud.dat" that should be placed exactly, including orientation, where a "properly" connected stud should be (...) (25 years ago, 3-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.ray, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: What is BFC meta command ?
|
|
John Jensen <skurt@vip.cybercity.dk> wrote in message news:ep26eso7d3ct4ll...4ax.com... (...) know what it is... (...) Then you can make your part BFC compatible by making sure that the points of a triangle or quad follow a clockwise path when the (...) (25 years ago, 3-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Type-5 conditional edge line
|
|
Fredrik Glöckner <fredrik.glockner@bio.uio.no> wrote in message news:m3pus9zd3x.fsf@...ldomain... (...) It looks good to me. I'm pretty sure this is how it is done on the sphere primitives. -John Van (25 years ago, 3-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: L3PLiTE?
|
|
(...) I searched my backup disks and couldn't find a version of the library with the connections information. I fixed about 100 files, making them BFC compliant and with the connection information but I lost everything after I changed the format of (...) (25 years ago, 3-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.ray, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: BFC: LITS 2
|
|
(...) Well I have to congratulate you for the effort ! Has always, when asked to, you provide some nice output! ;) So now let's discuss it. Just reply to my previous replys to "LITS 2" mails. I have to say, that I'don't actually have time know to (...) (25 years ago, 3-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: BFC: LITS 2
|
|
(...) I believe that the only problem is that these matrixes can't be inverted ! I'not sure if placing a one on the specific place has exactly the same graphic behaviour ? can someone confirm ? (...) Use my proposal: 0 CERTIFY BFC MTX where MTX is (...) (25 years ago, 2-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: BFC: LITS 2
|
|
(...) I have to read this better to make an opinion, later ! (...) Now you don't like local clipping anymore ? too or tree mails before you were in favour or am I mistaken ? I should we make complicated spec for clipping, just because of one stupid (...) (25 years ago, 2-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: BFC: LITS 2
|
|
I read the current proposal, and I have this to say: I don't agree with the following paragraph when an entire branch has to have cliping on to be able to be culled, don't think so. ( I know about the invert case, solution required ) 4 Control of (...) (25 years ago, 2-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: BFC: LITS 2
|
|
(...) I agree with the default from the start, I proposed them, somewhere ! (...) Agreed! but that's NOT currently written that way, is it ? (...) NO it is NOT ! read on. (...) I know that the branch only would be required, but I don't agree with (...) (25 years ago, 2-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Influencing what parts people work on
|
|
As you know, The Guild of Bricksmiths, (URL) a big user of LDraw compatible tools, since Guild members are producing instructions for almost all of their kits. From time to time a Guildsman runs into a part he or she would really like to use in a (...) (25 years ago, 2-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev) !
|
| |
| | Re: BFC: LITS 2
|
|
(...) I think the discussion started before the "line in The Sand" thread ! (...) It seems that it is currently on version 9 ! isn't it ?, but file name was NOT changed, OK. (...) Well, if my memory doesn't fail me, I taught you were against local (...) (25 years ago, 2-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Time for BFC overhaul?
|
|
(...) Didn't answer the question, but moving on. (...) That's good to know. (...) Yes, but the proposed standard doesn't list the several options for a specific issue thta asn't been agreed iet. List the options, that's my point, because if you (...) (25 years ago, 2-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | LDS ver 0.31 - Added PIPE
|
|
New version again. Same URL as usual. (URL) /Tore (25 years ago, 2-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: A discovery? and part 3475
|
|
(...) Oops, sorry 'bout that. (...) Wow, you're working with the horse? You have my deepest respect! I think that using one tool or another is mostly a matter of taste. I haven't written LDraw-mode to compete with anybody else's tool, but because I (...) (25 years ago, 2-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: A discovery? and part 3475
|
|
(...) Not just 4-4edge - it takes all between 1/16 through 16/16 and 1/48 through 48/48. (...) I see (I think...) If the two arbitrary connected curves run parallelly, I use LDS' EXTRUDE function, if not, I have to make arrangements like this in (...) (25 years ago, 2-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: A discovery? and part 3475
|
|
(...) related. Quite a coincident! Your function takes two (or more) 4-4edge primitives and connects them with quads, to create a "pipe" like object. My function takes two arbitrary connected curves made up of type-2 lines and fills in the space (...) (25 years ago, 2-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: A discovery? and part 3475
|
|
I haven't followed this thread, but after a brief glance, I think it is closely related to the PIPE function I (...) (25 years ago, 2-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: A discovery? and part 3475
|
|
(...) I have made a function in LDraw-mode which does this. In your example, you would put the cursor on the first type-2 line in the first edge, set the mark (C-SPC) move down to the first type-2 line in the second curve and hit C-c C-f. Voila. The (...) (25 years ago, 2-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Type-5 conditional edge line
|
|
I have a question about the type-5 conditional line. Assume I have four points in 3d space like this: (If you're reading LUGNET via the web interface, you must push "view raw message" to see my ASCII art.) 1---2 | | | | | | 4---3 Except that the (...) (25 years ago, 1-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | PIPE function... [DAT]
|
|
I've made a new function for LDS called PIPE. It's an extension of the LINE function. Remember:? LINE POINT x y z POINT x y z ... POINT x y z LINE END Now, PIPE works the same way but with that difference it's in 3D: PIPE [n_sectors total_sectors] (...) (25 years ago, 1-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: What is BFC meta command ?
