Hi hehud, hi Willy,
I like the renders too ! (and
those of the pirate scenery even more, really beautiful).
About some sets missing from the OMR, I discovered that many of them have already been made by Damien Roux [darats] and published on
the Eurobricks forum, several years ago. My opinion is they're good candidates for being OMRized...?
here the 6985 Cosmic Fleet Voyager,
normally wihtout mistakes,
from Leocad,
(2021-04-10, 16:19)Jeremie Guillaume Wrote: [ -> ]Hi hehud, hi Willy,
I like the renders too ! (and those of the pirate scenery even more, really beautiful).
About some sets missing from the OMR, I discovered that many of them have already been made by Damien Roux [darats] and published on the Eurobricks forum, several years ago. My opinion is they're good candidates for being OMRized...?
Sure, but it wouldn't be nice snatching files for EB to upload them here, would it?
If they are posted here by the author it is a totally different story.
w.
(2021-04-14, 10:35)Willy Tschager Wrote: [ -> ]Sure, but it wouldn't be nice snatching files for EB to upload them here, would it?
If they are posted here by the author it is a totally different story.
w.
Oh, I didn't think so at all; I would never do that without the permission of the original author. Sorry if I could be misunderstood (which I now realize when re-reading my post).
But I see he already put in the OMR many of his creations, with 100+ sets. So I was thinking, someday he's going to publish here the missing Classic Space sets he already created, and which don't need much work to be full OMR-compliant ?
[
attachment=6955]
[
attachment=6956]
OMR compliant
Missing items: none (The length of flexible hose might not be exact, any improvements are welcomed!!)
I hated this set as a child, 'til the day I took of the legs and with a few bricks I converted it into a cruiser.
w.
(2021-10-29, 6:37)Willy Tschager Wrote: [ -> ]I hated this set as a child, 'til the day I took of the legs and with a few bricks I converted it into a cruiser.
w.
I generally was dissatisfied by spacecraft that were open to the elements (or vacuum). I liked 6985 for this reason.
Sure, I don't like this one as much as the first white or blue Classic Space ships, such as 924, 928, 6929 ...
The latter are already in the OMR though !
Just for fun I converted the 6980 to the ONE AND ONLY acceptable classic space colors.
[
attachment=7075]
(2021-10-31, 10:06)Willy Tschager Wrote: [ -> ]Just for fun I converted the 6980 to the ONE AND ONLY acceptable classic space colors.
Agreed !
And here's the right version of the Star Fleet Voyager I had as a child:
[
attachment=7076]
Note: picture taken in flight, so the landing gear is up
Jeremie,
I beg your pardon. The so-called cross design above was a trap. I almost knew you would sooner or later post a picture of 6929. I started a similar project back in 2002 with at first simply substituting the colors one by one: white with blue, black with gray ... but it is not that simple. Can you see the difference in the picture below:
[
attachment=7077]
w.
You remembered I love the 6929, and I felt heavily in the trap !
Yes , I agree that it's surprisingly not so simple - and you'll notice that I changed the color of the cockpit hatch from trans yellow to solid blue, as well as the trans green/red colors of 3062's, for that sort of matter.
I had some hesitation, too, on these damned blue and grey 3942's... Finally I thought that the whole thing would be ok like that, if just for a quick and "just for fun" post.
For what it's worth, I just tried this possibility too:
[
attachment=7081]
Hell, it's possible to spend hours on this sort of issue... as much as, for example, when searching for the best orientation possible of studs logos.
I'm curious about the solution you found, if you ever found one!
Your grey-and-blue Galaxy Commander if rather fine, though, IMHO.
Hello Takeshi,
(as already discussed)
May I propose a new version of the set, with a few fixes and some enhancements:
[
attachment=7150]
[
attachment=7149]
OMR compliant, no missing part.
