xlib Posted November 15, 2015 Auto save function which saves you file under a different name with a date, like XYZ_17_03_9_11_2015,XYZ_17_13_9_11_2015, XYZ_17_23_9_11_2015, etc over an adjustable time period. This way we have all versions in order to revert and saves. Can't recall a single program that implement such a scheme. Usually they are saving 1 (one) file back, plus some save recovery information for unsaved files (office software). There's no point of implementing version control in such weird way. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zerobricks Posted November 15, 2015 Can't recall a single program that implement such a scheme. Usually they are saving 1 (one) file back, plus some save recovery information for unsaved files (office software). There's no point of implementing version control in such weird way. I think adobe premiere uses such a way... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
xlib Posted November 15, 2015 I think adobe premiere uses such a way... I used it quite a time ago - never saw such a thing. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
msx80 Posted December 3, 2015 2) groups in groups 3) repaint for multi selection 2) If i'm not wrong, groups in groups already exists. You can create a hierarchy of groups, it is explained for example here 3) This should exists too.. Isn't it enought to select all pieces and change select a new color ? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
OldTim3r Posted December 11, 2015 Ah... let's dream. It would be nice if you could increase the magnification in the parts picker (beyond it's current max). Also... perhaps in the Preferences window, please give us an option for increasing the magnification of the decoration picker. It is painful in it's current form. I find I have to pick the decoration to really see the detail, and quite often it wasn't what I was looking for. Then you have to pick again (and scroll down to where you left off). Please just let us increase the magnification of the picker. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kotaco Posted December 17, 2015 Let me use strings as they are meant to be! Also CPU is a big one. I have a model that is around 25k bricks, and it's a bear to work with in LDD. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
xlib Posted December 18, 2015 Also CPU is a big one. I have a model that is around 25k bricks, and it's a bear to work with in LDD. LDD is indeed CPU hog, but truth have to be told: any CAD model made from 25K parts (be it Autocad, Solidworks or even electronic schematics) will put your computer to its limit. This is even more true for 3D-presenting programs. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SuperJedi224 Posted October 24, 2016 Extended mode should allow custom decals and RGB colors, maybe? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lego Otaku Posted October 24, 2016 I still think it needs gravity check. Parts can be made to float in strange way with current and all of past LDD. A gravity check can reveal any "lost" parts by having it drop down. Also reveal what could be a design or structure problem so you don't end up buying 6,000 pieces off Bricklink and put it together only to find out it falls apart because you left out a few critical pieces. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lyichir Posted October 24, 2016 16 hours ago, Lego Otaku said: I still think it needs gravity check. Parts can be made to float in strange way with current and all of past LDD. A gravity check can reveal any "lost" parts by having it drop down. Also reveal what could be a design or structure problem so you don't end up buying 6,000 pieces off Bricklink and put it together only to find out it falls apart because you left out a few critical pieces. I've never really seen floating parts in LDD as a problem, since they can be great for setting a scene or leaving space for parts that aren't yet available on LDD. Also, disconnected parts are already easy enough to detect just by using the multiple selection tool on the model as a whole and hiding the bulk of the model. And even a tool like you describe would not be sufficient for ensuring the structural integrity of a model unless it featured a robust physics engine, since to truly ensure structural integrity you have to make sure that each and every connection point can support the weight of the parts that are connected above it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SylvainLS Posted October 25, 2016 6 hours ago, Lyichir said: […] each and every connection point can support the weight of the parts that are connected above it. or below it, or on its side, and if you move the model, shake the model, play with the model Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
