| Welcome, Guest |
You have to register before you can post on our site.
|
| Forum Statistics |
» Members: 5,718
» Latest member: Paulino
» Forum threads: 6,425
» Forum posts: 53,267
Full Statistics
|
| Online Users |
There are currently 173 online users. » 0 Member(s) | 170 Guest(s) Baidu, Bing, Google
|
| Latest Threads |
71613/30346c01 too high?!
Forum: Part Requests
Last Post: Gerald Lasser
2 hours ago
» Replies: 23
» Views: 12,983
|
Technic 1993
Forum: Official Models
Last Post: Takeshi Takahashi
Yesterday, 17:25
» Replies: 7
» Views: 8,102
|
Pokemon
Forum: Official Models
Last Post: Jeff Jones
2026-03-09, 15:02
» Replies: 0
» Views: 163
|
Existing Part Edit Reques...
Forum: Parts Authoring
Last Post: Philippe Hurbain
2026-03-09, 14:57
» Replies: 161
» Views: 394,163
|
Parts 5033 + 88704 (forme...
Forum: Part Requests
Last Post: Alfred Schmitz
2026-03-09, 14:21
» Replies: 0
» Views: 99
|
LEGO Parts Guide - Only 3...
Forum: Part Requests
Last Post: Mark Kennedy
2026-03-09, 2:44
» Replies: 39
» Views: 6,602
|
LDraw.org 2026-02 Parts U...
Forum: LDraw.org Announcements
Last Post: Sylvain Sauvage
2026-03-07, 17:22
» Replies: 5
» Views: 625
|
Big fig parts request
Forum: Part Requests
Last Post: Jeff Jones
2026-03-07, 9:57
» Replies: 4
» Views: 6,180
|
Part request, part 80179
Forum: Part Requests
Last Post: Alfred Schmitz
2026-03-07, 9:42
» Replies: 2
» Views: 353
|
Smort bleek stuff
Forum: Parts Authoring
Last Post: Gerald Lasser
2026-03-06, 9:46
» Replies: 3
» Views: 414
|
|
|
| LPub ROTSTEP - easy rotation? |
|
Posted by: Jetro de Château - 2018-04-25, 7:42 - Forum: LDraw File Processing and Conversion
- Replies (3)
|
 |
One of my biggest problems when using LPub is rotating models to show where a part is attached. I can normally work ut 90º increments in my head, but when it comes down to a more complex rotation I am at a complete loss.
I have seen I can rotate the model using the LeoCAD pane in LPub, but have not found a way to extract the rotation information and use it as a ROTSTEP command. Is there an easy way to do this? There must be a better way to go about this than to punch in some numbers and hope for the best....
|
|
|
| Minifig Head - Numbering of b and c variants |
|
Posted by: Gerald Lasser - 2018-04-23, 19:13 - Forum: Parts Authoring
- Replies (2)
|
 |
I embarked on a Minifig Head design spree... after starting the figs from the Batman movie, I photographed around 300-400 heads in my collection. I have a pretty good workflow now with a proper template that does the projection and a template of cond-lines in LDPE to finish the file.
Nowadays most heads come in the "3626c" variant, not too long ago the main head was the"3626b" variant, however out in the wild there are also patterns that come in both "b" and "c".
Here I started to sort through the library and noticed that a few codes sport a different pattern in the "b" and "c" variant. Except for one already official (p8d), all of those are still on the PT (p02, p80, p8e, pap and pb3)
There are also designs that are the same already in the "b" and "c" variant. Here is the overview of all the numbers that exist in both variants: (yellow = official; green = on PT, seems ok; red/salmon = official/different pattern; light blue = on PT/different pattern
Now what do you think: - If available in the real world, should we have a "b" and "c" variant in the Library?
IMHO, I don't think so, as the difference is usually not visible, and it would inflate the library.
- Should the numbering be consistent for both variants, i.e. different patterns get a different numbers?
In my opinion, a "3626bp8e" and a "3626cp8e" should be the same, even if it means there would be gaps in either the "c" or "b" pattern overview.
Next thing:- The sheer number of heads, some of the allocations are not enough, e.g. Star Wars, there are several hundreds patterns, but we do have only space for 2 x 36 (r and s space)
- Also to verify if a pattern is already on the tracker gets difficult over time, there was already a proposal to improve the search for MF-torsi done, may be for the heads it could be an idea as well.
Edit: corrected typos
|
|
|
|