 | | Re: L3PAO/POV-RAY Newbie
|
|
(...) Thanks for your reply. I will upload the pov file and post the link for you. (...) That, I think is my problem. Is there a link that has detailed explanations for each check box in L3PAO? Also, I downloaded the LGEO stuff and pointed L3PAO to (...) (23 years ago, 15-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: L3PAO/POV-RAY Newbie
|
|
Thanks for your reply Jeroen. This did help. Take care. (23 years ago, 15-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: L3PAO/POV-RAY Newbie
|
|
(...) Hi, You are right about black being dark grey. This is probably a good thing. If they would be black they wouldn't be showing details or depth (well, maybe but minimal). The colour of (all) bricks depends on a few things: the colour of the (...) (23 years ago, 14-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: L3PAO/POV-RAY Newbie
|
|
(...) Can you provide the actual .pov and .ldr files so that we can see (in detail) where the problem is at? A image is not much help. Also what are you setting L3PAO to do? (AKA what checkboxes do you have marked unmarked) (23 years ago, 13-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: L3PAO/POV-RAY Newbie
|
|
(...) Sorry here is the link: (URL) (23 years ago, 13-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | L3PAO/POV-RAY Newbie
|
|
Hello everyone. I have been messing around with L3PAO/POV-RAY but cannot get the colors to come out right. Plain old black parts come out looking "dark-grayish" but if I do transparent black the parts come out black. Also transparent colors are not (...) (23 years ago, 13-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: Inline POV-Ray code?
|
|
(...) I think where I want to go with it, is to keep things simple and limited. At least for now. Embedded POV-Ray code should not make references to L3P-defined objects or definitions. It should stick strictly with primitive operations. Maybe later (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: Inline POV-Ray code?
|
|
(...) Huh...? This is getting too complicated, lost me! Most of you have seen what I have done with adding POV part descriptions to parts. I believe that I was using them correctly with the "established" methods. To make much change would be too (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: Inline POV-Ray code?
|
|
(...) No big deal. I just wasn't sure which nut you were shelling. :) (...) Hmm. The problem is that there would be a lot of cases - we've already got a way to handle general stuff (by creating 'primitive' files). And my (general) preference is to (...) (23 years ago, 4-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: Inline POV-Ray code? [DAT]
|
|
I see now that your problem is difficult to solve. Sorry I tried to put it into a nutshell, Steve. My preference would be to design an auxiliary file for each case, and markup the LDRAW part in a very general way, so that future programs could (...) (23 years ago, 1-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: Inline POV-Ray code?
|
|
(...) Right! I have always thought of the "0 IFNDEF L3PPOV" as a way to utilize most of the normal LDraw lines (that L3P can convert to equivalent POV code) and only replace a small tricky curvy section by some POV code that would look better. This (...) (23 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: Inline POV-Ray code?
|
|
(...) When I wrote this message, I was trying to figure some rational way to mix LDraw and L3P/POV-Ray code. Something like: 0 IFNDEF L3PPOV (ldraw code) 0 ELSE 0 #if (STUDS) 0 LDRAW 0 1 16 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 stud2.dat 0 LDRAW END 0 #end 0 (...) (23 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: Inline POV-Ray code?
|
|
(...) I'm not following. Are you agreeing with the idea of using embedded POV-Ray code, or having separate file libraries? I *think* you agree with the second, am I right? The one thing we gain by having embedded POV-Ray code is the ability to have (...) (23 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: Inline POV-Ray code?
|
|
In a nutshell, 'namespaces'. Switching among parts libraries to get different versions (or different data) should be an application capability, not the individual part file. (23 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: Inline POV-Ray code?
|
|
(...) Well, if thats how you really feel, then why even bother to "write up a spec/reference page on 0 IFDEF" at all. The instant you put the line: 0 IFDEF <code> in a part file you're blessing a non-ldraw extension. The <code> is by definition a (...) (23 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: Inline POV-Ray code?
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Don Heyse writes: [snipped things down a bit] (...) Generally, yeah. But mostly to the extent that I haven't thought it through enough. (...) That could work, but IMO only pushes the issue to the side. To some extent, LDraw.org (...) (23 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: Inline POV-Ray code?
|
|
(...) So it appears as if we agree that L3P-generated objects don't really belong in official LDRAW part files. Once again this brings us back to the 0 INCLUDE suggestion. Imagine that ldraw.org (or someone else) distributes a separate set of part (...) (23 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: Inline POV-Ray code?
|
|
(...) No, I meant the POVRay code referring to L3P-generated objects. By allowing this code in official part files, we'd be endorsing language that hasn't been generally discussed and reviewed. Not that I see any particular problem with the code. (...) (23 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: Inline POV-Ray code?
|
|
(...) Which part of it aren't you keen about? Is it all the extra stuff in the dat file? If so, then perhaps this is a good time to dredge up my 0 INCLUDE suggestion yet again. ;) (URL) (23 years ago, 27-Feb-02, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: Inline POV-Ray code?
|
|
(...) OK. I'll write up a spec/reference page on 0 IFDEF. It will include the following metacommands: 0 IFDEF <code> 0 IFNDEF <code> 0 ELSE 0 ENDIF Should there be a 0 ELSEIFDEF and/or 0 ELSEIFNDEF? (...) Steve (23 years ago, 27-Feb-02, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.ray)
|