Detail of changes:
- changed the color of tyres to rubber black
- changed the z-coordinate of tyres from 39 to 40 (this is consistent with other sets you posted - eg 6930 - and I believe it is the correct value)
- changed two parts to correct alternates for the era of the set (checked on rebrickable): 4085c to 4085a, and 4345b to 4345a
- splitted the vehicle in two separate LDR's, with origins at the rotating center of the hinge
- added building steps
- Fixed Minifig legs orientation + snapping
- Added a little bit of drama
Hope you like it
Enhanced version:
[
attachment=7189]
[
attachment=7188]
Most notable changes are:
- split the vehicle and the craft in several sub-LDR: tractor, trailer, rotating support for spacecraft, thrusters right and left
- rotated the 6141 parts, for a better orientation of the studs logos
- corrected legs orientation + snapping for Minifigs
- added a little bit of drama
Hello evryone: this is my first time posting Official Sets. And I decide to do here in the Classic Space.
First: all the sets are made with LDCad 1.6d, the exception are set 6847 made with MLCad.
Second: all files are OMR compliant and no itmes missed
Third: set 6985 is already made, so you can omit it
Fourth: all sets names are from Lego UK catalogs form Brickset webpage (few sets are exception)
Now part 1 of my sets; hope you like it and enyoy it:
[
attachment=7458]
[
attachment=7459]
[
attachment=7460]
[
attachment=7461]
[
attachment=7462]
Hello Javier,
This is good work. Now the Classic Space series is complete !
The names from your UK catalog seem to differ from those usually used to refer to these sets, at least those used up to now for Classic Space. I think that using the latter would be better ?
I had a (quick) look at your models, and noticed a few minor glitches:
- the 3838 air tanks of all your minifigs are 2 LDU too high
- set 6952, minifig (the white one) with the 4736 part: the head is 1 LDU too high
- on many of your minifigs, the arms aren't correctly snapped to the torso - maybe you forgot to change the grid orientation before rotating them ? (in LDCad the default hotkey for this is 'O' - essential and great feature!)
- set 6985: some of the 4448 glasses aren't correctly snapped to their 4741 frames
This was a first and quick review , I'll have a closer look at your models when I have time.
Some other, more subjective comments (though I would appreciate comments from other members, since I'm relatively new to Ldraw myself, too). It's mainly about LDRs, sub-LDRs. and the way parts are distributed among them:
- Some consistent groups of parts are distributed among different LDRs. I mean, for example:
- in your 6985 set, I think that the two roofs of the ship should have their limits at the 4213 hinge part and not include the 4315, so as to allow the easy rotation of the roof centered on the hinge.
- in a simpler set - 1498 spy-bot:
- I would expect the 3679 turntable to be included in the head LDR
- in the same logic, I think that the 3749 parts should be included in your "(right|left) arms part 1" (even if it's not visible)
- the feet of the spybot are in the same LDR as the rest of the body
- in the more complex of your sets, LDR are not so easy to play with and I think things would be better if distributed differently. The best example of this is set 6972: I would have created one LDR for the whole "satellite", which in turn would include some sub-LDRs for its moving parts: side panels, front gate, etc.
In fact, I understand that you took care for LDRs to match the building steps from the original instructions, but IMHO a compromise should be found with ease of manipulating the resulting MPD.
I know that a possibility (though not very usual) is the use of LDCad parts groups; as an example you can have a look at the set 6919 (in the OMR).
AFAIK there's no golden rule as to how to deal with this dilemma though, so I repeat, I would be happy to hear from other models authors about this...
(2022-02-13, 17:02)Jeremie Guillaume Wrote: [ -> ]In fact, I understand that you took care for LDRs to match the building steps from the original instructions, but IMHO a compromise should be found with ease of manipulating the resulting MPD.
I know that a possibility (though not very usual) is the use of LDCad parts groups; as an example you can have a look at the set 6919 (in the OMR).
AFAIK there's no golden rule as to how to deal with this dilemma though, so I repeat, I would be happy to hear from other models authors about this...
There was a thread on this some time ago, and yes—it seems to come down to personal preference among modelers.
I also use submodels to reflect the official instructions, because that's the only way to accurately show building steps. And I use LDCad groups for parts that are meant to be rotated or otherwise moved as a unit. This is not ideal, and especially so for OMR purposes. That's partly because LDCad groups seem a little under-developed as a feature (by Roland's own admission, I believe), and it would be nice to be able to edit them directly more like you can with subfiles.
But I live with this limitation because I'm not building models primarily with the OMR in mind; most of what I build has already been built by other authors. (But I will submit a model if I built something that hasn't.)
