 | | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) need (...) You should measure with a ruler or with lego parts (or for detailed parts people have resorted to calipers). With a plate and a brick, you can make pretty accurate measurements based on wall thickness (4 ldu), plate thickness (8 (...) (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) i have fixed that and send the fix to terry. (...) i will fix this asap (...) i will not fix those (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) i have fixed that and send the fix to terry. also i added a missing stud at the edge next to the ramp. (...) i will fix this asap (...) i will not fix those (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) Without the actual element in front of you, how can you be 100% sure that you've actually fixed the problem? (...) Have you asked yourself why you missed this in the first place? --Todd (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) i have fixed it because i built kings mountain fortress on the part and all the studs are in place (...) it was a small oversight on my part. even if i had the part in front of me then i still could have missed the stud (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
Todd Lehman wrote in message ... (...) You can't. Even with a part in hand you can't because how do you know every part thru the ages is the same. A case in point, I just did an inventory of all the parts I have and found two 45 1 x 2 slopes that (...) (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) I disagree with the first sentence (as I've said). I don't have this part, so I can't give any detailed feedback on the accuracy of the part-file; I must stick to generalities. An easy way to fix this part (enough to earn the coveted 'needs (...) (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) The curved edges are an essential part of the piece, especially when viewed in LDLite or POV-Ray. Not modeling them would be like leaving the curved edges off of the Windscreens - the edges are a highly recogizable feature of the part. --Bram (...) (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) the canyon raised baseplate does not have the rounded edges. (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) Then it's broken too. :) --Todd (26 years ago, 27-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
I've never authored lego parts for ldraw, but I did for pov-ray (at the time I was using Anton Raves library which is very good (a lot more detailed than ldraw, I haven't tried l3P so I don't know the quality of the output) but it was lacking some (...) (26 years ago, 28-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) True, but it's also a precedent. I'd rather have the bottom surface than curved edges. I'd consider a part with all surfaces more accurate than a part with closely-modeled upper surfaces, but the underside completely missing. Maybe I'm just (...) (26 years ago, 1-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) Now, if they were going backwards, they'd really be moonwalking[1] Steve [1] A dance move made popular by Michael Jackson, where the dancer walks backward, but makes it look like they are walking forward. (26 years ago, 1-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
