Subject:
|
Re: Parts editing made easy, anyone?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Sun, 23 Jan 2005 10:29:45 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2234 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Chris Dee wrote:
> 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.
>
> 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.
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 is about (the possibility of) a utility to convert directly from a
modelling program to an Ldraw DAT file (presumably of LEGO bricks which ARE
eligible for inclusion in the official library), and I wanted to show why I
think the utility would have to be fairly smart in reducing and formatting the
information to produce that DAT file.
ROSCO
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Parts editing made easy, anyone?
|
| (...) 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 (...) (20 years ago, 23-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
|
|
|
|
