Existing Part Edit Requests


RE: Existing Part Edit Requests
(2019-07-07, 22:55)Gerald Lasser Wrote: I checked all the updates, I only find it in its initial release here: LDraw.org Parts Update 2009-02 - Sep 16, 2009

may be still on your HD?

I just checked every backup I have. If it ever existed, it's gone now.
Reply
RE: Existing Part Edit Requests - 4735
(2019-07-07, 16:01)Gerald Lasser Wrote: Another part used in the Quantum Real Explorer that needs a rework, is the Brick 1 x 1 x 2/3 Round with Bar and Clip Vertical (Part 4735)

Currently the grooves on the part are only edge lines, which make it appear smooth during renders. I have reworked it, added proper grooves and a different clip. The clip needs to be a bit narrower though...





with narrower clip

Mom not a fan of the sharp ridges. The real part is more rounded. Maybe torii instead?
Reply
RE: Existing Part Edit Requests - 4735
(2019-07-07, 23:38)Orion Pobursky Wrote: Mom not a fan of the sharp ridges. The real part is more rounded. Maybe torii instead?

Since the part is so small, I can't be absolutely sure, but I don't think they are rounded. I think they are rectangular grooves with a flat outside. And using tori for features so small would be serious overkill. I think the walls of the divots are too sloped (should be closer to 90 degrees), resulting in the outer parts being too skinny.
Reply
RE: Existing Part Edit Requests
Here's a hi-res picture of the part. It'S more a trapezoid shape. I also don't like too sharp edges, but using tori here would give us a LOT of quads...
   

I go ahead with those measurements, the indents will be shallower then as I used 1 LDU in the mock-up vs. 0,5 I get from the picture
Reply
RE: Existing Part Edit Requests
You might check what I did on 71342.dat
Minifig Bugle.

w.
LEGO ergo sum
Reply
RE: Existing Part Edit Requests
(2019-07-08, 6:42)Gerald Lasser Wrote: Here's a hi-res picture of the part. It'S more a trapezoid shape. I also don't like too sharp edges, but using tori here would give us a LOT of quads...
I go ahead with those measurements, the indents will be shallower then as I used 1 LDU in the mock-up vs. 0,5 I get from the picture
I'd clearly go with the trapezium method, like s\604547s01.dat with the right ridge scaling. More is pure overkill at this scale.
Reply
RE: Existing Part Edit Requests
@all, thanks for your opinions, I go ahead with this one


.png   Ldraw_4735_Final.PNG (Size: 47.16 KB / Downloads: 297)
Reply
RE: Existing Part Edit Requests
(2019-07-08, 8:58)Gerald Lasser Wrote: @all, thanks for your opinions, I go ahead with this one
Isn't this very close to the minifig tool handle?
Spanner, screwdriver, hammer. 6246a-f and 11402a-i
That design is placed in subfiles. Could they be used?
Reply
RE: Existing Part Edit Requests
(2019-07-08, 11:31)Magnus Forsberg Wrote: Isn't this very close to the minifig tool handle?
Spanner, screwdriver, hammer. 6246a-f and 11402a-i
That design is placed in subfiles. Could they be used?

No, they have one too many groove...
I tried looking them up as well
Reply
RE: Existing Part Edit Requests
(2019-07-08, 8:58)Gerald Lasser Wrote: @all, thanks for your opinions, I go ahead with this one
Imho, bottom of grooves cylis are just wasting triangles (though you caould use a single cyli for whole length...)
Reply
RE: Existing Part Edit Requests
(2019-07-08, 11:49)Gerald Lasser Wrote: No, they have one too many groove...
I tried looking them up as well

You could just have one groove as a primitive/subfile.
Reply
RE: Existing Part Edit Requests
(2021-04-13, 11:52)ashishkumarji Wrote: I think that we can't simply correct geometry

I think that you're a spammer. Be careful.

w.
LEGO ergo sum
Reply
RE: Existing Part Edit Requests
71708 has some strange sections that are always red no matter what colour I make the part:

[Image: c9EWAqm.png]I checked my settings in LDCAD and nothing changes it, and also reinstalled the official and unofficial LDRAW libraries.

Regards, Snipe
Reply
RE: Existing Part Edit Requests
As this is an unofficial part, I would suggest redownloading it.
Reply
RE: Existing Part Edit Requests
(2023-05-12, 15:00)Orion Pobursky Wrote: As this is an unofficial part, I would suggest redownloading it.
Yes. I have a weird colored version too, but the one on PT is correct.
Reply
RE: Existing Part Edit Requests
(2023-05-12, 15:59)Philippe Hurbain Wrote: Yes. I have a weird colored version too, but the one on PT is correct.

In comments, there was a hard coded surface that was corrected on 5/10. So if it was download before then, then you probably have an error.
Reply
RE: Existing Part Edit Requests
(2019-07-08, 1:03)Travis Cobbs Wrote: Since the part is so small, I can't be absolutely sure, but I don't think they are rounded. I think they are rectangular grooves with a flat outside. And using tori for features so small would be serious overkill. I think the walls of the divots are too sloped (should be closer to 90 degrees), resulting in the outer parts being too skinny.