I think that in the "perfect" all-in-one LDraw modeling program (at this point entirely fictional), you would be able to build a model pretty much however you want, and then interact with it in two more or less completely independent ways: one for posing or displaying, and another for rendering building instructions, which you would do by enabling distinct modes of the program. In other words, just what we currently do by using separate programs (and sometimes polling between them), except unified into one piece of software.
(2022-02-13, 17:02)Jeremie Guillaume Wrote: [ -> ]Now the Classic Space series is complete !
Don't know if it is complete, since there is the Minifig Sets (catalogued and Value Packs).
Quote:The names from your UK catalog seem to differ from those usually used to refer to these sets
Sorry, I have no intension to change the names to the US equivalent ones; if it's possible to add the last in some way, I acept that.
Quote:few minor glitches
Heads, airtanks and helmets are derived from MLCad. I do not notice it until you tell me. Now it is corrected. Same to the glasses.
Quote:more subjective comments... about LDRs, sub-LDRs. and the way parts are distributed among them
I did my best to correct this issiu; hope you like it.
Now, the updated files
Hello Javier,
I just made a quick review of your update. It's better and I like it
Some notes:
- Some Minifig arms are still incorrectly snapped; eg right arms of white and red Minifigs in set 6985 (and maybe others too, I didn't check them all). What I would do is simply, for each Minifig and each arm: select the arm + hand + object in hand if any ; move them away from the Minifig torso; and finally move them again on the torso, letting LDCad perfectly snap them for you on the torso.
- 1498 Spy-Bot : I would include the two 3937 parts in the legs LDRs (one for each leg).
- LDRs: I think they are better much better like that! To be perfect IMO, the axis of rotation of the LDRs (ie, the origin of their coordinates) should be centered on the hinge, when there is one; this is the case on many sets in OMR. For example, your set 6985, LDR "6985 - Roof.ldr": the 4213 would be at coords (-36,-4,0) for this to be fine. This way, when you go back to the main LDR, you can rotate the roof on demand without having to re-snap it to the 4315 afterwards ! (many of the sets in OMR follow this rule)
- Finally, an open question for anybody willing to answer: what should the Minifig head z-coordinate be, when the torso is at (0,0,0) and the Minifig has air tanks ? I just realize (I had forgotten that) that different sets already in the OMR, differ on this point: the most common value is 27 (it's the one I use), but some are at 25, while 28 (as you used Javier) is the one permitting the 3838 and 3626 parts not to overlap, but seems a little too much IMO...
Update - enhanced version:
[
attachment=7585]
[
attachment=7584]
Most notable changes are:
- replaced 3962b with 3962a (correct era)
- added two missing tools: one 4522 hammer and one 3959
- enhanced the snapping of the transparent red 3876's
- fixed 3957a antenna snapping
- reorganized LDR's, splitted and centered some (for those with rotations)
- rotated some 3024 and 6141, for nice stud logo orientation
- added a little bit of drama
(2022-02-22, 19:59)Jeremie Guillaume Wrote: [ -> ]- Finally, an open question for anybody willing to answer: what should the Minifig head z-coordinate be, when the torso is at (0,0,0) and the Minifig has air tanks ? I just realize (I had forgotten that) that different sets already in the OMR, differ on this point: the most common value is 27 (it's the one I use), but some are at 25, while 28 (as you used Javier) is the one permitting the 3838 and 3626 parts not to overlap, but seems a little too much IMO...
Hello Jeremie: I check my (and only) spaceman minifig and the head touch the air tank. So, my value seems to be correct; maybe I'm wrong, in such case, need to be checked with others.
(2022-02-23, 22:06)Javier Orquera Wrote: [ -> ]Hello Jeremie: I check my (and only) spaceman minifig and the head touch the air tank. So, my value seems to be correct; maybe I'm wrong, in such case, need to be checked with others.
Confirmed. The strap(?) is 4 ldu thick, both in ldraw and IRL = 28 is the correct value.
Hello Jeremie:
I think it is fixed now (I need to create some new LDRs to achieve your sugestions, most of them needed to be OMRized againe), if not feel free to correct me.