CAD Development : 2557


CAD / Development / 2557

Re: i admit i was wrong —Steve Bliss

(...) How could you *not* know? People have been blasting you about it for weeks. The lack of capitalization in your messages is not a major peeve for me[1], but I was very aware that it annoyed many other people. (...) So get them. Look at how the (...) (25 years ago, 13-Aug-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)

Re: i admit i was wrong —Bram Lambrecht

(...) don't (...) part[2], (...) the (...) Type 5 lines would make up for the lack of edge lines on curved edges, wouldn't they? (But I won't pretend that I know anything about using type 5 lines :/ ) Also, as more and more people raytrace their (...) (25 years ago, 13-Aug-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)

Re: i admit i was wrong —John VanZwieten

Bram Lambrecht <braml@juno.com> wrote in message news:19990813.073557...uno.com... (...) The type 5 lines only show up at the outer edges. There still would be no edgeline extending the length of the edge between the top and side faces, simply (...) (25 years ago, 13-Aug-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)

Parts for LDraw or parts for POV-Ray? (was: Re: i admit i was wrong) —Steve Bliss

(...) I disagree on this point. LDraw parts should be primarily focused on optimizing rendering in LDraw-tools. Among other things, this means that small-radius curved edges are better drawn as sharp edges. Heck, when you get right down to details, (...) (25 years ago, 13-Aug-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)

Re: Parts for LDraw or parts for POV-Ray? (was: Re: i admit i was wrong) —John VanZwieten

Steve Bliss <blisses@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message news:37b46776.174180...net.com... (...) Perhaps we should take this debate to a more appropriate group: lugnet.cad.dev.on-topic :-) (...) In general the cut-off for details is 1 LDU, or so (...) (25 years ago, 13-Aug-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)

Re: Parts for LDraw or parts for POV-Ray? —Leonardo Zide

(...) Good idea, we shouldn't be discussing this in lugnet.flame.flame :) and Steve said: (...) I've done that to LeoCAD a few months ago, when you export a file to POV-Ray it first searches the LGEO library for the parts and then if it cannot find (...) (25 years ago, 13-Aug-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)

Re: Parts for LDraw or parts for POV-Ray? —Steve Bliss

(...) I'd give that one a hearty "Heck, Yes!" :) Except I never did come up with a decent working version of Rayshade/Netshade. I finally settled for the POV- Ray port of L3G0. Even made a few parts for myself. :) No rounded edges, though. :( In (...) (25 years ago, 13-Aug-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)

Re: Parts for LDraw or parts for POV-Ray? —Jonathan Wilson

(...) There are parts in l3go and mabie even in lgeo that are not in ldraw yet. I think that before a merge of lgeo and l3go is done then the l3go parts not in ldraw should be done in ldraw.That way there would be nothing in the combined library (...) (25 years ago, 14-Aug-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)

Re: Parts for LDraw or parts for POV-Ray? —Bram Lambrecht

(...) each (...) I agree with joining libraries, but the creators of the libraries might not, especially when parts are in both libraries. Then which do you keep? It may also take a lot of effort to match the scale, coordinate system, and insertion (...) (25 years ago, 14-Aug-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)

Re: Parts for LDraw or parts for POV-Ray? —Paul Gyugyi

(...) I don't care, really. I'm still wondering why we needed those newfangled L*P tools, anyways. :) I've always been amused at how everyone who creates a part library uses a totally wron^H^H^H^Hdifferent coordinate system and names the pieces (...) (25 years ago, 14-Aug-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)

Re: Parts for LDraw or parts for POV-Ray? —Todd Lehman

(...) What was the rationale motivating the hammer on BriCad? --Todd (25 years ago, 14-Aug-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)

Re: Parts for LDraw or parts for POV-Ray? —Leonardo Zide

(...) TLG sent the author a letter saying that they had the copyrights over the bricks/studs and if he didn't remove his pages he would be sued. The author got so disappointed that he left the net. Leonardo (25 years ago, 14-Aug-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)

Re: Parts for LDraw or parts for POV-Ray? —Todd Lehman

(...) Did Carsten ever post a copy of the letter or anything like that? Anyone know what year/month this was? How about what country he lived in at the time? Very odd... Obviously (er, apparently) TLG has lightened up considerably since then. --Todd (25 years ago, 14-Aug-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)

