Subject:
|
Re: DAT voting page up
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Thu, 25 Feb 1999 07:11:21 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1744 times
|
| |
|
|
On Thu, 25 Feb 1999 04:37:49 GMT, "Earls HouseHold" <brandone@mounet.com>
wrote:
>
> Terry K wrote in message <36d4980d.635296@lugnet.com>...
>
> > How do you expect to be able to accurately model pieces into LDraw if you • don't
> > have them?
> > I can understand maybe real simple pieces, but some of the pieces you have
> > attempted have been of complex forms. I find it difficult to believe that • you
> > could do a credible job of recreating a complex piece in LDraw without • having
> > the actual piece to guide you.
>
> Geez, Terry, its all relative. I've yet to see anyone try to model the few
> imprinted part numbers there are. Besides, if we start getting too picky
> we'll be wanting the lot numbers next 8-o.
I am not worried about part numbers on the parts. What I am concerned about is
the overall accuracy of a part that is modelled from a picture. If you have
followed l-cad for any time at all, you recall much discussion about part
dimensions. How can anyone hope to accurately dimension an ldraw part just by
looking at pictures or scans? Sure, you could do a passable mock-up, but you
are unlikely to get an accurate model.
Several parts in the vote right now have been referred to as "mock-ups". And I
agree. They are severely lacking in detail and accuracy. Why? Perhaps
because the author does not have real-life examples to model from?
So sorry if I appear to be picky. But I don't want LDraw parts to degenerate
to such a low level of quality.
> > This makes me seriously question the accuracy of all the parts you have
> > submitted.
>
> That's what the vote is all about. So he doesn't have any LEGO pieces.
> That will be the next step. Lego is like a cold; once your exposed you
> can't help but catch it. ;-}
He has already stated that he does not intend to buy any actual pieces. Using
and enjoying Lego virtually thru LDraw is good. I am glad he enjoys it. But
trying to make LDraw parts with no actual examples to work from is, IMO, a bad
idea. Making mockups is fine, but trying to officialize pieces that are
little more than mock-ups would be hurting us all in the long run.
-- Terry K --
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: DAT voting page up
|
| Terry K wrote in message <36d4f44c.3127860@lu...et.com>... (...) about is (...) have (...) by (...) you (...) This is certainly true, but with some research dimensions can be determined by comparison with known parts via this very discussion and (...) (25 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
| Terry K wrote in message <36d4980d.635296@lugnet.com>... (...) don't (...) you (...) having (...) Geez, Terry, its all relative. I've yet to see anyone try to model the few imprinted part numbers there are. Besides, if we start getting too picky (...) (25 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
42 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
|
|
|
|
