Welcome, Guest |
You have to register before you can post on our site.
|
Online Users |
There are currently 644 online users. » 1 Member(s) | 638 Guest(s) Applebot, Baidu, Bing, Google, Yandex, Jeff Jones
|
|
|
A question of priorities... |
Posted by: Jude Parrill - 2011-07-29, 0:58 - Forum: Parts Authoring
- Replies (10)
|
 |
As a user of the LDRAW system over the past 2-3 years, I've seen the official library grow substantially with the various updates. And while I'm always happy to see new parts and new updates, the happiness invariably turns to frustration when I see what hasn't been released, and what was released instead.
Take the last 2-3 updates, for example. The part developers seem to have developed an unhealthy obsession with Fabuland figures. Now, I don't have a problem with releasing older parts, but when it seems these are being prioritized over newer, useful, and more common parts, I begin to wonder. I mean those figures were used in what, 2-3 sets back in 1979? What about newer parts like 50955, 50956, 60956, and 51000 (to name a few) that have been sitting in "unofficial" limbo for who knows how long? Doesn't it seem like these parts should have a higher priority than older parts? I understand there are many different kinds of LDRAW users and we all likely have different tastes and different ideas of what parts are more important than others. However, I do have to wonder, are there really that many users out there demanding old, obscure parts over newer, more common ones?
Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not saying I'm the person that should be deciding these things, but I do think it's important that the discussion be had. I don't fully understand all the intricacies of the organization here, but I would assume something like this would/should fall to the steering commitee. Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't they the ones that set the tone and guide other developers? If they said, "We should focus on these parts" and then focused on the parts themselves, it seems likely other part developers would follow suit. Perhaps I'm off on this, so feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
You may be asking, "Who is this upstart punk, who's never so much as developed a 1x1 brick, nor involved himself in any way in the part-making process, to come in here questioning our decisions and processes?" And you're right, I'm nothing more than an end-user. I'm just a guy who likes building with LEGO using your software and data files. If that's not enough, then I'm sorry to have wasted your time...
|
|
|
Testers needed for a new editor |
Posted by: Roland Melkert - 2011-07-28, 20:17 - Forum: LDraw Editors and Viewers
- Replies (21)
|
 |
Hello all,
I'm at the brink of finishing a 'basic basic' version of a new LDraw editor.
I would like to test this with a small group of people in order to weave out bugs and collect feedback on the feel of things.
Currently I found 3 people willing to help, but I would like to expand this group.
I'm looking for experienced LDraw users, because the software isn't 'new user' proof at the moment.
With the editor I'm aiming at a more visual oriented 'mlcad' way of doing things, so expect to work with grids etc.
Some features that are completed:
stepping (navigate through them, adding and placing stuff within a step)
relative grids (e.g. build a wall on a angle by setting the grid to the first bricks orientation).
multi file editing (open as many files you like)
mpd editing (basics -> add new, edit existing submodels)
undo/redo.
extendable and customizable part bin.
extendable and customizable color picking bin.
Editing wise you can place, move, delete and rotate parts
It's all running on OpenGL and it's very fast (if I may say so myself ), e.g. you could edit thousands of bricks in real-time on decent hardware.
Current version is Windows only but it's 99% portable code so a Linux and or Apple version should become available at some point.
Hope I sparked your interest, if all goes well I expect to release the test version next week.
If you are interested let me know here (and or) email me at [email protected] ether way I will be needing a valid email address of you in order to send the software when the time comes.
|
|
|
Sorry, you can't reply to this topic |
Posted by: Tore Eriksson - 2011-07-28, 9:55 - Forum: Website Suggestions/Requests/Discussion
- Replies (5)
|
 |
So, is it really "easier" to post in the new forum? When we're not even allowed to post feedback to point out problems in updates announced. I think it really sucks a lot.
My first impression is that LUGnet was way more open and Democratic. Do I hate this message: "Sorry, you can't reply to this topic. It has been closed." Or, if I or anyone had anything to announce, LUGnet was an open forum for everyone.
I wish I could close this thread so you can experience how it feels not to able to respond to a message.
Why???
|
|
|
What does TLG use? |
Posted by: Scott Classen - 2011-07-27, 18:28 - Forum: Parts Authoring
- Replies (6)
|
 |
Just out of curiosity does anyone know what TLG uses to design new parts (I would guess SolidWorks), and what do their model designers and instruction book people use to make digital versions of the official models? I toured PIXAR once and saw that their animators predominantly used an in-house animation software package (not sure of the name). I'm sure they use industry standard stuff too, but there was some seriously custom Pixar-only software for the animators.
|
|
|
How to become a parts reviewer? |
Posted by: Scott Classen - 2011-07-27, 15:06 - Forum: Parts Authoring
- Replies (11)
|
 |
Hello
I'm very new to this Lego CAD stuff, but have general CAD experience from my work. I would like to contribute in some way to reviewing unofficial parts. What is involved? Do I need digital calipers to measure the original part and then compare to the digital version? Would I just be reviewing the part for appearance?
Cheers
|
|
|
|