Re: Parts for LDraw or parts for POV-Ray? —Joshua Delahunty

(...) IIRC (this would be from e-mail he sent me that I almost certainly no longer have, and is stuff I know because I was making an attempt to port it to a Windows version): - It was LEGO Germany - The dispute was over TLG's rights to "studded (...) (25 years ago, 15-Aug-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)

Re: Parts for LDraw or parts for POV-Ray? —Leonardo Zide

(...) You are probably more correct than me, I've never been able to talk to Carsten and I've never been able to use BriCad, Unix was very hard to install at that time and I wasn't a programmer (didn't knew much about computers). (...) You're right, (...) (25 years ago, 15-Aug-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)

Re: Parts for LDraw or parts for POV-Ray? —Joshua Delahunty

(...) You continue to amaze, Leonardo. To have not been a programmer that recently, and to have come up with LeoCAD and make it work so well, it shocks me a little (in a good way). :) (...) I wouldn't go that far. In fact, I'd caution that we be (...) (25 years ago, 15-Aug-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)

Re: Parts for LDraw or parts for POV-Ray? —Steve Bliss

On Sun, 15 Aug 1999 00:28:15 GMT, Joshua Delahunty <dulcaoin@alumni.cse.ucsc.edu> wrote: [Update on the story of BriCAD and Carsten Gnoerlich] Thanks for the information, Joshua. I hadn't heard of btopia. Heck, the last thing I knew, I was (...) (25 years ago, 15-Aug-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)

Re: Parts for LDraw or parts for POV-Ray? —Tamyra Teed

Snipped most of the message... ok.. all of it.. :-) I have some thoughts on why TLG hasn't thought about trying to shut this down... I'm sure they already know the group as a whole isn't very happy with them. To turn around, and try to shut down a (...) (25 years ago, 16-Aug-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)

Why TLG doesn't have a leg to stand on anymore. —Christian Holtje

Despite the dire Subject line, I am only refering to good things for people who author "lego" software. There are the PR problems that Mookie mentioned, but there is more than that. Lego has lost the IP rights in several countries (due to time). (...) (25 years ago, 16-Aug-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)

Re: Why TLG doesn't have a leg to stand on anymore. —Leonardo Zide

(...) I thought that most countries have signed the same agreement about copyright laws, making the laws the same almost everywhere (in about 200 countries at least). (...) Or you could find a place that doesn't have copyright laws and put the (...) (25 years ago, 16-Aug-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)

Re: Why TLG doesn't have a leg to stand on anymore. —John Bauman

Leonardo Zide wrote in message <37B811B3.16EA370B@c...com.br>... (...) Reminds of hearing that all windows -emulation projects (like WINE) should be moved to australia because you are allowed to reverse engineer there. (...) (25 years ago, 16-Aug-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)

Reverse engineering (Was: Why TLG doesn't have a leg to stand on anymore.) —Jacob Sparre Andersen

(...) You have (as I read the law) been allowed to do that in EU for a few years now. Play well, Jacob ---...--- -- E-mail: sparre@cats.nbi.dk -- -- Web...: <URL:(URL) -- ---...--- (25 years ago, 17-Aug-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)

Re: Why TLG doesn't have a leg to stand on anymore. —Christian Holtje

(...) Copyright laws are pretty the much the same for the reasons you list, with a few exceptions. However, lego cad programs don't infringe on *any* copyrights, only Trademarks and (possibly, but not likely) intelectual property rights. (...) It (...) (25 years ago, 16-Aug-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)

Re: Parts for LDraw or parts for POV-Ray? —Leonardo Zide

(...) If you liked the Windows version, you're going to be even more amazed when the Linux version is ready. :) I just hope that someone else gets impressed and offers me a job... (I'm going to graduate this semester and I realized I don't want to (...) (25 years ago, 16-Aug-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)

Re: Parts for LDraw or parts for POV-Ray? —Paul Gyugyi

(...) I have BriCAD 0.83 source, and possibly the earlier 0.75 source, in archive, if Carsten would like to have them. -gyug (25 years ago, 20-Aug-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)

Re: Parts for LDraw or parts for POV-Ray? —Joshua Delahunty

(...) Gee, hath my memory deceived me? Maybe it WAS 0.83 source I wanted (I think I had 0.75 source). Carsten wasn't interested, I was. I wanted to at least bring the functionality of BriCAD (as opposed to btopia) to Windows, and perhaps build it (...) (25 years ago, 21-Aug-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)

