Subject:
|
Re: Thoughts on File Format for LDraw Animation
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Wed, 26 Oct 2005 21:03:02 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2691 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, James Reynolds wrote:
> > > > Isn't that more or less an MPD? By *not* reusing sub-models you get
> > > > a unique
> > > > name for every group, sub-group etc.
> > > >
> > > > Or am I misunderstanding something?
> > >
> > >
> > > No. I've said this before and don't understand why others don't
> > > understand this yet. See my article:
> > >
> > > http://james.magnusviri.com/lego/animatable_models/
> >
> >
> > My assumption was that you want to create a scripting language to
> > create your
> > animations. I don't see how these ideas help us script anything.
> >
> > Can you explain what I'm missing?
>
> I really should write a part 2.... Basically, it involves
> converting the model to povray (or whatever, blender even). If the
> conversion process retains the parent-child hierarchy, then you don't
> have to go into the converted code and 1) add the hierarchy support
> in the converted format and 2) you don't have to move the stuff.
>
> Specifically, I've converted people's models and found it a pain to
> fix those 2 things. If they are modeled right to begin with (with
> the intent to animate rather than build instructions using the STEP
> command), then it is so much easier in the future.
>
> I keep saying over and over. Do not use the Ldraw format for
> animation! Use it for what it was intended: modeling. Anything that
> uses STEP and CLEAR to create animations is asking to be obsolete
> very very very fast.
I guess I was not even considering STEP, ROTSTEP or CLEAR as meaningful for
animation. I was only really considering type 1 lines as useful, just to
describe the models components, so we agree.
I was thinking about a higher level scripting language that lets you manipulate
components and subcomponent attributes over time. I've never studied what
cutting edge is, but I knew that LDraw was very far from that. I think it is
good at describing all the components needed, but doesn't provide any kind of
time related changes (which is what animation is all about.)
>
> > > This whole animation issue makes me dizzy. It is one big circle:
> > >
> > > http://news.lugnet.com/cad/?n=13192
> > >
> > > James
> >
> >
> > Yes, and I was talking about trying to get to the second half of
> > what you
> > list.... scripting language.... without talking about GUIs for it.
>
> Somewhere around here:
>
> http://news.lugnet.com/cad/?n=13299
>
> we got to talking details. I still plan on writing this up and using
> it. That is when I finish other projects first. But pretty soon
> actually.
>
> James
I look forward to it. WHen I get home I'll reread that thread.
Kev
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Thoughts on File Format for LDraw Animation
|
| (...) I really should write a part 2.... Basically, it involves converting the model to povray (or whatever, blender even). If the conversion process retains the parent-child hierarchy, then you don't have to go into the converted code and 1) add (...) (19 years ago, 26-Oct-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
30 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
