Subject:
|
Re: Another stupid part-authoring question (Primo?!?)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Thu, 28 Feb 2002 22:10:32 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
683 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Steve Bliss writes:
> In lugnet.cad.dev, Tony Hafner wrote:
> > My question is whether I should bother designing the stud like other studs
> > or whether I should just make it a subpart that doesn't get stud rendering
> > optimizations.
>
> Hmm. I don't have any Primo parts handy, so I've got to throw out a
> basic question. Isn't the inside of the Primo stud actually hollow? If
> we made a Primo stud that was subject to studline'ing, that would leave
> a huge hole in the Primo parts, right?
>
> That would be bad.
>
> So I'd say you should just model the Primo stud as a regular primitive,
> using your "simplified approach". Call it babystud.dat or something. :)
Yes, the stud is hollow. The studline substitution would leave a hole 56
(or at least 48) LDU across... big enough to fit a microfig-scale capital ship.
--
Tony Hafner
www.hafhead.com
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Another stupid part-authoring question (Primo?!?)
|
| (...) Hmm. I don't have any Primo parts handy, so I've got to throw out a basic question. Isn't the inside of the Primo stud actually hollow? If we made a Primo stud that was subject to studline'ing, that would leave a huge hole in the Primo parts, (...) (22 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
4 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