Re: Parts for LDraw or parts for POV-Ray? —Steve Bliss

(...) I don't think TLG has changed much since then. I also think TLG was blowing some smoke, and Carsten gave up too easily. I'm pretty sure Carsten could have made some cosmetic changes to satisfy TLG. Steve (25 years ago, 15-Aug-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)

Re: Parts for LDraw or parts for POV-Ray? —Bram Lambrecht

(...) I didn't place all 10,000 parts separately, though. Thanks to Jacob's fractal landscape generator, I was able to convert a contour map and a color map of the Fallingwater landscape into a DAT file. To create the contour map, I first scanned (...) (25 years ago, 14-Aug-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)

Re: Parts for LDraw or parts for POV-Ray? —Paul Gyugyi

(...) are one of the hardest things to make, IMO). I did a fractal terrain thing on my jade outpost model. (URL) ended up with a set of 32x32 "terrain" baseplates at varying resolution. One trick is to only include the visible bricks, and group (...) (25 years ago, 14-Aug-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)

Re: Parts for LDraw or parts for POV-Ray? —Ryan Dennett

(...) (URL) (...) (Waterfalls (...) That is a very interesting scene. Really hard to describe :) Ryan "God is always polishing my personality, giving me new things to work on. Since I've become a Christian, my whole perception of life has changed." (...) (25 years ago, 14-Aug-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)

Re: Parts for LDraw or parts for POV-Ray? —Bram Lambrecht

(...) Yep. Jacob Sparre Anderson has created a fractal landscape generator. It works in two steps, first you create a PGM bitmap (in an image editor, or using Jacob's fractal generator), then you convert the PGM to LDraw. Sorry, I don't have the URL (...) (25 years ago, 14-Aug-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)

Re: Parts for LDraw or parts for POV-Ray? —Steve Bliss

(...) "Leveraging the LDraw knowledge-base" :p (...) Isn't that something? I think it would make much more sense if everyone built their library using some obscure, *nix-based (that's a bit redundant) raytracing program. Steve (25 years ago, 15-Aug-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)

Re: Parts for LDraw or parts for POV-Ray? —Paul Gyugyi

(...) ^^^...^^^ (...) LOL. But remember, it was a *free* raytracing program, with more features than POV at the time. And it ran faster under Linux than the DOS version. -gyug (25 years ago, 20-Aug-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)

Re: Parts for LDraw or parts for POV-Ray? —Steve Bliss

(...) GNU free, or just no-price? It could have been worse--it could have only run on a BeBox. Steve (25 years ago, 20-Aug-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)

Re: Parts for LDraw or parts for POV-Ray? —Lutz Uhlmann

(...) First to make clear: L2P uses a library of parts, about 630 by the latest update L3P uses LDraw parts and converts them directly, as I know, so with L3P you can get all parts which are in your parts-directory. So the discussion shlul be about (...) (25 years ago, 16-Aug-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)

Re: Parts for LDraw or parts for POV-Ray? —Bram Lambrecht

(...) you (...) I know, but I was talking about the three libraries in the statement above, not L3P. (...) True. (...) Exactly. (...) This is exactly the reason for joining efforts: to handle all parts, yet use the best quality parts where possible. (...) (25 years ago, 16-Aug-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)

Re: Parts for LDraw or parts for POV-Ray? —Richard Bingle

(...) Both l2p and l3p have their advantages depending on the goal of the user. l3p is great if you want a rendered version of a model, no matter the parts. l2p is great if you want a more detailed/smooth render and the parts are available. Thanks (...) (25 years ago, 17-Aug-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)

Re: Parts for LDraw or parts for POV-Ray? —Richard Bingle

(...) Funny, after almost a year away from the lego ray-tracing world, I had just gotten back into it and had downloaded the latest versions of tools I had tried in the past, including leocad. I just spent the last couple of hours playing with (...) (25 years ago, 14-Aug-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)

Re: Parts for LDraw or parts for POV-Ray? (was: Re: i admit i was wrong) —Paul Gyugyi

(...) Any interest in LDLite-meets-L3G0? (25 years ago, 13-Aug-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)