LDD collision confusion conundrum

[manglegrat]

Hi, I'm pulling my hair out trying to either work around or simply understand why the scenarios I describe below are happening. I searched this subforum but wasn't able to find an answer - apologies if my search kung-fu is weak... 

I'm building someone else's SHIP MOC in LDD from pictures off Flickr, and have replicated the box frame for a section of it that is 6-studs wide, with 8-stud wide plates on top and bottom (studs inverted on the bottom), and should have 5-high SNOTted panels on the sides. 

I've used technic beams & frames for the body, and 5l liftarms & plates to get the correct vertical separation for the side panels and brace it all, with technic pegs (#4274) to provide the connections for the sides. 

However, the top and bottom plates seem to collide unpredictably with the side panels, and I can't get it to work.

Here's a screenshot:

The yellow plate was placed before the 2-stud wide red plate below it was added, then the file was saved. It doesn’t complain when you reload the file (I was expecting a "brick placed incorrectly" barf) but if you try to move it off that position then back to the same place, it doesn’t accept it. It didn't complain when I added the bottom plate, either - completely inconsistent!

The blue plate can move left and right up to just beside the red plate. 

The red plate cannot be moved any further right, fails to move just one stud to the left (?!), but does move 2 or more studs left of its current position towards the blue plate OK.

The green plate can move right but not left.

I read a post on this forum that mentioned peg orientation as sometimes an issue for snapping & collisions, and oriented all of the pegs (and the black pins as well, because why not?) to 0 degrees, with no improvement.

The top right red plate and the bottom left two red plates are colliding with the SNOT plates. If I remove them, I can move the SNOT plates around but can’t subsequently re-install the top & bottom plates. Gah.

This works in real life (I just tested a simplified version of the above), but LDD seems to be intolerant of what I’m trying. I'm using 4.3.10 in both Mac and PC environments on the same file, with the same results in both versions.

The same SNOT/collision issue caused me to be unable to replicate Raskolnikov’s awesome AT-AT MOC in LDD following their provided instructions, so the scenario I was trying definitely worked in real life and in their own software (not sure if they used LDD or LDraw).

Does anyone have any ideas why this is happening and how/if it can be avoided in LDD? On the SHIP recreation, I'm already up to 3400 bricks (some side panels built but obviously not attached) and really don't fancy having to do an epic rework to try to realize my version of the guy's MOC in LDD! 

Thanks in advance!

[legolijntje]

LDD only allows absolutely 100% 'legal' connections. Even the slightest (mathematical) collision is not allowed. The connection you're trying to use, is in fact an illegal connection; see the third slide in this pdf.
Now, why LDD does allow some connections and doesn't allow others in this case, I have no idea. I'm not really an LDD user, I mainly use LDraw.

Quote

The same SNOT/collision issue caused me to be unable to replicate Raskolnikov’s awesome AT-AT MOC in LDD following their provided instructions, so the scenario I was trying definitely worked in real life and in their own software (not sure if they used LDD or LDraw).

They (I ) used LDraw to digitally replicate the model to create the instructions. There was someone on Reddit who wanted to make an LDD version too, but I believe he had some problems too.

Quote

Does anyone have any ideas why this is happening and how/if it can be avoided in LDD? On the SHIP recreation, I'm already up to 3400 bricks (some side panels built but obviously not attached) and really don't fancy having to do an epic rework to try to realize my version of the guy's MOC in LDD! 

I don't think there's really a solution (maybe one of those LDD experts here might know a workaround though) other than placing the sidepanel loose next to the ship, or exporting to LDraw and continuing from there...

[manglegrat]

9 hours ago, legolijntje said:

LDD only allows absolutely 100% 'legal' connections. Even the slightest (mathematical) collision is not allowed. The connection you're trying to use, is in fact an illegal connection; see the third slide in this pdf.
Now, why LDD does allow some connections and doesn't allow others in this case, I have no idea. I'm not really an LDD user, I mainly use LDraw.