I need to finally fix it, it has still some other issues
Reply
RE: Existing Part Edit Requests
(2023-05-12, 15:00)Orion Pobursky Wrote: As this is an unofficial part, I would suggest redownloading it.

I downloaded the file on its own rather than the entire library, now it works, thx.
Reply
RE: Snowshoes
(2019-06-26, 11:43)Gerald Lasser Wrote: I noticed yesterday that the snowshoe, coming with the current Arctic Sets, is actually another type.

Now comes the dilemma. In our library there is the 30284, the original one and the 11187 which is currently listed as an alias.

At BL and Brickset however, the 11187 is NOT the same design as the 30284. Moreover there is another variant, the 28263, which is an alias to 11187.

The 11187 is official, but in reality it has another origin that 30284. Compared to 30284 it has a short front end and a long backend.

Ideal would be to change 11187 to the correct geometry and add an alias for 28263.

With that approach a complete compatibility cannot be guaranteed due to the different lenghts and existting models may face collision issues (though I think there is only a slim chance...)


To sum what we currently have:

30284 - Minifig Snowshoe  - The real thing - Official
11187 - =Minifig Snowshoe - Wrong alias as this is actually the short version - Official
11187a - Minifig Snowshoe with Short Toe Webbing - The real thing  - Unofficial
28263 - =Minifig Snowshoe with Short Toe Webbing - Alias to 11187a - Unofficial

I has been suggested to obsolate 11187 (which have never been done) and release 11187a and 28263 as official short versions. To get away from the 11187-mess I suggest:

* Obsolate 11187 as suggested
* Make 28263 the offiicial short version
* Make 11187a the alias of 28263

Thoughts?

w.
LEGO ergo sum
Reply
RE: Snowshoes
I'm fine with this scheme.
Reply
RE: Existing Part Edit Requests
Exclamation 
Hi, I'm new here, so if this is the wrong spot for this, just say so.

The Chrome Visor piece (part 769, https://library.ldraw.org/official/12552) has "incorrect" perfectly straight geometry on its lower half, which causes any rendered reflections to be stretched, as shown here:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/thebrickcc...3497541138

However, the real-life piece is rounded all the way down, resulting in natural-looking reflections, as shown here:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/ironbricks/6008252805

It would be nice if the 3D model could be fixed to match the real piece by adding just a bit more curvature and more triangles on the lower half of the visor. Kind of the entire reason this piece exists is because of its crisp, shiny reflections, so I think fixing this aspect of the piece should be somewhat of a priority.

I have created a very rough fix in Maya, demonstrating that this is possible (it still has some stretching on the bottom though, since my 3D modelling skills are severely lacking):
https://www.flickr.com/photos/thebrickcc...3498379547

But it would be amazing if someone who actually knows what they are doing could take a shot at fixing this.
Reply
RE: Existing Part Edit Requests
I would say it is flat, but the geometry could be improved. The angle of the bottom front surface is not right.
The green arrow show that the surface in a fresh download of part 23318 is more tilted.

   

This could be fixed, but not until someone decide to also correct the bad shape on helmet 2446.
https://forums.ldraw.org/thread-26653-po...l#pid47475
Reply
RE: Existing Part Edit Requests
(2024-01-31, 22:05)Magnus Forsberg Wrote: I would say it is flat, but the geometry could be improved. The angle of the bottom front surface is not right.

While the rendering looks wrong, I don't think it's due to incorrect LDraw part geometry. As Magnus points out, the real helmet really isn't flat, and I'm pretty sure this is visible in your photo:

   

The red arrow I added certainly appears to point at the spot on the helmet where it changes from spherical to cylindrical. Notice how the apparently linear features in the reflection change direction at that spot.
Reply
RE: Existing Part Edit Requests
(2024-01-31, 22:05)Magnus Forsberg Wrote: I would say it is flat, but the geometry could be improved. The angle of the bottom front surface is not right.
The green arrow show that the surface in a fresh download of part 23318 is more tilted.



This could be fixed, but not until someone decide to also correct the bad shape on helmet 2446.
https://forums.ldraw.org/thread-26653-po...l#pid47475

Thanks for responding! I think you're right and it definitely looks somewhat flat in real life.

From what I understand, it's more of an issue with the seam in the reflection that is present due to the 3D geometry abruptly switching from spherical to cylindrical. (Here's the best explanation I can find of what causes the seam in the reflection:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jvPPXbo87ds&t=1736s

it's talking about flat planes, but if I understand correctly, it should also apply to this piece, where a sphere transitions to a cylinder.)
That's why I was wondering if this piece could get even just the slightest bit of curvature on its lower half---it wouldn't take away all the stretching, but it would smooth it out and make it more like its real-life counterpart.

Also that's kind of crazy how much is left to fix on the helmet model, I had no idea...
Reply
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »



Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)