 | | RE: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) Thank you for your effort Terry. Here are some comments from "l3p -check". /Lars WARNING "2552.DAT" Line 479: Identical vertices: 2 24 -150 0 10 -150 0 10 WARNING "2621.DAT" Line 204: Identical vertices: 4 16 36 8 -66 40 8 -63 36 8 -66 33.78 8 (...) (26 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | RE: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) 71427.dat Electric 9V Mini-Motor uses box3#8p.DAT (Note the p!) /Lars (26 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | RE: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) Yes, there is a huge amount of studs hiding inside other bricks. Anybody got an intelligent algorithm? This would be applicable for LDLite too and save a lot of unnecessary rendering. However, watch out for transparent bricks... /Lars (26 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | RE: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) POV-Ray certainly requires a LOT of memory when using the L3P -q3 option. Parsing time increases very much. However, the rendering time isn't that much longer as one could have feared. Probably because POV-Ray has some efficient internal (...) (26 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | RE: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) Yes, but from the LDraw triangles and quads alone it requires some heavy analysis to decide whether to add or subtract the small offset. I think we have some patterned inverted slopes... /Lars (26 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | RE: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) No. I should have been more specific: If two surfaces coincide, the viewing ray will due to small numerical inaccuracies sometimes hit the one surface first and sometimes the other surface first. If the surfaces are colored differently (...) (26 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Java LDraw/LDLite
|
|
Todd Lehman wrote in message ... (...) Why thank you =) (...) Indeed - I've got a guitar tabulature editor written entirely in Java and it runs as happily on a Win32 box as my friend's Linux box and apparently another friend's Mac. Rumour has it (...) (26 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) 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. (...) (26 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) Perhaps because it would be too small to resolve clearly when rendering - and would add greatly to rendering times. -- Terry K -- (26 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) Well, "Pattern" just sort of became a standard way of identifying a patterned part. "Logo" I think should refer more to a specific type of pattern. Necessary? I don't know. But I seem to be blindly following the convention. (...) In a perfect (...) (26 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