Argh. Well that explains it. 

Thanks for the link - I've actually skimmed through that before but it was ages ago. I've bookmarked it now for future reference! Knowing that, the seeming randomness of LDD applying the rules in this case is weird. It shouldn't work at all! 

I've installed LDraw (and Bricksmith on my Mac) a few times but the usability just turned me off completely. It seems to have a much higher barrier-to-entry than LDD, and since LDD has served well to-date I've never really committed to jumping the hurdles. May have to revisit that...

Quote

They (I ) used LDraw to digitally replicate the model to create the instructions. There was someone on Reddit who wanted to make an LDD version too, but I believe he had some problems too

I shoulda maybe checked that thread first, you probably mentioned it there... You did a helluva great job, by the way! 

Quote

I don't think there's really a solution (maybe one of those LDD experts here might know a workaround though) other than placing the sidepanel loose next to the ship, or exporting to LDraw and continuing from there...

Given your info above, I doubt there's a legal workaround.

I'm going to do some investigating in LDD and try to find alternative methods before completely giving up on LDD... I suspect that they'll either be just as unpredictable and/or will introduce gaps that may cause spacing issues with other parts of the design. 

At the moment, the side panels are just sitting loose, as you say. Not much use when you want to produce a render of the finished model, though! 

[manglegrat]

After experiment, it seems that whether the connection is direct from the technic pins or via some other mechanism (I tried four, one of which seemed OK but only worked if you did things in a certain sequence), there seems to be no legal and predictable or consistently successful way to get this to work in LDD without introducing additional gaps into the design. 

I also downloaded the latest LDraw package for my PC (it's a Parallels VM) and faceplanted over that adoption hurdle again. In comparison to LDD, both MLCad and LDCad are impenetrable to my aging and simple mind... Also, exporting the SHIP from LDD to LDraw format lost a lot of parts I'd have to find (if they're even in visible places) and replace. It may be too late in this build to productively switch to anything else!

I haven't tried Mecabricks yet, so I guess I could take a look at that as well...

[legolijntje]

Quote

I also downloaded the latest LDraw package for my PC (it's a Parallels VM) and faceplanted over that adoption hurdle again. In comparison to LDD, both MLCad and LDCad are impenetrable to my aging and simple mind... Also, exporting the SHIP from LDD to LDraw format lost a lot of parts I'd have to find (if they're even in visible places) and replace. It may be too late in this build to productively switch to anything else!

Yeah, compared MLCad is nothing compared to LDD. But, I'm not using it either. It's slow, old and outdated.

LDCad is very nice though. Sure, the learning curve is a little steeper than LDD, but it works pretty nice. A few tips that might make life easier using LDCad if coming from LDD:

• Automatic part snapping is off by default. Yup... Go into that 'menu' with the 3 colored arrows at the bottom-left of the editing window. Then press the red GS to turn part snapping on (so, it should be a green PS)
• The default rotation-mode is trackball. A lot of people prefer that mode, a lot of people don't (including me). I prefer spin-mode, which is the same kind of rotation-mode that LDD uses. Go into the same menu as the previous tip and press the tan TBL button so it becomes a tan SPN button. Try rotating your model, it should be easier now 

But, I can surely understand why LDCad is more 'difficult' than LDD (although miles better than MLCad), but I also think it really differs from person to person. I for example, tried Mecabricks but I just can't get to work with it comfortably, while others praise Mecabricks for its simplicity.

You could also take a look at the new kid, stud.io by Bricklink. It works a lot like LDD; it also has part snapping like LDD and LDCad, but it also has part collision-detection. Something only LDD had so far. But, the nice thing, you can turn it off if you just want to force a part into a specific location. And, it uses the LDraw library in the background, so there's a huge part library. I haven't used it very much personally, but the short time I tried it it didn't look bad at all. I'm just not really a fan of their... 'openness' (couldn't find the right word) about their software.

