(2025-12-16, 15:03)Orion Pobursky Wrote: I have another question about this:
What aren't they the same? If the curved top face is just the flat top face broken into parts for the curve they should match.
Philippe Hurbain
Question is "exactly"... imho, should simply be "the same" within (to be defined) a few %
- should sticker size be defined as the sum of chords of facetized surface, or the sized of the smooth arc?
- because of sticher thickness, length of top is different from length of bottom
...and human eye is unable to see a length difference of a few %!
With the official stickers released so far, the accuracy is guaranteed at 1/10000 LDU, on the decorated upper face.
The lower one is obviously shorter for folding and we don't care. What comes comes.
Even after we have standardized the length of the flattened stickerback, we should aim for this precision in order to be able to use, as I wrote before, the mounting of the flattened sticker formed by the rotation of subparts.
The length I mean is the sum of the length of the chords of facetized faces that make up the sticker. It is useless to aim for the ideal arc of circumference since no sticker is made in this way, not even if made with Texmap because you do not have the real cylindrical surface on which to project it.
With the solution currently proposed by Philippe, equality is no longer guaranteed, in fact only the length of the flattened version has been changed. And this is wrong.