 | | Re: The geometry of minifigs —Chris Dee
|
| | | (...) No, the part is authored with an angle of 9.782. The (x,y) values of the lower facet of the shoulder is (14.345,2) and that at the waist is (19,29) - hence 4.655/27. Or alternatively the top of the torso is (14,0), giving 5/29 - the same (...) (25 years ago, 6-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: The geometry of minifigs —Fredrik Glöckner
|
| | | | | (...) Ok, thanks. I understand. It's not interesting for me (in this setting) to know the angles and offsets of the _true_ minifig. What is of interest is the values that were used to _model_ the minifig. This is because what I want to do is to pose (...) (25 years ago, 6-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Digging up an old thread (was: The geometry of minifigs) —Tony Hafner
|
| | | | | | (...) Considering the accuracy to which the torso and arm parts are modeled... is it possible at all to do realistic poses (like an ABS minifig) without nasty gaps and collisions? I've had trouble doing this before, but only just realized how bad it (...) (23 years ago, 24-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Digging up an old thread (was: The geometry of minifigs) —Bernd Broich
|
| | | | | | | (...) I have had thougt about this and I also think this is worth to be taken over. But I don't have time to realize this. If no one has a something against this you could make realistic arm parts. CU Bernd (23 years ago, 24-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Digging up an old thread (was: The geometry of minifigs) —Steve Bliss
|
| | | | | | (...) I would *love* it if someone were to redo the arms and hand with higher accuracy. :) Steve (23 years ago, 24-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Digging up an old thread (was: The geometry of minifigs) —Tony Hafner
|
| | | | | | (...) Note that it's probably not possible to make proper arms that are backwards compatible because of the hand placement on the ends. So we'd need to assign new id numbers to the arms... right? Either that or we break a few thousand files. It may (...) (23 years ago, 25-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Digging up an old thread (was: The geometry of minifigs) —Chris Dee
|
| | | | | | (...) I have started working on an improved arm part - and agree this will need to use a new number to aboid backward compatibility issues. I'll try and post work-in-progress here when I have something worthy of comment. Chris (23 years ago, 28-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: The geometry of minifigs —Steve Bliss
|
| | | | (...) Da, you are correct. I'd go with the (14,0) shoulder position -- it has better (hidden) precision. 14.345 is derived, as you pointed out, and it is rounded. Does LGEO have the minifig torso? It'd be so nice to have truly rounded edges and (...) (25 years ago, 6-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: The geometry of minifigs —Fredrik Glöckner
|
| | | | (...) No, it doesn't. But it has the head, arms, hands, legs and hips. Fredrik (25 years ago, 6-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| | | | |