[SylvainLS]

10 hours ago, manglegrat said:

Also, exporting the SHIP from LDD to LDraw format lost a lot of parts

Have you tried with my updated ldraw.xml conversion file?

But note that in LDraw, technic holes are not placed correctly (they are at the same place as side-studs, too low with respect to reality) whereas, as you experienced, in LDD, they are placed higher (a bit too high with respect to reality), so pins are exported as LDD places them and end up not centered in the technic holes in LDraw.

 

[sheo]

On 1/9/2017 at 6:29 AM, manglegrat said:

Does anyone have any ideas why this is happening and how/if it can be avoided in LDD?

You just need to position the side panels using temporary SNOT bricks, then replace them with Technic bricks and put pegs in them.

[manglegrat]

19 hours ago, legolijntje said:

Yeah, compared MLCad is nothing compared to LDD. But, I'm not using it either. It's slow, old and outdated.

Both of them are callbacks to the bad old days of non-intuitive user interfaces (MLCad from the static multi-canvas perspective, LDCad from the odd/ugly menuing system). Still, in 20 years in IT I've never written anything like that and made it available for free to others so it's a bit mean of me to criticize others too harshly. I'm so needy. 

Quote

LDCad is very nice though. Sure, the learning curve is a little steeper than LDD, but it works pretty nice. A few tips that might make life easier using LDCad if coming from LDD:

• Automatic part snapping is off by default. Yup... Go into that 'menu' with the 3 colored arrows at the bottom-left of the editing window. Then press the red GS to turn part snapping on (so, it should be a green PS)
• The default rotation-mode is trackball. A lot of people prefer that mode, a lot of people don't (including me). I prefer spin-mode, which is the same kind of rotation-mode that LDD uses. Go into the same menu as the previous tip and press the tan TBL button so it becomes a tan SPN button. Try rotating your model, it should be easier now 

Ooh, thanks for those tips! I'll take a look and see if that makes LDCad a bit more usable.  

Quote

I for example, tried Mecabricks but I just can't get to work with it comfortably, while others praise Mecabricks for its simplicity.

I tried it yesterday and it seemed more intuitive than LDCad, but I still got my head turned inside out trying to get to grips with piece rotations, and the brick palette would take some getting used to after becoming so familiar with using LDD's extended mode... Actually, that last bit applies to every other package, too!

Quote

You could also take a look at the new kid, stud.io by Bricklink. It works a lot like LDD; it also has part snapping like LDD and LDCad, but it also has part collision-detection. Something only LDD had so far. But, the nice thing, you can turn it off if you just want to force a part into a specific location. And, it uses the LDraw library in the background, so there's a huge part library. I haven't used it very much personally, but the short time I tried it it didn't look bad at all. I'm just not really a fan of their... 'openness' (couldn't find the right word) about their software.

I read some concerns in other threads here about their licensing terms and what they claim ownership over, but I think that might be more about public rather than private builds... Definitely interested in seeing how that software evolves though!

For my SHIP MOC recreation, I just kept plugging away in Extended mode in LDD (checking on Rebrickable for parts in unavailable colours along the way) and left the side panels disconnected. I finished it earlier tonight - ~4600 parts, including the tiled display stand... 

Rather than trying any conversions for that, I'll stick to trying out any new software on new - simple - builds... 

Thanks again!

17 hours ago, SylvainLS said:

Have you tried with my updated ldraw.xml conversion file?

But note that in LDraw, technic holes are not placed correctly (they are at the same place as side-studs, too low with respect to reality) whereas, as you experienced, in LDD, they are placed higher (a bit too high with respect to reality), so pins are exported as LDD places them and end up not centered in the technic holes in LDraw.

No not yet - that might help!

Is there a way to make that file work on a Mac, or is everything too packaged-up for that to work and you need to use Windows?

I only installed LDD on my Windows VM the other day as a result of this problem and haven't tried it yet on that, but I'll take a look - thanks!