|
|
(...) What if I am creating a new part? Regards John (25 years ago, 1-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: BFC: LITS 2
|
|
Steve: (...) No. - Or rather: That depends on how good looking a rendering you want. Thinking a bit more about it, I think we can get just as good result _with_ clipping of transparent surfaces as without. Yes, transparent surfaces can be clipped! (...) (25 years ago, 1-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: BFC: LITS 2
|
|
Fifth and final in the series. Summary of the recap. This concludes my review of the "Line in the Sand" thread. If I have overlooked any issues, important or trivial, feel free to point them out. If there's something I didn't mention in this thread, (...) (25 years ago, 31-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: BFC: LITS 2
|
|
Fourth in the series, starting with message #41 in the "Line in the Sand" thread. Notice that I scanned past a number of messages before I got another 'open issue' hit. This posting covers up to & through message #83, the end of the thread. In (...) (25 years ago, 31-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: BFC: LITS 2
|
|
Here's the third message in my review of the "Line in the Sand" thread. This message covers my review from message #28 to message #40 in the thread (sorted by thread-view, not chronology). That's (URL) for the start, and (URL) for the finish. (...) (...) (25 years ago, 31-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: BFC: LITS 2
|
|
Second in a series, collect them all... (...) I believe the language around the 'defaults' has been cleared up sufficiently. (...) Hmm. I don't think there was much more discussion about whether every file should have an explicit 0 BFC CCW CLIP (...) (25 years ago, 31-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: open source & inventory ?
|
|
(...) ldlite is open source. Ldlite is a viewer for ldraw .dat files. (...) There is a way to do what you want, if you have dat files of a lego set, using steve blisses ldraw addon. (...) (25 years ago, 31-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | open source & inventory ?
|
|
Hello, I've just resently discovered Ldraw and Mlcad and I'm absolutely amazed at the power of these programs, allthough I've not yet build a real model (other than the tutorial). I have got 2 questions however. 1) Are any of the programs open (...) (25 years ago, 31-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | BFC: LITS 2
|
|
Rui has stated that there are outstanding issues with the BFC proposal that are not included in the issues list at the start of that proposal. With this message, I am going to review the messages from the "Line in the Sand" thread, which started at (...) (25 years ago, 30-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Time for BFC overhaul?
|
|
(...) In lugnet.cad.dev, Rui Martins wrote: (...) I'm glad I didn't let you down. ;) (...) Because it's easier than rereading the entire thread of 83 messages where we went through all this before. Seriously. But I will attempt to go through that (...) (25 years ago, 30-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Problem with 1-4con1.dat
|
|
Steve Bliss <blisses@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message news:85s6es8rkgaqn20...4ax.com... (...) as (...) "L3P -check" (...) And will it substitute for all the cone primitives? (please,please,please) -John Van (25 years ago, 30-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Part numbers for newer parts
|
|
(...) The only generally available method of finding parts numbers is to look for the number embossed on the interior of the part. If the number for a part is unknown when a file for that part is submitted for inclusion in the official updates, (...) (25 years ago, 30-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Part numbers for newer parts
|
|
I have called Lego for the answer to this and, of course, got no real answer. Does anyone have any idea how I can find out the Part numbers for specific parts? I know that Lugnet and others have online resources for most of the parts, but I can't (...) (25 years ago, 30-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Checking for bowtie quads?
|
|
It's funny but two weeks ago, I developed exactly this method, the one with the cross products, and all the findings you got, too. (...) Isn't 3D math a wonderfull thing P.S. Maybe if I would have look at someone elses code or book, my life could (...) (25 years ago, 30-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Time for BFC overhaul?
