Subject:
|
Re: Instructions for new fire truck - Ladder 110
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.inst, lugnet.town
|
Date:
|
Sat, 2 Aug 2003 16:12:12 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
5305 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.inst, Kevin L. Clague wrote:
| |
In lugnet.inst, Allan Bedford wrote:
snip
| |
| |
The instructions seem well thought out in terms of sequence of steps and
having the parts box at each step helps. I know (think?) this is a standard
lpub thing now, IIRC but it is nice.
|
It is an option which is selected by default. The way it works for me is
that it generates the construction image as one file and the parts list for
that step as a second file. All of those images were then manually combined
into the steps that I posted. If there’s a way to get LPub to do this
automagically, I can’t find it. :)
|
LPub 2.2 adds another layer of processing after the two that you listed. The
new layer can do a few things for you:
1. Pack sub-model steps into a single “callout” image for use in making
compact building instructions.
http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/kclague/mm-at-st/mm-at-sts004ci.jpg
|
I don’t believe that LeoCAD does sub-models. I could be wrong, but I can’t
find any way to do it. For me, that’s o.k. since my models right now are small
and relatively simple.
However, I did notice something in your picture above. You have the parts list
for that step as part of the instruction image. Are you doing that manually?
Or is there an option in LPub that combines the two automagically? :)
| |
2. Provide different color backdrops for different sub-model levels (that
is how the foot assembly in the above image has a yellow backdrop).
|
I was going to play with different backgrounds for my main instruction images,
but haven’t had time yet.
| |
3. Pack the step number, the part list image for the step, the step
assembly image and any callout images all into the same image for you
automatically. Other than doing a lot of programming to add the new features,
I didn’t have to do any extra work to get the composite image shown above.
|
See question above. I can’t figure out how that’s being done.
| |
Combining all these features got me this single sheet building instructions
for one of my tiny bipeds with no manual editing.
|
No image editing at all? So again, there must be an option I’m missing, that
inserts the BOM into each step image.
| |
I would wait for 2.2.0.1 though before upgrading to a new LPub. There are
some annoying bugs in 2.2.
|
I guess I didn’t realize that 2.2 was a bit buggy. When I went looking for the
suite of apps to start doing instructions I just downloaded the latest greatest
of each one. Which is how I got POV-Ray 3.5, which I have since found out isn’t
best friends with LPub. :(
| |
| |
I personally think there are too many steps for a model this size. That’s
another thing I’m experimenting with. I’m hoping the next few will be a bit
more efficient.
| |
Stylistically though, I just can’t get excited about lightening previous
parts to show current step parts,
|
What you see is the default in LPub. I tried backing off that option, so
that previous step colors remain at full intensity, but it didn’t end up
looking like an official instruction book for some reason. I went back to
the default only because there would be little confusion over what the new
pieces were. Except of course when you use white pieces, as in the ladder,
and then there is confusion. I can’t win. :)
|
Larry’s expressed this opinion before, so I know it well.
You can choose some other color than white, or just mix a little white with
the brick color to give a similar but less drastic effect. See “Previous
Parts Color Scaling” scrollbar.
|
I’m completely split on this issue. I think, for me, it will be a decision I’ll
make on a model by model basis. I did use the technique you describe above when
I did the instructions for a small train station recently. It worked fairly
well, though I may have pushed the scrollbar a bit far. Some of the previous
steps ended up dithering the existing bricks a bit much.
| |
| |
| |
or by the use of rendered parts without
strong edge lines.
|
Again I went with the default within LPub. (which is .5) What value would
you recommend?
| |
I like the more cartoonish instructions that Lego
themselves do, with big chunky edge lines. But that’s just me.
|
I totally agree. In fact that was something I told Will Hess about his
recent 6-wide instructions. I do want to get to that cartoonish look. I
guess I just have to figure out what options/settings to lower in order to
obtain that look, without sacrificing quality.
