| | Re: Proposed solution *Test Here* [DAT]
|
|
(...) Yes. No. ;-) There's still a problem with mirrored sub-assemblies. Suppose you have an aeroplane, Plane.ldr: 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 -1 0 0 2445.DAT 1 16 0 -8 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 Wing.ldr 1 16 0 -8 0 -1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 Wing.ldr Wing.ldr: 1 4 -80 (...) (21 years ago, 19-Jul-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
|
| | Re: Vertices not coplanar?
|
|
(...) Right, it is typically an error if the four points of a quad do not lie in a plane. Too bad that the LDraw format has a built-in possiblity of creating degenerate quads. POV e.g. uses 2D points to describe a polygon. See also "Method for (...) (21 years ago, 18-Jul-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
|
| | Re: Vertices not coplanar?
|
|
(...) What Orion said. (...) Sometimes, it just means the vertices are incorrect. If the vertices are correct, then you should break the quads into two triangles, and put a soft edge (linetype 5) along the common edge. But often, it's worth looking (...) (21 years ago, 18-Jul-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
|
| | Re: Vertices not coplanar?
|
|
(...) When a renderer goes to render a quad in 3D, it will almost always (perhaps always) first split the quad into two triangles. As long as the quad forms a planar surface, this will result in fairly equivalent results no matter which of the two (...) (21 years ago, 18-Jul-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
|
| | Re: Vertices not coplanar?
|
|
(...) If I remember my 3D theory correctly, these quads can mess up the normals associated with them. Also, noncoplaner quads cause small gaps in the part since they are, in essence, bent rectangles. Usually these gaps are too small to see, even (...) (21 years ago, 17-Jul-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|