 | | Where is Part 4589.dat Cone 1 x 1?
|
|
Hi, Playing with Ldraw yesterday I couldn't find the part 4589.dat Cone 1 x 1 in my Parts directory. I thought my Parts dirtectory were corrupted and reinstalled everything from James' ldraw.exe and all updates (lp97-13 ... -17, 10 updates in '98 (...) (25 years ago, 10-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Subparts for Black Falcon and Wolfpack Patterns ?
|
|
(...) Let me rephrase that... I just make the design from the shields 50% smaller. (25 years ago, 9-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Subparts for Black Falcon and Wolfpack Patterns ?
|
|
(...) I would prefer that you do that, because you can get the sizes right. I just used 0.5x for the scaling on the shields. (25 years ago, 9-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Subparts for Black Falcon and Wolfpack Patterns ?
|
|
(...) weekend), (...) could (...) I am proposing an alternative way of handling the castle logos which are common to the shields, torsos and flags. I have put the logos into subparts. It also seems to make sense to synchronise the Pxx number across (...) (25 years ago, 8-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Subparts for Black Falcon and Wolfpack Patterns ?
|
|
(...) That sounds like a reasonably good idea. :) Steve -- Reduce, reuse, recycle ... bits (25 years ago, 8-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: 71184 Bar 4.5L Straight is too short
|
|
(...) I hope the added length doesn't mess up any models... (but I suppose the short version made some of my models look weird on other people's machines :) (...) I'm flattered. Maybe I should attempt a complete part sometime. --Bram Bram Lambrecht (...) (25 years ago, 7-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Subparts for Black Falcon and Wolfpack Patterns ?
|
|
When I fix the bowties in the Black Falcon and Wolfpack shields (this weekend), would it be more sensible to make each pattern a subpart (or two), which could be shared between shields, torsos and flags, scaled appropriately? If I had done this to (...) (25 years ago, 7-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: BFC checking program (was Re: Some Words To BFC)
|
|
(...) Umm, it's a little more than that, but facing the faces is a very important part. Basically, I meant: 1. All polygons wound correctly 2. All subfile references clean Good point about primitives not being solid. I don't think a renderer (...) (25 years ago, 7-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: BFC: LITS 2
|
|
(...) Yes, it did. But I'm pretty sure that all important topics have been addressed (or re-addressed) since that thread started. (...) Yes, and today it will change to version 10. But version 4 was a big rewrite, where the language changed from (...) (25 years ago, 7-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: BFC: LITS 2
|
|
(...) Actually, the problem is that their determinant is 0, neither positive nor negative. So the renderer would have to disable BFC processing for any file with this kind of reference. Another problem (that L3P handles in most cases) is that (...) (25 years ago, 7-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