The potential issue with technic pegs you mention might not be that much of a hurdle in comparison to everything else with a conversion to LDCad - there's only 40 or so of them to redo... 0.8% of the total part count.  

[manglegrat]

10 hours ago, sheo said:

You just need to position the side panels using temporary SNOT bricks, then replace them with Technic bricks and put pegs in them.

I just tried that - for the purposes of producing a render with the side panels on, that sounded like it could work, but obviously not be structurally valid, so I gave it a go... I tried both SNOT types - i.e. "Brick 1x2 w/knobs" (11211) and the headlight brick (4070). Unless I misunderstood the suggestion it doesn't seem to work for me. 

The first brick type still produced an illegal overlap with the plates above and below the top & bottom, not allowing any plates to be connected to the SNOT bricks with the overhang in place. 

The headlight brick looked like it was better, after I added a plate to bump out from the recessed stud on the headlight brick, and while that does push out the side panel vs. the technic pegs, it might not have required a redesign of anything else in the model to accommodate it due to some "play" in the existing gaps. 

In the screenshot below, you can see that using the headlights got me a part of the way there, but I can't put any plates on the visible blue plates from the layer behind the multi-coloured one.

I guess we're still playing in "illegal connection" land... 

A top-to-bottom contiguous 5 stud solution on the same layer of plates still isn't allowed while it's between those overhanging plates, and the side plates need to be recessed. 

I appreciate your suggestion, for sure! If I misinterpreted it and there may be another way, please let me know...

Edited January 11, 2017 by manglegrat

[sheo]

Here is a simple example:

1. Put a temporary SNOT brick.
2. Connect side plates to the SNOT brick.
3. Replace the SNOT brick with a Technic brick.
4. Put a Technic peg in the Technic brick.

Now everything is connected together, and there is no collision errors.

In your case I would suggest building something like that:

Edited January 11, 2017 by sheo

[SylvainLS]

7 hours ago, manglegrat said:

Is there a way to make that file work on a Mac, or is everything too packaged-up for that to work and you need to use Windows?

ldraw.xml is the file LDD uses to convert to/from LDraw. It’s part of LDD.

So, if LDD works, you just need to replace LDD’s version (just find where ‘C:\Program Files\LEGO Company\LEGO Digital Designer\’ actually is on your disk) with the one downloaded from the link above (“downloaded,” not opened and copy-pasted or whatever else that could mangle the file; there’s an md5 for the latest version in the latest comment in the thread).

[manglegrat]

9 hours ago, sheo said:

Here is a simple example:

1. Put a temporary SNOT brick.
2. Connect side plates to the SNOT brick.
3. Replace the SNOT brick with a Technic brick.
4. Put a Technic peg in the Technic brick.

Now everything is connected together, and there is no collision errors.

Wow, awesome work figuring that out, and thanks for the great illustration!  

That approach does the trick - if you can follow that sequence and if you don't subsequently have to move either of the overhanging bricks (top or bottom) once the side plates are placed, which seems to reset the collision/legality test logic. 

Here's a render of the recreated SHIP model I'm working on now (Ryan Olsen is the original builder), so I'm not sure at this stage I'd be able to reimplement the exposed internal structure using technique above...  Can't hurt to try in one section, though. I'll give it a go. 

However, the next time I'm starting something that has awkwardly-sized recessed side panels using plates, I'll know how to make it work. 

Edited January 11, 2017 by manglegrat

[SylvainLS]

7 minutes ago, manglegrat said:

if you don't subsequently have to move either of the overhanging bricks (top or bottom) once the side plates are placed, which seems to reset the collision/legality test logic

Use the hide tool: place the plates, hide them, change the bricks back, unhide.

[manglegrat]

6 hours ago, SylvainLS said:

ldraw.xml is the file LDD uses to convert to/from LDraw. It’s part of LDD.

