 | | Re: Pontoon Elements, anyone?
|
|
(...) It depents on your scale, but maybe jou can make someting out of these technical parts: 2823 Technic Forklift Fork, length 7 studs (seen it used in pairs back to back) see (URL) Technic Wing Back, length 5 studs (use it upside down) see (URL) (...) (23 years ago, 5-Jun-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Pontoon Elements, anyone?
|
|
(...) Ryan, I was refering to elements that are slightly flat, such as Helicopter runners, but somewhat wider and "taller" (or "thicker"). At any rate, I want to thank you for trying to help out. James J. (...) (23 years ago, 5-Jun-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Pontoon Elements, anyone?
|
|
The only ones I can think of are the Aquazone pieces: 6037.dat 6043.dat 6042.dat --Ryan (...) I'm (...) plane. (...) (23 years ago, 4-Jun-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | ldglite 0.9.1 (now with better LEdit emulation)
|
|
Hmmm, I didn't get much feedback on the 0.9.0 version of ldglite. No problem, I found enough to work on myself and the result is ldglite version 0.9.1. For this release I tried to make the LEdit emulation more accurate. I also attempted to tweak the (...) (23 years ago, 1-Jun-01, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.announce)
|
| |
| | Re: Opinion sought for rendering style
|
|
"Steve Bliss" <steve.bliss@home.com> wrote in message news:GE8IMF.8K5@lugnet.com... (...) cad (...) line (...) So far all of the lines and optional lines I've seen, have been polygon edges. Rather than do the math to determine if an optional line (...) (23 years ago, 1-Jun-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Opinion sought for rendering style
|
|
(...) Why? A lot of pieces have odd lines on their surfaces -- sometimes regularly laid out (like on cylindrical bits), sometimes oddly laid out (like the car doors or complicated printed pieces). Sometimes these lines will make an interesting (...) (23 years ago, 1-Jun-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Opinion sought for rendering style
|
|
I spent a few moments tweaking the rendering style of my in-development cad program. A sample can be seen at (URL) ignore the few unhidden lines (such as the steering wheel in the side view, and the lines leading diagonally up and to the left from (...) (23 years ago, 1-Jun-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Demo of part manipulation in isometric view
|
|
"Farlie A" <alex_farlie@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:GE7LFr.7BJ@lugnet.com... (...) in (...) Thanks! (...) course?) (...) program... Yes. I am developing a version for Windows with Delphi, and a version for GNU/Linux with Kylix, using the (...) (23 years ago, 1-Jun-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Pontoon Elements, anyone?
|
|
Hello. Does anyone know if small pontoon-type elements were ever made for LCAD? I'm referring to small-sized ones capable of supporting an airboat or sea plane. James J. (23 years ago, 31-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Demo of part manipulation in isometric view
|
|
(...) Nice interface. Like it! I was wondring if you planned to rlease the source code... (GPL of course?) as I was considering a similar interface for a different (non-lego) program... (...) (23 years ago, 31-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | 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)
|
