+- LDraw.org Discussion Forums (https://forums.ldraw.org)
+-- Forum: Models and Parts (https://forums.ldraw.org/forum-18.html)
+--- Forum: Parts Authoring (https://forums.ldraw.org/forum-19.html)
+--- Thread: patterned parts (/thread-29161.html)
patterned parts - Peter Blomberg - 2025-11-09
Are patterned parts allowed to deviate from the mesh of the unpatterned version?
It seems different authors have chosen different solutions. Some authors prefer using 5 decimals to make sure that the patterned part doesn't introduce new cond lines. Other authors find it perfectly acceptable to deviate from the unpatterned mesh and ignore the need for new cond lines.
Is there any consensus?
Are both approaches acceptable?
Is either approach preferable?
Why shouldn't the deviating mesh also require new cond lines?
RE: patterned parts - Gerald Lasser - 2025-11-09
(2025-11-09, 18:37)Peter Blomberg Wrote: Are patterned parts allowed to deviate from the mesh of the unpatterned version?
It seems different authors have chosen different solutions. Some authors prefer using 5 decimals to make sure that the patterned part doesn't introduce new cond lines. Other authors find it perfectly acceptable to deviate from the unpatterned mesh and ignore the need for new cond lines.
Is there any consensus?
Are both approaches acceptable?
Is either approach preferable?
Why shouldn't the deviating mesh also require new cond lines?
From my point of view, I would stay with the given geometry, even if you have to go to 5 digit decimals. some geometries however make it extremely difficult to avoid additional condlines for patterns, e.g. minidolls.
I prefer to have a seperate subfile for the standard conds and have the patter extend the decimals to 5.
RE: patterned parts - Manfred Schaefer - 2025-11-10
(2025-11-09, 18:37)Peter Blomberg Wrote: Are patterned parts allowed to deviate from the mesh of the unpatterned version?
It seems different authors have chosen different solutions. Some authors prefer using 5 decimals to make sure that the patterned part doesn't introduce new cond lines. Other authors find it perfectly acceptable to deviate from the unpatterned mesh and ignore the need for new cond lines.
Is there any consensus?
Are both approaches acceptable?
Is either approach preferable?
Why shouldn't the deviating mesh also require new cond lines?
I don't understand the question. The model determines the shape. In my opinion, adding a pattern has no effect on the shape of the model or on the conditional lines.
Do you have a visual example to help me understand the problem better? For example, where a model with a pattern would require an additional conditional line that is not present in the model without a pattern.
Best regards,
Manfred
RE: patterned parts - Peter Blomberg - 2025-11-10
(2025-11-10, 16:41)Manfred Schaefer Wrote: Do you have a visual example where a model with a pattern would require an additional conditional line that is not present in the model without a pattern?
https://library.ldraw.org/parts/44236
RE: patterned parts - Chris Böhnke - 2025-11-10
Odd.
Is there an additional one on the pattern - but on the actually unpatterned sub-file?
RE: patterned parts - Orion Pobursky - 2025-11-10
Aside from the face's now being broken up into several colored parts, there should be no difference in the geometry between a patterned part and it's unpatterned version. If that's not the case, it is an error.