So, if LDD works, you just need to replace LDD’s version (just find where ‘C:\Program Files\LEGO Company\LEGO Digital Designer\’ actually is on your disk) with the one downloaded from the link above (“downloaded,” not opened and copy-pasted or whatever else that could mangle the file; there’s an md5 for the latest version in the latest comment in the thread).

Yeah, I got that, I updated the file on my Windows VM no problem, it's just the way apps are packaged on a Mac they're bundled into a '.app' file with the contents hidden inside, rather than the way Windows does it with folders - a slightly different paradigm.

However, I just found out that you can explore the contents of Mac .app files if you open the 'Applications' folder in Finder, right click on the 'LEGO Digital Designer' package & select the 'Show Package Contents' option, then you can explore the package folders as normal. The 'ldraw.xml' file is inside the 'Contents\Resources\' folder, and I was able to copy your version into it (I renamed the old one first, just in case). It seems to work, and did a much better job than the original file. Nice!  

Hey, now you can update the "how to" instructions in your thread about how to install this file for Mac owners...  

There are some parts that don't make it through the conversion and are missing, but some of those may just be variants (e.g. 15207 - which I manually replaced with 30413 and that came through OK). MLCad says '.dat' files are missing for the following part IDs: 3665b, 24316, 92582, 48729b, 24299, 24307 - but LDCad doesn't complain about those when I open the file. 

I'll need to investigate why and learn more about MLCad/LDCad to check on the missing parts - LDCad says there are 4608 parts in the ldr file but the lxf has 4664, so definitely some detective work to do there... 

21 minutes ago, SylvainLS said:

Use the hide tool: place the plates, hide them, change the bricks back, unhide.

Ooh, cool! I hadn't ever used that tool before - much smarter than moving & replacing. Thanks, Sylvain!

[legolijntje]

1 hour ago, manglegrat said:

I'll need to investigate why and learn more about MLCad/LDCad to check on the missing parts - LDCad says there are 4608 parts in the ldr file but the lxf has 4664, so definitely some detective work to do there... 

You could upload the LDD file and the LDraw file as 'private mocs' on Rebrickable.com to get the parts lists. Then you could maybe spot the difference easier. 

[SylvainLS]

1 hour ago, manglegrat said:

Hey, now you can update the "how to" instructions in your thread about how to install this file for Mac owners...  

Will certainly do. Thanks! (And thanks for the explanations, I had forgotten there was a Mac version )

1 hour ago, manglegrat said:

3665b, 24316, 92582, 48729b, 24299, 24307

24316, and 48729b are in the Official LDraw Parts Library as of version 2016-01 (that’s the first (and last) update of 2016, dated December 31st).

15207, 3665b, 92582, 24299, and 24307 are still Unofficial parts for now.

There’re other parts that are not available on LDraw.org but make-dos are available at digital-bricks.de.

[manglegrat]

1 hour ago, legolijntje said:

You could upload the LDD file and the LDraw file as 'private mocs' on Rebrickable.com to get the parts lists. Then you could maybe spot the difference easier. 

Good idea! That'll definitely help highlight some conversion issues. 

I've been using Rebrickable to validate the availability of parts in general as I was building, but since importing to Rebrickable also does mappings from some of the older part variants still used in LDD to more preferred ones, that might also point to some parts that could be falling out of the LDraw conversion, even just by reviewing the output of uploading LDD file alone.

It's kinda like translating something written in French to Spanish, and then the Spanish to English, and also translating the original French directly to English and comparing the results.  Hey, anything that helps is awesome...  

Thanks! 

[manglegrat]

Some more analysis - probably the last, as I think I have a way to move forward in LDCad... 

