Subject:
|
Re: LPub and Lsynth page for tracking enhancement requests and bug fixes
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Sun, 30 Mar 2003 17:50:03 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
832 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Jake McKee writes:
> In lugnet.cad.dev, Larry Pieniazek writes:
>
> > Better rendering control. While I use MLCad for model capture and review, I
> > use LDLite as a rendering tool for final instruction images, as it is much
> > more flexible and gives me fine grained control over more things. YMMV.
>
> But is this only comparing MLCad to LDLite? While I would agree that the
> batch processing abilities seem cool, the quality just doesn't seem to
> compare if you also factor in MegaPOV to the mix.
It's good enough for what I use it for, and it doesn't require POV, and it's
way way way way faster. I'd never tie up my PC for two days rendering,
that's just unacceptable.
> That being said... am I missing something? There are only a few "File..."
> menu items. The quality looks quite similar to MLCad. Maybe I am just
> overlooking a key option switch.
Maybe. Read the help on the command line options to se what you're missing,
there's a lot there. I confess I haven't even launched LDLite as a windows
app in quite some time so I can't comment on whats on or not on the file menu.
Don't underestimate the importance of batch processing. MLCad doesn't do it
and MegaPOV is too hard to use and too slow. LDLite fills a great niche.
I'm about to switch back to MpeeDee if I can get it to work, as MLCad's MPD
splitting is broken, badly, as you have to respecify the path each time.
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
49 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
