Subject:
|
Re: Modeling without the real element -- bad
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Fri, 26 Feb 1999 01:39:30 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1746 times
|
| |
|
|
On Thu, 25 Feb 1999 22:33:32 GMT, lehman@javanet.com (Todd Lehman) wrote:
> In lugnet.cad.dev, legoverse@geocities.com (Terry K) writes:
> > "jonathan wilson" <wilsonj@xoommail.com> wrote:
> > > i do not accually own any lego.
> > > i am excusivly ldraw.
> >
> > !! Really?
> > 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.
> >
> > This makes me seriously question the accuracy of all the parts you have
> > submitted.
>
>
> Indeed.
>
> In fact -- and maybe I'm reading too much into this -- but I'm surprised that
> there isn't a strict rule against submitting parts that have been modeled
> without having them in front of you. (Mock-ups noted as such being a valid
> exception, right?)
>
> Terry: Is that correct? Is there not currently a rule against submitting
> parts that have not been painstakingly measured from a real element?
No, there is no strict rule. More of a common sense rule. But apparantly,
common sense is not always sufficient.
How could I possible enforce such a rule? And there would always be valid
exceptions to it (see John VanZ's post)
> I think you should flat-out reject all parts submitted by people who haven't
> measured the dimensions and haven't worked from an actual element. It's just
> wrong to model them without the real element in front of you.
>
> If Jonathan has the energy to model parts, but not the will to purchase them,
> then perhaps we can send Jonathan parts via snail mail. IMHO, no one should
> be working blind.
Sending parts to an author could work. I would have no qualms about sending
pieces to many of the authors. Because I know and trust them, and I have
confidence in their ability to accurately model a piece.
But before sending any pieces to Jonathan, I would want him to work on his
authoring skills. He has not shown me that his skill level is up to snuff.
-- Terry K --
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Modeling without the real element -- bad
|
| (...) I'm not sure how a rule like that could be strictly enforced, but you could certainly put down a foot and declare from here on out that modeling pieces blindly is verboten because they (a) cannot possibly be 100% correct except in extremely (...) (25 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Modeling without the real element -- bad
|
| (...) Indeed. In fact -- and maybe I'm reading too much into this -- but I'm surprised that there isn't a strict rule against submitting parts that have been modeled without having them in front of you. (Mock-ups noted as such being a valid (...) (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
|
|
|
|