I checked the 6 parts that caused the MLCad missing file complaints:

• 14x 3665b Slope, inverted 45 2x1 - The ‘b’ was added in the export from LDD, not sure why it did that!
• 4x 24316 Technic axle 3 w/stop - should be there in end-2016 parts update…
• 32x 92582 Hinge Plate 2 x 2 Locking with 1 Finger on Top - an unofficial LDraw part for now
• 14x 48729b Bar 1L with Clip Mechanical 14 - The ‘b’ was added in the export from LDD, but it should be there in end-2016 parts update…
• 1x 24299 Wedge, Plate 2 x 2 Left 1 - an unofficial LDraw part for now
• 1x 24307 Wedge, Plate 2 x 2 Right 1 - an unofficial LDraw part for now

So a total of 66 parts are in those above 6 part types.

Reconciliation:

• LDD parts count: 4664
• LDCad parts count: 4608

LDCad visual reconciliation:

• 3665b - missing
• 24316 - missing (internal to the model, not a crisis)
• 92582 - missing
• 48729b - missing
• 24299 - missing
• 24307 - missing

Subtracting these 66 missing parts from 4664 leaves 4598.

This is 10 less than the LDCad count - not sure where the difference comes from!

Maybe LDCad is counting some of the multi-part components separately (i.e. the 2 technic turntables and 8 1x4 hinge plates)… Rebrickable did give messages about merging them on the import, but I know LDD counts both top and bottom parts as one piece. Odd but not critical.

Visually, for the purposes of completing a panels-on render in LDCad, only five of the part types above need to be fixed, 62 parts in total. Not as much of an issue as I expected over the total number of parts, so the LDD-LDraw translation is actually doing a really good job with Sylvain’s XML file! 

I think I can manage to manually fix those… 

Just for fun, here’s the difference between Rebrickable import of LXF and LDR files both generated from LDD:

• LXF part count: 4664
• LDR part count: 4637 

27 parts are missing across 3 different part types, only one of which is in the 6 listed above! The LDR import also complained about one technic brick (1x2 with axle opening) that was actually in the LDD import but didn't cause a warning, but I changed it to another variant just to clear it.

• 5x 3713 Technic bush
• 8x 43093 Technic Axle Pin with Friction Ridges Lengthwise
• 14x 3665 Slope, inverted 45 2x1

So something subtle was missed in the translation from French to Spanish to English! 

Edited January 11, 2017 by manglegrat

[roland]

1 hour ago, manglegrat said:

This is 10 less than the LDCad count - not sure where the difference comes from!

 

Maybe LDCad is counting some of the multi-part components separately (i.e. the 2 technic turntables and 8 1x4 hinge plates)… Rebrickable did give messages about merging them on the import, but I know LDD counts both top and bottom parts as one piece. Odd but not critical.

Yes LDCad counts both parts of a turntable (and other combined parts) if they have been placed separately. If you want to count them as one you need to replace them with '(complete)' variants.

As of the missing files, LDCad renders those as red crosses. If you want an overview of the missing (not found) parts you can get that trough the session/missing files dialog. If you want you can enable showing of that dialog when opening files with missing parts. I disabled this by default as I always got very annoyed by the ones in MLCad :)

Also some of the missing files might be unofficial files so you might want to add the unofficial library (ldrawunf.zip) to the LDraw search paths.

[SylvainLS]

1 hour ago, manglegrat said:

3665b Slope, inverted 45 2x1 - The ‘b’ was added in the export from LDD, not sure why it did that!

The b was added when I went over all the parts, back in September or a bit before. I had a little program that searched LDraw IDs that could match LDD’s IDs. I then chose between the available variants. Generally, the -b variant is newer than the -a one, so that’s the one that was chosen. I wasn’t thorough enough then to verify it was actually correct. Actually, I still don’t know if it’s correct as LDraw is the only one having variants for 3665.

Anyway, I can change it to 3665a but not to 3665, as 3665 is renamed “~Moved to 3665a” in LDraw Unofficial, which is my reference. And as 3665a is, like 3665b, only in Unofficial, it won’t change much either way.

