| |
In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Tim Courtney writes:
> In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw "Larry Pieniazek" <lar@voyager.net> wrote:
> > > Those are all great models.. but I strongly hope that the final list
> > > covers a wider variety of model types, not just space/flying machines!
> >
> > Agreed. There is more to LEGO than space. Indeed, I would argue that the • most
> > creative models are those that represent things already built in real life • such
> > as buildings and current day vehicles, rather than things from the • imagination.
> > But I'm not trying to start an argument, so I shan't actually make that
> > statement.
>
> I agree as well. Again, this is the problem you get when a couple
> spaceheads run a display ;) It'd be nice to have some train models,
> because the train layout is going to be right across the tent from us.
>
> > However, there are some implications that weren't clear from the original
> > message...
> >
> > The criteria (which didn't seem clear at the time) are that: (?)
> >
> > -The model has to exist physically.
> > -The model has to have an LDraw representation
> >
> > This rules out neat models that haven't been ldrawn, and neat images that • don't
> > have physical manifestations, right?
>
> 99% of the time. We're going to strongly prefer that an LDrawn model
> has a physical representation - but there is one instance I'm making
> an exception for - Tom McDonald's Hangar 33, with a special (funny)
> scene we're arranging in it. The rest will have physical
> representations as well as virtual models.
Thanks for the clarification! I think you're spot on.
> We can show the design
> process of each, and have also high quality printouts for display on
> our display boards. Terry and I talked about that on the phone last
> night, we're getting some 'art gallery' -ish display walls for the
> area around our booth.
That sounds pretty swell.
> > Further, you'd want the actual LDraw source files as well, not just • generated
> > images from them? That probably rules me out.
>
> It would be nice, but it shouldn't be absolutely required for each.
> It would be cool because then we could show people how the model was
> actually put together in the software. Which models are you referring
> to of yours? Your SW and cars one? We can feature that if you like -
> do you have physical models of that (which won't be running on the
> layout, or could be taken off temporarily??)
I do have physical models for all of that except the blue version of the
hopper. It's starting to look like i won't be able to make it, but am not 100%
sure yet. I may be in Switzerland during that time on an assignment.
However I can almost certainly make arrangements to loan the models out.
Perhaps I can even build 2 copies of most of the cars and the loco so one
could be a static display and the other operating on the GMLTC layout. Time.
Is there enough time?
If we can figure out how to do this, I'm down for it. I need my copyright
preserved though, so wouldn't want to see the source on the CD. It's a big
image and renders slowly, even in MLCad, though.
++Lar
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
14 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
|
|
|
|