I’ve found the learning curve (to produce both instructions and especially
renders) to be fairly steep. Maybe that’s just me. Normally I am very
comfortable with new software, but not in the case of the suite of programs
needed to produce these types of images. I wish there was a very basic
tutorial that walked you through producing those ‘cartoon’ type images, for
dummies like me who are computer literate, but not graphics literate.
|
I have two seperate emails from two different times from Ahui Harrera telling
me that LPub’s Mega-POV defaults were *wrong*. Each time I expained to him
that by definition they were right, because as the developer I get to decide
what they are.
|
I can’t comment on Mega-POV as I don’t even have it installed. I wanted to make
sure I was comfortable with the core software before adding yet another variable
into the mix.
| |
LPub added “Minimum Camera Distance” to dramatically reduce this issue and
eliminate need for manual shrinkage.
|
You have Minimum Distance on both the STEPS and the PARTS IMAGES tabs, under
BUILDING INSTRUCTIONS. Is there some quick way to describe the difference? I
typically am only changing the STEPS distance (usually lowering it from the
default) in order to have my models fill the screen more.
| |
| |
That was why I mentioned the .CAD thread about lighting techniques.
Everyone offered such good advice, but it came from a half dozen different
people and none of it was information I’d been able to locate online or in
any of the help materials included with the apps.
O.K. I’m done griping now. ;)
|
Don’t bite the hand that feeds you like Tim often does.
|
I definitely wasn’t trying to do that. I was trying to walk that fine line
between asking for help and expressing my thoughts about certain aspects of the
software (not just yours) that I found confusing. Please believe me when I say
that I appreciate and respect what all these apps do in combination with each
other. I love that I can produce instructions for LEGO models.
If I were to offer a gentle suggestion... it might be that some of the
documentation that accompanies these programs could be geared more to LEGO
builders, rather than graphics junkies. For example: I knew zero about an app
like POV-Ray before I started using it. I now know 1.73625 % of all there is to
know about it. In other words, I’m still a graphics idiot. But I find their
documentation to be heavily slanted towards folks who are very graphics savy.
Now, POV isn’t a LEGO program... of course. So why should LEGO be in their
documentation? It shouldn’t. But what I find hard to grasp sometimes is that
people might offer the suggestion to “read the POV-Ray help files and you’ll
find your answer.” Which normally I would agree with, but because their
documentation is so thick with graphics terminology I don’t understand, it’s of
little help. I have always used this example when describing that type of
documentation. It’s as though they are saying:
“A shovel is a tool used to shovel.”
It’s a very accurate statement, but not very helpful if it’s the shovel that
you’re trying to understand. In the case of ray tracing, it’s the shovel part
that I don’t understand and that’s why I get frustrated with their docs.
All that said, I have found some wonderful suggestions being offered by the
LUGNET gang. Surprise? No, this is what I would have expected. But again, I
sometimes found it hard to even understand the question I wanted to ask.
Luckily, thanks to lighting and other tips provided by people here, I’m at the
stage where I think I can do most of what I want to do with this software.
I suspect what I’ll do for myself at some point is go back through the threads
where I’ve asked these questions and gotten help and then put all of it into a
‘tips, tricks and just plain good advice’ document, so that I can have all of
this knowledge handy. (1)
| |
| |
Thanks for the input Larry! Sorry for the long rambling reply. And just
think, I haven’t even had my coffee yet this morning. :)
|
I like long ramblings when I have the time and patience.
|
Me too. :)
But again I have done this today without yet having had my coffee. Weird.
Thanks Kevin, for all your hard work and for providing this key piece of
software.
Best regards,
Allan B.
(1) Keeping in mind that I had a strong communications/writing background
before I got into programming. I happen to be a guy who likes to write code
and documentation. I know that’s not the norm, but then when have I ever been
considered the norm? ;)
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Instructions for new fire truck - Ladder 110
|
| In lugnet.inst, Allan Bedford wrote: <snip> (...) I'm not at my LPub computer right now, so I can't tell you, but it is a *menu* item just below the one you use to generate images. (...) In the extra procesing step via the extra menu I just (...) (21 years ago, 2-Aug-03, to lugnet.inst, lugnet.town, FTX)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Instructions for new fire truck - Ladder 110
|
| In lugnet.inst, Allan Bedford wrote: <snip> (...) LPub 2.2 adds another layer of processing after the two that you listed. The new layer can do a few things for you: 1. Pack sub-model steps into a single "callout" image for use in making compact (...) (21 years ago, 2-Aug-03, to lugnet.inst, lugnet.town, FTX)
|
11 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
|
|
|
|