1 hour ago, manglegrat said:

Maybe LDCad is counting some of the multi-part components separately (i.e. the 2 technic turntables and 8 1x4 hinge plates)

Not a maybe. Parts like hinge plates are two different parts, else you wouldn’t be able to move them separately (hinge them). LDD calls them assemblies and the subparts are what is exported to/imported from LDraw. LDraw doesn’t allow you to move subparts/parts-of-a-submodel, so we have to import/export them as separate parts.

Same goes for minifigs parts. For example, the LDD minifig standard torso is an assembly that is split up in 5 parts: 2 hands, left and right arms, and torso.

 

[manglegrat]

2 hours ago, SylvainLS said:

The b was added when I went over all the parts, back in September or a bit before. I had a little program that searched LDraw IDs that could match LDD’s IDs. I then chose between the available variants. Generally, the -b variant is newer than the -a one, so that’s the one that was chosen. I wasn’t thorough enough then to verify it was actually correct. Actually, I still don’t know if it’s correct as LDraw is the only one having variants for 3665.

Anyway, I can change it to 3665a but not to 3665, as 3665 is renamed “~Moved to 3665a” in LDraw Unofficial, which is my reference. And as 3665a is, like 3665b, only in Unofficial, it won’t change much either way.

There were only 14 of the 3665's in fairly visible and reachable places, so I manually replaced the missing parts in LDCad. Seemed the simplest solution! 3665a may be a better mapping to use for the future, though.

I added the unofficial parts library to LDCad to get the 2x2 wedge plates to be available, but only after I had already deleted all the "missing part" placeholders and manually replaced the other visible parts with alternatives, so I probably could've got the parts that are in there to work just by doing that first... Ah well, another lesson learned! 

I then spent another while placing the side panels (had to install LDCad 1.6 beta to get the multiple-select-by-CTRL-drag function to save my sanity), and I only have one pair of panels left to attach! They're going to be at an angle though, and I haven't figured that bit out yet. I think that may happen in LDD or real life prototyping first, as doing it as an LDCad newbie may cause my laptop to be thrown at the wall in frustration...   

We're nearly there, though!

Quote

Parts like hinge plates are two different parts, else you wouldn’t be able to move them separately (hinge them). LDD calls them assemblies and the subparts are what is exported to/imported from LDraw. LDraw doesn’t allow you to move subparts/parts-of-a-submodel, so we have to import/export them as separate parts.

Same goes for minifigs parts. For example, the LDD minifig standard torso is an assembly that is split up in 5 parts: 2 hands, left and right arms, and torso.

Cool, thanks! I've learned a lot of useful stuff on this little journey. Thanks for your help! 

3 hours ago, roland said:

Yes LDCad counts both parts of a turntable (and other combined parts) if they have been placed separately. If you want to count them as one you need to replace them with '(complete)' variants.

I suspected that might be the case, as the number was just too coincidental. Also confirmed by Sylvain, so I'm happy I haven't missed something else that I'll only notice later on... 

Quote

As of the missing files, LDCad renders those as red crosses. If you want an overview of the missing (not found) parts you can get that trough the session/missing files dialog. If you want you can enable showing of that dialog when opening files with missing parts. I disabled this by default as I always got very annoyed by the ones in MLCad :)

Also some of the missing files might be unofficial files so you might want to add the unofficial library (ldrawunf.zip) to the LDraw search paths.

Thanks for the advice, Roland! As per my reply to Sylvain above, I took that advice and installed the unofficial library, but probably not in the most efficient sequence... I'll know to use the missing files dialog next time (if I'm ever brave enough to do this again...).

Much appreciated. 

Edited January 12, 2017 by manglegrat

[manglegrat]

If anyone's curious, I completed the LDCad conversion, installed the remaining panels and generated a few POV-Ray renders (so proud of myself )... The renders are slightly paler than BlueRender (gamma settings on POV-Ray 3.7 need to be dialled up further?), but I'm pretty happy with them.

Here's the results of my efforts and your help - thanks for all the tips and assistance, guys!

Front angle

 

Side

 

Rear angle

Edited January 13, 2017 by manglegrat
Nested spoiler tag problem...