LDraw.org Discussion Forums

Full Version: ldconfig.ldr - need magnet material
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3
Analogous to metal and rubber,
we IMHO need a special material in ldconfig.ldr for the train magnet's material, e.g.:

http://www.ldraw.org/cgi-bin/ptdetail.cg...499c01.dat

I'll send Scott a note... :-)
Thanks for bringing this to my attention.

I've given this quite a bit of thought, and even though I'm both a big train fan and enjoy high quality renders, I don't think that I can support this addition. I don't want to clutter up ldconfig with colors that are no longer made and were only used for one part. Otherwise, there would be a lot of colors that we would need to add.

If anyone has a different opinion, please speak up.

On a side note, when I get the 2012 Color Chart from LEGO, I plan on releasing an update to ldconfig. For now, Lavender is the only new color since the last update; along with a few minor tweaks to color edges and color values. If anyone feels that a current edge or color value is "way off", please let me know.

Thanks,
Scott W.
Hello Scott,

I'm of course not too happy with these counterarguments.

I appreciate that you do not want to clutter ldconfig.ldr, but I do not as well.

I also cannot follow your counter-arguments,
please let me ask some questions against the points you make:

(1) > I don't want to clutter up ldconfig with colors that are no longer made.

Why should this be an argument against introducing a magnet material?
We model parts ranging from the very beginnings, even including Mursten, up to today.
We also have a color for "milky white" e.g. for the historic antenna. That's nice!
So if magnets were present in the 80's, why not add this material?
It is needed to properly model the parts, currently we substitute the magnets with dark grey plastic
material, but that is logically wrong and just a workaround. That it looks bad in renders is just an additional oddity.
The magnet material simply has been forgotten when creating the materials for rubber and metal.
It is just a missing one.

(2) >> and were only used for one part.

That is not true. Example parts using this material are:
http://www.peeron.com/inv/parts/73092
http://www.peeron.com/inv/parts/x799
http://www.peeron.com/inv/parts/735
http://www.peeron.com/inv/parts/x547
You can see also from peeron that this material was present in lots of sets.
When playing with these sets in LDRAW - which I do - the absence of that material becomes
simply just evident.

(3) >> Otherwise, there would be a lot of colors that we would need to add.

Could you be more specific here? I cannot imagine more missing materials. I would be happy if you could name them.
Ah, while thinking, just one, maybe: "black thread" (for hooks etc.)
But besides that? LEGO consists of 99% ABS plastic, and the addition of "foreign" materials is minimal:
just some metal variants, some rubber for tyres etc., and, well, this very magnet material.
What other materials are you anticipating?
I'm not asking for 100 new materials. Just 1. A single line in ldconfig.ldr, which would allow correct logical
modeling of the materials, and would allow to easily assign a material to this when raytracing.
Using the grey plastic substitute has as consequence that you manually have to edit each file
before you can ray-trace it properly. You have to tediously look up the parts where the "substitution grey plastic"
color is used, and change that to magnet material.
Why force the users to do that, when this can easily be avoided by adding a single line in ldconfig.ldr?

Undecided ...
I'm with Steffen on this one. The are lots of models that use magnets. I think a magnet material would be value added.
I agree. I think the benefits to the LDraw user community far out-weigh the overhead of an additional line in LDConfig.
OK, I'm willing to make an exception based on the majority. For the record, it is still just a single part; though it has many forms.

If we add a new material...

We should probably allow some wiggle room. Instead of calling the material Magnet, it might be better to call it Porous_Metal. We already have Metal as a material (which can be assumed to be polished).

Thoughts on this?

Also, any thoughts on defining the properties (reflection, refraction, specular, roughness, etc.) of each of these materials, so that there is a common way to show them? Could that information be added to ldconfig without causing any programs to crash?

Thanks,
Scott W.
thanks for the compromise, happy to hear that!

the primary goal for me here is getting a unique color code.
that will allow me to fine-tune the appearance in renders.
for ldconfig.ldr, a rough first approximation would be sufficient IMHO,
as we can improve this easily in later iterations.
I'm not requesting a syntax extension of ldconfig.ldr here, just a color code.

having that color code will allow us to let these
http://www.ldraw.org/cgi-bin/ptdetail.cg...499c01.dat
http://www.ldraw.org/cgi-bin/ptdetail.cg...959c01.dat
leave the PT finally.

also, the official file s\735s01.dat will use that new color code.
I have added this line under LDraw Internal Common Material Colours:

0 !COLOUR Magnet CODE 493 VALUE #656761 EDGE #595959 METAL

Please let me know if that meets your needs. I don't think METAL is an accurate material, but I think that the LSC has to issue a new enumeration for a new material. Anyone on the LSC want to speak to this, or recommend a name for the Magnet material? I still recommend POROUS_METAL.

Thanks,
Scott
Are LEGO magnets porous metal, or are they ceramic? Visually, they look ceramic (like these) to me, so perhaps MATTE_CERAMIC is a better name for the material.
thank you very much!
the most important thing for me is the defined color code.

where can I find the change? this file
http://www.ldraw.org/library/unofficial/ldconfig.ldr
seems to not yet contain it.

does the PT use that, so I can submit parts using the new color to the PT?

(locally, of course, I can manually edit the file)
Pages: 1 2 3