Subject:
|
More on Stickers (was: Questions on Stickers and Certification)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Fri, 22 Feb 2002 19:01:45 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
732 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Imre Papp writes:
> In lugnet.cad.dev, Tony Hafner writes:
> > On stickers:
> >
> > Should stickers be treated, for part authoring purposes, as if they were
> > printed on the parts? If so, should we indicate somehow that the part is
> > stickered as opposed to printed?
>
> I'm currently working on modelling of the stickers of the Technic black
> Supercar. Before that I put some question in thread
> http://news.lugnet.com/news/display.cgi?lugnet.cad.dev:6715
>
> Then we agreed on the approach that stickers are separate parts just as they
> were ordinary bricks since, they can be sticked on various parts, as
> alternate models in Technic sets usually require. So they differ from
> patterns that are unremovably printed on parts.
From reading that thread, it sounds like the only reasonably solution to
both the bleed and seam gap problems is to author the parts and stickers
together.
Problems with stickers as separate parts:
Nomenclature:
- 6 digits for the sheet ID plus 2 for the individual sticker
doesn't leave room for a dividing character.
- The sheet IDs will often be hard to obtain for older sets.
- Identical stickers appear in multiple sheets/sets.
Positioning:
- Stickers might be hard to align. Potential partial solution
is to supply shortcuts to the stickers as placed on the
"correct" part.
- The back of the sticker or the part beneath will "bleed"
through the printing on some (most?) renderers unless the
sticker is way too thick.
- Some renderers (including POV) will scale the parts to create
a seam gap, which will show the sticker floating above the
part.
New Standard: As far as I know (which may not be much!), there
are no stickers in the official parts library that are done
this way. On the other hand, some official "patterned" parts
are actually parts with stickers.
Problems with stickers done like patterned parts:
Nomenclature:
- On what do you base the name? Would you name the pattern
after the "correct" parent part? Would you name it after the
sticker sheet?
Positioning:
- You have to author a separate part for each possible
positioning of the piece.
It seems pretty obvious to me (for what that's worth) that modeling stickers
essentially like patterns is the way to go. This is also consistent with
the current parts library in at least a few cases.
You can look at this approach as being a bit on the "purist" side- if you
follow the instructions in the set that comes with the sticker, there are
only one or two possible places to put the sticker. If someone wants to
muck with putting a sticker on a non-normal part, they can figure out how to
model that themselves. It would be easier than many "simple" tasks (simple
in the real world, anyway) that LDraw users already have to deal with...
such as positioning flexible hoses.
The naming issue mostly goes away, or at least becomes relegated to the same
status as patterns. We could possibly switch to a different character for
stickers: <part#>s<sticker#>.dat as opposed to <part#>p<pattern#>.dat. I'd
actually recommend using "d" for "decal", though, because subpart naming
might be more confusing with "s" already meaning "subpart".
Note that if sticker faces are always done as subparts, they would be easy
for people to use them in other places. Sure, they'd be floating and
backside-less two-dimensional stickers... and people would have to look in
the subparts directory... but I think that's a solution that most people
would find acceptable if they aren't parts authors and can't do it properly.
The sticker file could include commented-out code for a backing, or even a
single commented-out subpart reference for this. That way it would take
minimal file-hacking to get a proper sticker.
> In some cases the number of the sticker sheet is known and the sticker part
> will get this number as LDraw filename suffixed be some subpart identifier
> xxxxxxa.dat, xxxxxxb.dat etc.
>
> Please have a look at my sticker renderings at
> http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=11384
These look great, but the stickers look too thick to me. On the other hand,
I may be used to dealing with plastic stickers... which appear to be
significantly thinner than paper ones. Yours may be appropriate for paper
stickers. Heh- there's another issue!
--
Tony Hafner
www.hafhead.com
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Questions on Stickers and Certification
|
| (...) I'm currently working on modelling of the stickers of the Technic black Supercar. Before that I put some question in thread (URL) we agreed on the approach that stickers are separate parts just as they were ordinary bricks since, they can be (...) (23 years ago, 22-Feb-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
17 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
