LDraw or LDD?

[jamzee]

Hi everyone,

I'm just wondering which one most people would recommend and if possible the reason(s) why?

Thanks for any advice

[CP5670]

It depends on what you want to do, as they are meant for different things. The purpose of LDD is basically to let you build and order models from the Factory. It's tied into PAB and has a very limited parts selection based on what is available there, so it should only be used if you want to buy the model. LDraw (or rather, MLCad, SR3D and other programs supporting the LDraw format) is the best choice for most other things like general MOC design and planning, producing instructions, and so on.

[djo]

i'm a 3D designer and more familiar with 3D enviromental.

even LDD's parts is limited,but the design process is easier to me to do in LDD than in LDraw (i'm using MLCAD).

so i do the design process in LDD and export them into LDraw to get the part count and database.

Edited April 24, 2009 by djo

[Legoking]

I am more of a LDD guy when it comes to this. I think LDD is easier than drawing because I am not the best at drawing Lego bricks. But the bad thing about using LDD is that it will take longer to find a piece, but when you draw it, it is 3 times as fast. But in LDD, your creation is 3D. So there you go.

LegoKing

[jamzee]

Interesting advice, thanks all - much appreciated

[treeboy]

Do "we" still agree that LDraw (MLCAD) should be used for design and instructions even with Extended mode in LDD? I am looking into LDraw, but honestly after viewing the installation instructions I got discouraged (lazy) and thought "I wonder if I really need LDraw". So any insight others can provide is greatly appreciated.

[Lego Otaku]

IMO LDD is a bit easier to use for designing but for manual part, LDD is weird at time with floting bricks, build order from top down, and order of assembly that don't make sense. I had a round tower made of 1x2 bricks and 1x1 round bricks. I used the instruction just for fun, and I expected the instruction to do it layer by layer from the bottom. LDD instead did vertical strips, which would be much harder to keep stable at first, and quite impossible to connect the final strip in the end.

I tried using LDraw but I kept running into problem just getting it to run, dunno if Windows 7 64-bits isn't friendly or if it's just my laptop. I didn't pursue any further on this issue.

[Aanchir]

I recommend LDD, because rather than just moving the parts into place according to coordinates, the parts "click" together more naturally. Additionally, LDD lets you see the model in three dimensions as you're building it, rather than just showing 2-D elevations of it and later creating a 3-D image with rendering software. This can lead to a more natural building experience than with LDraw software.

LDD's colors have a 1:1 relationship with official LEGO color names and numbers, and most colors you will ever need for building are available (besides, in some cases, certain "speckle" colors, chrome colors, and metallic colors). And through Superkalle's regular contact with the LDD team at TLG, errors can be reported and corrected, and information that would be hard for AFOLs to find (such as certain part numbers) can be put to use in the programming.

The disadvantages to LDD are numerous, of course. Its parts palette is somewhat limited-- while it tends to get new parts more quickly than LDraw, it lacks a lot of older hinge styles, and often doesn't get parts from certain themes (it has very few Toy Story figure parts and no Fabuland or Technic figure parts, for example). Decorations and colors are somewhat limited, as mentioned above. Since LDD is proprietary software, you can't just download "parts packs" off the internet-- you're stuck with the available palette in whatever mode you're using.

The "more natural building experience" mentioned above doesn't let you nudge parts easily to find the best alignment-- instead, everything must be hinged in a way that avoids collisions. This can be frustrating in (for example) a model that makes heavy use of flex cable. Occasionally (although this is rare), the fact that the parts "click" together means that illegal or impossible connections will be allowed and legal connections will be impossible due to poor programming. LDD's software is constantly being improved, but it hasn't been around as long as LDraw and so often has more bugs to work out. And as mentioned, LDD's auto-generated building instructions are often exceedingly poor.

In general, I tend to prefer LDD to my experience with LDraw software, but depending on your typical building/designing process for your MOCs it's purely a matter of preference which software is best. And neither is ideal for all types of building. I hope you find one that works for you, though.

[Cy-Gor]

Years ago i would say Ldraw all the way. However, with extended mode and recent improvements, LDD is my preferred method of building virtually.

