Subject:
|
Re: Parts editing made easy, anyone?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Sun, 23 Jan 2005 09:47:04 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2145 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Ross Crawford wrote:
> In lugnet.cad.dev, Jindrich Kubec wrote:
> > Orion Pobursky wrote:
> > > > What's wrong with the larger number of polygons?
> > > Unneccessary memory usage and file size.
> >
> > 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.
> >
> > > L3P (and other converters/viewers) detect these primitives and convert them to
> > > smooth objects (e.g. L3P detects a 4-4cyli primitive and turns it into a smooth
> > > cylinder instead of a faceted cylinder)
> >
> > Wouldn't it be possible to be the parts as accurate as possible and then
> > 'primitivize' them a bit for the draft renders or owners of legacy hardware?
> >
> > I simply don't think that something like LGEO is a good idea, but IMO it
> > was driven by the 'unneccessary' simpleness of the .DAT parts.
> >
> > So basically the question stands: I somebody submits .DAT file with,
> > say, 3000 lines, without any special ldraw features, which provides
> > _perfect_ render
>
> 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
> http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/RoscoHead/cad/bbb1.png (waiting for his OK
> before I post the DATs publically). Have a close look at them. Ben's CAD
> generated ones are at the rear. Which look more "perfect"?
>
> > - would it be accepted (on better-than-nothing policy)
> > or denied (on purity-or-nothing polity)?
>
> I'm sure it would be accepted. But it's like comparing a BMP image with it's JPG
> counterpart. All necessary info to see the image is still there in the JPG so
> why include all the unnecessary info of the BMP? My versions of Ben's wheels are
> 10-15 times smaller than his original.
>
> ROSCO
Maybe I'm missing the point here, but if this whole discussion is about Ben's
excellent independently produced wheels, then whether or not they are modelled
appropriately for inclusion in the official LDraw library is academic.
The official library (updates to which are managed by the Parts Tracker)contains
only parts made by LEGO themseleves. That is not to say that the LDraw file
format is restricted to such parts, nor that the LDraw organisation will always
restrict itself to such. But that, I think is a question for the entire Steering
Committee to ponder.
Chris (speaking personally, not on behalf of the SteerCo)
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Parts editing made easy, anyone?
|
| (...) I'm sorry if I was unclear. Earlier in the thread I put forward Bens wheels as an example and continued that example here. I realise they would not be eligible for inclusion in the official Ldraw library, and would not submit them. This thread (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jan-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | 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)
|
23 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
