 | | Re: Differences between rotation points
|
|
(...) from (...) library (...) rotation (...) That helps a lot. Thanks! Cheers, --Ryan (23 years ago, 30-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.mlcad)
|
| |
| | Re: Differences between rotation points
|
|
(...) - Part Origin, is the absolute zero (0,0,0) point of the part itself. - Part Center, is the computed center of the part (e.g. the part ranges from (-2, -2, -2) to (+4, +4, +4) so the computed center is (+1,+1,+1). - The part rotation point, is (...) (23 years ago, 30-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.mlcad)
|
| |
| | Differences between rotation points
|
|
I am working on making some parts, and I have a couple of questions regarding rotation points. . What is the difference between Part Origin, Part Center, and Part Rotation Point in the Rotation Point dialog box (MLCad)? . Is the Part Rotation Point (...) (23 years ago, 29-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.mlcad)
|
| |
| | Re: Test posting of "Unoffficial Update"
|
|
I just noticed #30414 (Brick 1x4 with studs on side) is named "_3010-8.dat" in this unofficial update. Clearly the partnumber is 30414. Greetingz... Sjaacko (...) (23 years ago, 25-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Is there any benefit...
|
|
(...) Yeah, I wasn't thinking of a large-scale rewrite, but I was curious. (...) I'm not at all code-savvy, but I'd help where possible. Dave! (23 years ago, 24-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Is there any benefit...
|
|
----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve Bliss" <steve.bliss@home.com> To: <lugnet.cad.dev@lugnet.com> Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2001 10:54 AM Subject: Re: Is there any benefit... (...) most (...) recursing (...) But (...) It's not worth the trouble: (...) (23 years ago, 24-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Is there any benefit...
|
|
(...) The main advantage would be saving a few bytes of file space. Which is most significant to the download process, since we've got about 3MB of data, between ldraw.exe and complete.exe. The rendering time would be *mostly* unaffected. On the on (...) (23 years ago, 24-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Is there any benefit...
|
|
I've noticed that a number of older DAT files could be steamlined (that is, rendered using far fewer lines) by application of box.dat and rect.dat primitives rather than a series of linetypes 2 and 4. Is there any merit in doing this, such as (...) (23 years ago, 23-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: "33" Slope Shocker... Possible name change?
|
|
Nice response time here on my behalf :] Oops (...) Yeah, I didn't like these two either, mostly the first one. It could be confusing. (...) ARRrrgh!! Hehe, got it :] To me, either of the angle method or the rise-run methods could work, and I can (...) (23 years ago, 15-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Part Authoring FAQ (was Re:Some submission guidelines...)
|
|
(...) Oops, sorry about that. Really all this info should be added to the FAQ on www.ldraw.org. All the FAQ says about submitting is "When you have finished the part, you should check it for technical mistakes with l3p -check, and then send it to (...) (23 years ago, 11-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Demo of part manipulation in isometric view
|
|
(...) At Y=0. Just make sure the light source doesn't move. Steve (23 years ago, 10-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Some submission guidelines (was: Re: 6002 mpd version, now I think I got it.)
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dat.parts, Don Heyse wrote something that triggered me to write at length: (...) Posting to lugnet.cad.dat.parts as an MPD is cool. It's better than the alternative (posting several messages, possibly pointing links to (...) (23 years ago, 10-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Demo of part manipulation in isometric view
|
|
"Steve Bliss" <steve.bliss@home.com> wrote in message news:GD4pME.Bz2@lugnet.com... (...) could (...) But where would the shadow be drawn, if there is no absolute minimum elevation? (23 years ago, 10-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Demo of part manipulation in isometric view
|
|
"Dave Schuler" <orrex@excite.com> wrote in message news:GD4oE6.82s@lugnet.com... (...) the (...) the (...) it. Yes, I'm planning to allow at the very minimum, the ability to view any of the eight potential isometric views (if you made a model of a (...) (23 years ago, 10-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Demo of part manipulation in isometric view
|
|
"Ahui Herrera" <jedi_agh@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:GD4nu6.6KI@lugnet.com... (...) Yes. (23 years ago, 10-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Demo of part manipulation in isometric view
|
|
(...) The only suggestion I have is to keep drawing the brick's shadow when the brick goes underground. Steve (23 years ago, 10-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Demo of part manipulation in isometric view
|
|
(...) I like it! Ultimately I suppose you'd have a toggle for finer-detail motion, but as a demo I think it's quite cool. Would it be possible in the final product to rotate the scene, or even to change the centerpoint of the view? In any case, I'll (...) (23 years ago, 10-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Demo of part manipulation in isometric view
|
|
Will this new program have the ability to move objects both in the iso.. view and other views that MLCAD currenlty allows. This would be best! (23 years ago, 10-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Test posting of "Unoffficial Update"
|
|
"Steve Bliss" <steve.bliss@home.com> wrote in message news:qk5lftsl7dvnao4...4ax.com... (...) OK, don't let us stop you. Must be a nightmare trying to get the automatic parts release system written. Dan (23 years ago, 10-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Test posting of "Unoffficial Update"
|
|
Thanks for the feedback, Dan. I'll see what I can do about straightening these parts out. Now, on to the next step: managing feedback and updates to files. :) Steve (...) (23 years ago, 10-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
