|
|
 | | Re: Modeling without the real element -- bad
|
| (...) Sure, but it's not like the modelers are payed to make the parts. Personally, my motivation for making a new part is the enjoyment I feel from being able to use it in a model. But, to take the part 32140.DAT as an example agian, this (...) (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| | | | | Re: Modeling without the real element -- bad
|
| (...) Why wouldn't rejecting flawed parts improve the quality of the parts? It's not like they'd never get in -- they'd just get fixed right away. --Todd (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| | | | | Re: Java LDraw/LDLite
|
| Might it be great in 12 months though? --Todd (...) (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| | | | | RE: DAT voting page up
|
| (...) I'm glad you think so, beacuse I was going to suggest that to you, when you made the coins ;-) (...) You can have a hint of how to model the numerals by looking at L3P's primitive substitute for stud.dat (in any L3P generated POV file). /Lars (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| | | | | Re: Modeling without the real element -- bad
|
| (...) I'm sure this happens all the time. A lot of the current LDraw elements are wrong, in some way. Some examples, from the top of my head: - The teeth of the Technic gear cogs are too wide. In real life, the width is 10 LDU, but on the LDraw cogs (...) (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
|