|
|
(...) And you like that don't you ? ;) If any one doesn't ! Don't read the rest of the mail ! (...) There we go again ! I saw this coming ! Why the hack do you assume things are stable as long as you agree with the supposed current status of them ? (...) (25 years ago, 30-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Problem with 1-4con1.dat
|
|
(...) Thank you steve, i'm waiting for the next announcement. (25 years ago, 30-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: What is BFC meta command ?
|
|
(...) Ok, i'm working on several parts, but i get BFCspecv4 to explain... Thank you (25 years ago, 30-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | next ldraw part update, space/minifig accessories?
|
|
hey folks, i'm just curious if there is a parts update in the works for the near future. also, (and sorry if this has been asked before) i found two minifig accessories in the Space category that would go great with regular minifig stuff (3959 space (...) (25 years ago, 30-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: FAQ update (Was: Problem with 1-4con1.dat)
|
|
(...) Well, I don't know about the 'very respected' part, but other than that, it's fine. :) (...) A very wise decision. Unfortunately. :( I'm hoping to improve speed after this first go-round. Steve (25 years ago, 30-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | BFC Test Files (was: ===== MLCad V1.8 IS AVAILABLE =====)
|
|
[X-FUT lugnet.cad.dev] (...) [snip rest of announcement] (...) everyone saw it: I've uploaded a set of files which have been cleaned and marked up, according to the existing BFC proposal. The file only includes some basic 1x and 2x bricks, a couple (...) (25 years ago, 30-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.mlcad, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | FAQ update (Was: Problem with 1-4con1.dat)
|
|
Steve: (...) Is the new text sufficient? I decided to remove the promise that you will have a new update ready every month. Play well, Jacob ---...--- -- E-mail: sparre@cats.nbi.dk -- -- Web...: <URL: (URL) > -- ---...--- (25 years ago, 30-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Time for BFC overhaul?
|
|
(...) Oh, good! Fresh blood. :) I've uploaded a BFC-test file with the part files for a few bricks, and the primitives needed to support them. Anyone who wants to play with these files can get them from (URL). My suggestion: make a second (...) (25 years ago, 30-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Problem with 1-4con1.dat
|
|
(...) That's a good test. How soon can a new L3P be distributed? (...) Questionable, but it works. For now, at least. (...) Yes. Steve (25 years ago, 30-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Problem with 1-4con1.dat
|
|
(...) The procedure is this: the parts authors (that's a bunch of people) create and maintain parts files. They send their files to the parts administrator (that's me). The parts administrator puts together a proposed list of files to go in the next (...) (25 years ago, 30-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: L3PLiTE?
|
|
(...) I think this is a little too much for the task, you don't need to try to remove the interior too, it won't make a big difference. Think of a 2x2 plate, if you can remove the stud4, you're saving 48 quads, 64 lines and 32 optional lines while (...) (25 years ago, 30-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.ray, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Checking for bowtie quads?
|
|
(...) Wow, I'm glad I revisited this since I think I can save some rendering time by saving the vertex normals from the bowtie checks for the OpenGl lighting phase in LdGLite. Here is the algorithm I came up with before I decided to use the L3 code (...) (25 years ago, 30-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: L3PLiTE?
|
|
(...) In this case you could leave out the interior of the 2x2, but you must use the entire top of the 4x4. In the case of solid wall like structures, however, it could reduce 90% of the blocks to no interiour, and no studs. -Chuck (25 years ago, 30-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.ray, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: L3PLiTE?
|
|
Tore Eriksson wrote... (...) Uh, maybe. However, if you have a 2x2 brick on top of the 2x4, how do you leave out only half the TOP section? Or you wouldn't? Maybe parts should be broken into subparts for analysis? I think the main problem is, that (...) (25 years ago, 30-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.ray, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: L3PLiTE?
|
|
John VanZwieten wrote... (...) A general analyzer may be a good idea. As you say, the optimized .dat file can be viewed in any rendering engine, and also, you can run L3P on it. Of course, the analyzer could be compiled into L3P, L3Lab, LDLite etc. (...) (25 years ago, 29-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.ray, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: L3PLiTE?
|
|
Leonardo Zide wrote... (...) I assume you have manually added extra info to all parts into your pieces.bin. Is there any chance you could export that info into some META commands to be inserted into each part in the LDraw PARTS base, so LDraw (...) (25 years ago, 29-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.ray, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Problem with 1-4con1.dat
|
|
John VanZwieten wrote... (...) Is there any use for color 16 in linetypes 2 and 5? To test if we have any color 16 lines, I just added a warning to "L3P -check" The only legitimate example I could find was in PARTS\S\973p46a.dat.DAT "~Subpart (...) (25 years ago, 29-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: What is BFC meta command ?
