Subject:
|
Re: fixed part: JW's parts
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Sat, 10 Apr 1999 12:21:06 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1273 times
|
| |
|
|
i have a large quantity of parts that as they stand there are no known problems
with. all of them i will be sending to terry.
the raised baseplate part is only the tip of the iceberg. i have lots of parts
on my site that appear to have no known problems e.g. technic pin long with
stop bush, baseplate 32 x 32 airport runway straight pattern, brick 2 x 2 with
arm 2f, brick 1 x 2 with arm 2f, electric technic micromotor top, space nose
with "v" pattern, panel 1 x 2 x 1 with black grille pattern, brick 1 x 4 with
white grille pattern, brick 1 x 4 with long yellow arrow pattern, brick 1 x 2
with long yellow arrow pattern, brick 1 x 2 with yellow down arrow pattern and
panelv 2 x 5 x 6 with black grille pattern. all of them can be obtained from
http://members.xoom.com/wilsonj/. if i had a baseplate 32 x 32 raised with
ramp, i would measure it with calipers and a microscope if it would increase
the chances of getting the part in. But i do not have one and i do not know
anyone who has one, therefore i can't check on the real thing. i will fix
anything that someone says is wrong with any of my parts... if i cant fix it
then i will give up on that part and leave it as a mock-up. i have already
decided to abandon the electric brick 1 x 8 with 3 lights and minifig tool
signal holder. i will investigate adding the curves on the edges on my raised
baseplate and will do it if it is possible to do given my skills.
my first ldraw parts really sucked. my current vote-ready ones are a massive
improvement on the first attempts. believe me, you would not want to have seen
the first version of the raised baseplate.
i am not deliberatly trying to taint the official parts with crap mock-ups.
every part i label as complete is a part that i know of nothing wrong with.
i have lots of parts on my page that are far worse than my raised baseplate
part etc.
if i cant make ldraw parts without real lego then i will seriously consider
giving up on ldraw and switch back to red alert editing, where my efforts are
appreciated.
i checked the parts from cad.dat in the same way as the copies on my HD and
there were no problems (see my earlier post).
the walls on my raised baeplate are definatly there and any view in which they
do not show up is not due to a fault in my part. it is probobly due to bugs in
ledit. i can find nothing physically wrong with this part as it stands (except
for the edge curves which i am going to fix).
i am going to keep fixing my raised baseplate part and posting it to cad.dev
until it is given a clean bill of health, even if it means that it has appeared
50 times. you keep saying that i need to author from real parts but as i said i
do nht have a 2552. if someone will lend me a 2552 i will gladly spend a couple
of hours checking my part against the real thing.
i am sory for getting angry but i feal very strongly about the fact that you
think that no matter how much time i spend fixing 2552.dat it will never be
good enough for the official parts, simply because i do not have a 2552,never
have had a 2552 and probobly will never have a 2552.
i have been misrepresented on this group as putting quantity over quality. this
is not true. i do care about quality. i am not adverse to making a mock-up of a
part that i want for a model but i would never submit a mock-up for voting. any
part i submit for voting is at least 99% complete. true, there were problems
with the baseplate in 99-02 but i did not know about them untill i was told by
the group. had i known about them before the vote i would have fixed them for
the vote.
my parts are not perfect but they are not unfixable either. i think that with
a bit of work my raised baseplate can be fixed to official starndard.
please stop telling me my parts are crap. i know that. please tell me what i
need to do so that i can fix my parts so that they are no longer crap.
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
 | | Re: fixed part: JW's parts
|
| (...) Maybe the viewing portion of your internal feedback cycle (edit -> view -> re-touch -> re-view -> re-touch -> re-view...) is different from other people viewing the parts. That is, what sorts of tools are you using to view the work as it (...) (26 years ago, 10-Apr-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| | | Re: fixed part: JW's parts
|
| (...) Jonathan, Please try not to take this personally -- and realize that this is only one opinion -- but if you are unable to get parts right even *with* real LEGO elements in hand, then IMHO you really should consider giving up on LDraw, or at (...) (26 years ago, 10-Apr-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| | | Re: fixed part: JW's parts
|
| (...) Yes, I also agree here. But do try with Lego in hand! Just don't push it on the group if it doesn't pan out for you. (...) Yes, truthfully, your public math class isn't gaining you many friends here. (...) Correct.... (...) Sounds like a good (...) (26 years ago, 11-Apr-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: fixed part: JW's parts
|
| i can understand that some of the parts i am constructing are crap. several things: 1. i am lousy at coordinate geometry especially in a 3d plane like ldraw. 2. i have no lego and the only person i know who has lego does not have most of the parts (...) (26 years ago, 10-Apr-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
43 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
|
|
|
|
