 | | Re: Weird Logo Issue at L3P Quality Level 3
|
|
(...) matrix that represents that stud is mirrored (meaning either 1 or 3 of the axes are flipped). You should get the same problem if you render both of the classic space wing pieces. One of them will have correct logos, the other won't, because (...) (22 years ago, 6-Sep-02, to lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: Weird Logo Issue at L3P Quality Level 3
|
|
(...) Hmmm, I am trying to understand what you are stating here as applies to parts authoring. I get it if you mean that someone manually mirrored aspects of the DAT file without regard to how the stud would turn out at L3P quality level 3 -- so I (...) (22 years ago, 6-Sep-02, to lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: Weird Logo Issue at L3P Quality Level 3
|
|
(...) Something about MLCad that's worth noting is that fact that when you add a new part is uses the same rotation matrix as the part above it. Therefore, if you mirrored the part above the part you just added, the part you added is mirrored as (...) (22 years ago, 6-Sep-02, to lugnet.cad.ray, lugnet.cad.mlcad)
|
| |
| | Re: Weird Logo Issue at L3P Quality Level 3
|
|
(...) But the stud subfile was mirrored. At the lowest level, the ldraw system doesn't differentiate parts, models, primitives, etc. It just knows about files. So mirroring a stud primitive is logically identical to mirroring an entire part. BTW, (...) (22 years ago, 6-Sep-02, to lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: Weird Logo Issue at L3P Quality Level 3
|
|
(...) Considering the usefulness of modeling mirrored parts this way (one file just references the other file) (it saves time and bytes), I'd say this is a problem that needs resolution in software. I *think* it could addressed with a POV-Ray macro, (...) (22 years ago, 6-Sep-02, to lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: Weird Logo Issue at L3P Quality Level 3
|
|
(...) I believe that Lars agrees with you regarding the fact that we can't expect parts not to use mirroring. However, based on his knowledge of POV, fixing this would require a complete change in the way L3P works. It would have to internally (...) (22 years ago, 6-Sep-02, to lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: Weird Logo Issue at L3P Quality Level 3 [DAT]
|
|
(...) How many parts have this mirroring? I expect that the 4x8 wings are an example. Would it be possible to recreate the basic wing, without studs, as a sub-part, and then invoke it in the two actual wing files? The studs could be added in the (...) (22 years ago, 6-Sep-02, to lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: Weird Logo Issue at L3P Quality Level 3
|
|
(...) No, flattening everything wouldn't be a workable solution. We had some of that (quite awhile ago). It was scary. (...) Ah. Yeah, if the macros are only evaluated once, that wouldn't work either. I'm not sure how L3P performs the translation (...) (22 years ago, 6-Sep-02, to lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: Weird Logo Issue at L3P Quality Level 3
|
|
(...) [snip] Yes, that would certainly work. And for correct alignment of studs, it will sometimes be the only answer. For example, some parts (30373 is one of them) use mirror symmetry to create a subpart that is a fraction (like 1/4 or 1/8) of the (...) (22 years ago, 6-Sep-02, to lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: Weird Logo Issue at L3P Quality Level 3
|
|
(...) I dunno... I'm still coming to grips with the whole BFC thing, so this subpart whatsit doesn't seem like too much extra typing! That reminds me--is BFC-compliance mandatory for new parts submissions, or is it simply a good idea? I confess that (...) (22 years ago, 9-Sep-02, to lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: Weird Logo Issue at L3P Quality Level 3
|
|
(...) :) It's not much extra typing, it's just one more thing to understand, or more guideline to follow... (...) It's simply a good idea. (...) There are two primary benefit: 1. It *can* boost rendering speed, if the viewer is coded to take (...) (22 years ago, 10-Sep-02, to lugnet.cad.ray)
|