[treeboy]

IMO LDD is a bit easier to use for designing but for manual part, LDD is weird at time with floting bricks, build order from top down, and order of assembly that don't make sense. I had a round tower made of 1x2 bricks and 1x1 round bricks. I used the instruction just for fun, and I expected the instruction to do it layer by layer from the bottom. LDD instead did vertical strips, which would be much harder to keep stable at first, and quite impossible to connect the final strip in the end.

I tried using LDraw but I kept running into problem just getting it to run, dunno if Windows 7 64-bits isn't friendly or if it's just my laptop. I didn't pursue any further on this issue.

Yea the Sherman tank in my profile pic was done with LDD, obviously, and the building mode was totally jacked.I am running Win 7 64 bit too, so...

I recommend LDD, because rather than just moving the parts into place according to coordinates, the parts "click" together more naturally. Additionally, LDD lets you see the model in three dimensions as you're building it, rather than just showing 2-D elevations of it and later creating a 3-D image with rendering software. This can lead to a more natural building experience than with LDraw software.

LDD's colors have a 1:1 relationship with official LEGO color names and numbers, and most colors you will ever need for building are available (besides, in some cases, certain "speckle" colors, chrome colors, and metallic colors). And through Superkalle's regular contact with the LDD team at TLG, errors can be reported and corrected, and information that would be hard for AFOLs to find (such as certain part numbers) can be put to use in the programming.

The disadvantages to LDD are numerous, of course. Its parts palette is somewhat limited-- while it tends to get new parts more quickly than LDraw, it lacks a lot of older hinge styles, and often doesn't get parts from certain themes (it has very few Toy Story figure parts and no Fabuland or Technic figure parts, for example). Decorations and colors are somewhat limited, as mentioned above. Since LDD is proprietary software, you can't just download "parts packs" off the internet-- you're stuck with the available palette in whatever mode you're using.

The "more natural building experience" mentioned above doesn't let you nudge parts easily to find the best alignment-- instead, everything must be hinged in a way that avoids collisions. This can be frustrating in (for example) a model that makes heavy use of flex cable. Occasionally (although this is rare), the fact that the parts "click" together means that illegal or impossible connections will be allowed and legal connections will be impossible due to poor programming. LDD's software is constantly being improved, but it hasn't been around as long as LDraw and so often has more bugs to work out. And as mentioned, LDD's auto-generated building instructions are often exceedingly poor.

In general, I tend to prefer LDD to my experience with LDraw software, but depending on your typical building/designing process for your MOCs it's purely a matter of preference which software is best. And neither is ideal for all types of building. I hope you find one that works for you, though.

That's good info on the 2D-3D and coordinate info something I didn't glean while doing so research.

The color thing is correct I'm sure, but when attempting to purchase bricks for the Sherman I used LDDManager and BrickLink since I am using extended mode etc. and the colors were different when imported to LDDManager not he actual color I don't think but the number and name.

I like the "more natural building experience" idea and will stick with LDD for now, but undoubtedly will try LDraw because that's how I am. Thanks all for the replies.

[Brickdoctor]

Basically LDD is more user-friendly to the new user, but LDR programs have more options and offer more freedom in piece placement.

Shouldn't this be in the LDD Forum?

[Superkalle]

I'm not going to say anything, because everyone allready know what I think

But I do want to add: let's not forget SR3D, which is an excellent piece of software!

Shouldn't this be in the LDD Forum?

I guess so, but for the moment it could stay here. Maybe we can reach some newcomers to EB

And for those who don't know, the EB digital tools forum is right over here

[Legostein]

Hello everbody!

My vote goes for LDraw/MLCad. And here is why:

When I started making building instructions for my models, it was the only really capable tool available. I agree that installation and getting it to run properly was very difficult at the start. And to learn how to operate the program is really not easy in the beginning either. I spent months learning how to use it correctly. But this pays off in the end, and you will be able doing instuctions and virtual models quite conveniently with some training.