|
|
(...) BFC means back face culling, it basically means that the rendering program doesn't need to draw the faces that are not facing the viewer (calculated by taking the dot product between a face normal and the camera direction). It's there to make (...) (25 years ago, 29-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Checking for bowtie quads?
|
|
(...) Quads should be plane and follow a correct order, the points must be in a correct order. Search the old messages and you'll find several discussions about it. Leonardo (25 years ago, 29-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Checking for bowtie quads?
|
|
Just a question... Does the quad should be plane, is there any problem to get 4 non-coplanar points ? Damien. (25 years ago, 29-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | What is BFC meta command ?
|
|
With the new version of MLCad, i hear about BFC, but, i'm sorry, i don't know what it is... Could someone give me explanations ? Thank's Damien. -- Damien et Nathalie Duquennoy 26, rue du belvédère 69210 L'ARBRESLE dduquenn@club-internet.fr (URL) (25 years ago, 29-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Problem with 1-4con1.dat
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Steve wrote : (...) Well, I'd like to participate ! what is the procedure ? Who vote, how is it possible to vote ? Is there a FAQ on this subject ? Regards Damien (25 years ago, 29-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Checking for bowtie quads?
|
|
(...) Yeah, I tried to think of a simpler way to do it myself. But all my ideas required converting the quad from 3D coords to 2D coords first so my feeble brain could handle it. :^) Don (25 years ago, 29-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Checking for bowtie quads?
|
|
(...) Thanks, I've got it! I didn't know the check was that involved, though... Fredrik (25 years ago, 29-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Parts Cataloging Program
|
|
(...) I don't know the exact files that I changed, I remember that I unziped LDLite 1.6 and added a #ifdef BMP_HIGHCOLOR, I'm sending what I have in another message. The code is not Windows specific, it was taken from the LeoCAD image routines and (...) (25 years ago, 29-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: L3PLiTE?
|
|
(...) It does take some extra time to load a big file but the speed increase later is well worth it. After doing the initial calculations, you only need to check the studs for the bricks you move so it's very fast. Leonardo (25 years ago, 29-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.ray, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Checking for bowtie quads?
|
|
(...) Lar's L3Input.cpp is in the latest ldglite source (which is available at the usual place). It contains the bowtie checking code and is quite nice. Don (25 years ago, 29-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Checking for bowtie quads?
|
|
Do anybody know of a simple algorithm for checking if a quad is of the "bowtype" kind? I.e. a quad where two of the edges cross each other. I understand that Lars C Hassing's L3P does this check, so perhaps he can help me? Thanks in advance! Fredrik (25 years ago, 29-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Time for BFC overhaul?
|
|
Now that MLCad is supporting BFC, should we begin overhauling the parts database to take advantage of this? I'd be interested in working on this for a while. What is the status of the meta-command discussion? How close are we to closure? -John Van (25 years ago, 29-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Parts Cataloging Program
|
|
(...) I didn't see it, but I didn't look really hard at the windows specific code since I'm bypassing it for something more portable. If you still have the code I could try to paste it in with the other two formats. Don (25 years ago, 29-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Problem with 1-4con1.dat
|
|
Augh! How do these things get by us? I'll put this into the next update. And I promise that the 2000-01 vote is coming. Very soon. Really. Steve (...) (25 years ago, 29-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: L3PLiTE?
|
|
Leonardo: (...) So in "every" part you have put a "stud-slot-point" in all the places where a stud from another part can connect with this part. So if a stud on a non-transparent part is at the stud-slot of another non-transparent part, it is (...) (25 years ago, 29-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.ray, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Parts Cataloging Program
|
|
Rui: (...) You are probably right, but JPEG is defined _for_ lossy compression. It is definitely not the correct choice if you want loss-less compression. (...) Maybe, but GIF is covered by a patent (not a problem in Europe yet), and PNG generally (...) (25 years ago, 29-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Parts Cataloging Program
|
|
Don: (...) In some, but admittedly very few, cases GIF gives a better compression than PNG. (...) PNG does anything from 1 to (at least) 64 bit/pixel, including up to (at least) 16 bit/pixel graduated transparency. Play well, Jacob ---...--- -- (...) (25 years ago, 29-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
