Subject:
|
Re: Technic Axles - go rounded?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Mon, 8 Mar 1999 17:04:21 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1823 times
|
| |
|
|
Steve Bliss writes:
> > Introducing this much details will make the parts render much slower,
> > and will make them a pain to use in LEdit, I'm sure. So if these new
> > axles get introduced, we may need some kind of system to replace them
> > with ordinary axles in LEdit, much like the system which replaces the
> > studs with lines.
>
> So maybe we should drop the idea of rounding the axle ends. But
> shortening them to more appropriate lengths would be worthwhile.
>
> Steve
i disagree.. i say go for it... create the end caps (i thought about doing
this myself when the crankshaft discussion came up) and let's have a
primitive axle cross section without end faces...
then i say we integrate the primitive+end caps versions as an update to
existing pre-defined axle lengths (4591,3705, etc etc)... anyone not wanting
that level of detail can simply use the primitive axle *with* end caps and
scale it to the desired length... but i say the official parts take on the
rounded ends... it won't add *that* much to rendering time... hell, i was
planning to create the rounds with maybe 2 added face steps... that adds what..
like (3x2)x4 (24 total) faces??? that isn't that big of a deal.. and as long as
there is a lesser-detailed alternative i don't see the negative repercussions
outweighing the benefit of accuracy
J
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Technic Axles - go rounded?
|
| (...) Yes, having new axle primitives would make the process go much easier. Perhaps the axle.dat file could be separated into two files: one with the end-lines, and the other with everything else. the "everything else" file would be one of the (...) (28 years ago, 8-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
9 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