But I highly respect LDD and its supporters. It has really improved a lot since its original launch, and became a very valuable alternative for LDraw/MLCad. Of course I tried it out, but it turned out that this is simply not my preferred tool. I guess it's difficult to switch after having used the other program for years because everything works a bit different there.

So let me quickly summarise my choice for LDraw/MLCad

The Good: It's a free, versatile, and potent program with nearly unlimited parts and building possibilities.

The Bad: It will need some training until you know how to use it properly, but then it's simply great.

The Ugly: Installation and get it to run properly needs some patience.

I will gladly help if anyone has problems with installation or operation of MLCad.

Cheers,

~ Christopher

[bjoerk]

I recommend LDD, because rather than just moving the parts into place according to coordinates, the parts "click" together more naturally. Additionally, LDD lets you see the model in three dimensions as you're building it, rather than just showing 2-D elevations of it and later creating a 3-D image with rendering software. This can lead to a more natural building experience than with LDraw software.

LDD's colors have a 1:1 relationship with official LEGO color names and numbers, and most colors you will ever need for building are available (besides, in some cases, certain "speckle" colors, chrome colors, and metallic colors). And through Superkalle's regular contact with the LDD team at TLG, errors can be reported and corrected, and information that would be hard for AFOLs to find (such as certain part numbers) can be put to use in the programming.

The disadvantages to LDD are numerous, of course. Its parts palette is somewhat limited-- while it tends to get new parts more quickly than LDraw, it lacks a lot of older hinge styles, and often doesn't get parts from certain themes (it has very few Toy Story figure parts and no Fabuland or Technic figure parts, for example). Decorations and colors are somewhat limited, as mentioned above. Since LDD is proprietary software, you can't just download "parts packs" off the internet-- you're stuck with the available palette in whatever mode you're using.

The "more natural building experience" mentioned above doesn't let you nudge parts easily to find the best alignment-- instead, everything must be hinged in a way that avoids collisions. This can be frustrating in (for example) a model that makes heavy use of flex cable. Occasionally (although this is rare), the fact that the parts "click" together means that illegal or impossible connections will be allowed and legal connections will be impossible due to poor programming. LDD's software is constantly being improved, but it hasn't been around as long as LDraw and so often has more bugs to work out. And as mentioned, LDD's auto-generated building instructions are often exceedingly poor.

In general, I tend to prefer LDD to my experience with LDraw software, but depending on your typical building/designing process for your MOCs it's purely a matter of preference which software is best. And neither is ideal for all types of building. I hope you find one that works for you, though.

Well MLcad is a more cad approuch to Lego Designing. But for as i have know MLCad always had 4 windows, and the forth window is the 3D window if you want it for the 3D view. I prefer MLCad but thats just because i've been working with MLCad for years now and i know that program inside out. If there comes a day i cant use it anymore because of driver problems or what ever, i will need to try out LDD and it would probably still work fine ^^

[Ralph_S]

Placing the elements in MLCad is done in the projections, but it does give you a 3D view which you can rotate. I actually like the projections.

I gave LDD a brief try a few months ago, but deciced to stick with LDraw / MLCad a while ago for four reasons:

-I frequently use 'illegal moves' and other techniques that -while not technically 'illegal'- are unlikely to be supported in LDD.

-I frequently use old parts, such as finger hinges and 1xn technic plates that aren't available in LDD.

-I can manually edit the LDraw files. This may seem a difficult way of doing things, but is brilliant if you want to mirro some part of your model, say the right and left wings. You make one in MLCad, copy the file and mirror the coordinates in the copied file. Presto!

-LPub: Perhaps things have improved with LDD's latest release, but the main reason why I used CAD in the first place was to make instruction booklets for some of my models and LPub is brilliant for that.

Cheers,

Ralph

Edited June 19, 2011 by Ralph_S

[legolijntje]

I use SR3d builder. It's a good mix between ldd and mlcad. There are often updates, so the most bugs are solved quickly.

I has a good "technic simulator", so you can turn gears and othere elements to see how it works. It has automatic brick placing (or how do you call it) like in ldd. And of course it's also easier to render than a ldd file. And it has many more functions.

I really like sr3d builder