Eurobricks Counts
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by ___

  1. Well the main thing here is that you think in LDraw/Bricklink colors, which aren't the same as official Lego/LDD colors. LDD does use the official Lego color names.

    Light Bluish Grey (LDraw) = 194 Medium Stone Grey (LDD/LEGO)

    You can see the whole list on Rebrickable

    Well, simply what I mean is the naming one would use if buying at BrickLink, Pick-A-Brick or wherever else (but I may be wrong, of course, anyway I did not see it selling in any other names than this somewhat standard naming and if for example LDD - cos that was my question, not LDRAW - was intended for ppl to design and afterwards order their bricks from LEGO Store then I really see no reason in such a "made up" naming, or let's say naming that does not "tell anyone anything" about actual brick color he needs to buy unless he uses some additional SW that would transfer those LDD naming/color numbers into real "buy-able" brick colors, if you understand me)...to my knowledge colors are selling exactly in that as you said "LDRAW/Bricklink" way which is exactly one of the points I am asking this question/for help (so one can easily ordder required bricks in required EXISTING color name).

    BTW thank you for the link - I will check it later as now I am doing something else.

  2. As I have decided using just the exact real life brick colors (I mean combination of specific brick and color) I have quite a problem with LDD naming scheme as its color names in many (if not most) cases do not fit official LEGO colors naming. For example, which colors in LDD represents these as of now for me very crucial colors:

    Light Bluish Grey (I am using LDD color 208 - Light Stone Grey)

    Dark Bluish Grey (I am using LDD color 199 - Dark Stone Grey)

    Light Grey (I am using LDD color 2 - Grey)

    Yellow (I am using LDD color 24 - Bright Yellow)

    Dark Grey (I am using LDD color NO USABLE COLOR!)

    Flat Silver (I am using LDD color 298 - Cool Silver, Drum Lacq)

    Trans Purple (I am using LDD color 126 - Light Bright Bluish Violet)

    Trans Neon Orange (I am using LDD color 47 - Transparent Fluorescent Reddish Orange)

    Metal Blue (I am using LDD color 145 - Metallic Sand Blue)

    Can anyone participate and tell me if those are correct or there are some others that I should choose as their LDD equivalents (ehm, there are no others in LDD as a fact actually :laugh: )?

    I am a bit lost and really really need help (as I have to be as much accurate as possible so my renders would represent real brick model rigorously)! :sad:

    Besides I really do not understand why they did chose such made up naming and not the ones from real existing LEGO brick color names, to me it is quite misleading and unnecessary mess.

  3. Yo, Bluerender says it wants a db.lif but I don't have a db.lif. I have a db folder with all the contents of a db.lif. Can I just use that?

    I am not quite sure how Nicola exactly coded it but it definitely can make use of extracted db folder (and I'm 1000% sure of) but you probably need to have original db.lif presented too (that is: having both side by side, you know). :wink:

  4. Yes, this looks very good. Looks more functional. The previous prototype had a tad to much dodats etc... but this is perfect!!!!! Design aproved

    Unless there are other versions you wanted to show then im curious


    Actually I am still playing with the idea of removing that long arm with chain and hook completely + changing colors of the bricks to existing combinations + I have such an idea that the forehand of arms would be openable...

  5. It depends on what you want to build (and what theme you choose) If you are new to "mocing" and you plan on using technic then I would warn against it, as you really need to test your ideas out physically with technic.If you are talking about a moc for a city layout or using the "traditional" Lego type elements then Lego cad is a great tool to use.

    When using Lego cad software you need to be careful of using parts that do not exist in some colours or are rare and expensive to buy.

    That is very true + or he can combine both: you design something you somehow logically (in a way, of course) expect should work and after that trying to build just that part(s) in question...

    Alasdair- The MOC is already done, and works. I want to have drawings for rebuilding and documentation.

    Than I am affraid you really have to disasseble you model and make "conversion" into some of LEGO CAD SW available: you have to "build" every layer one by one in such SW and then once you have you MOC "transfered" into digital world just print those "steps"/layers or use some other SW for creating building instructions...

  6. Thanks Bublible,

    Here's what I'm doing... I'm trying to create my three-story townhouse as a modular... it's skinny and tall, so I thought it would be a good practice building as I have a template to work off of. I've created the base and stairs for the first story, but am now ready to start on the second one... so I wasn't sure if I should just build the second story next to the first, then be able to highlight the entire thing to see how it fits, etc... I'm a beginner to LDD, so I didn't know that importing other files into one was possible, but I don't see the benefit in that. At the same time, I'm building a few of the modulars to learn more about them and get ideas on the actual build. Thanks!!

    Then definitely one file with groups: that way you can have visible only those floors you need, you can also subgroup them to smaller parts like stairs, windows, furniture etc. and once again let visible only those you need at the moment, very handy thing (I am using it constantly in a quite advanced way when grouping allows me rotating whole parts, for example)...

    As for the "I don't see the benefit in that": it has quite big impact as it is really important thing, look at it like this - let's say I am having my Techtroners line which, let's say, has to have some concrete parts in every Techtroners model, if there were no import option in LDD one would need to build those same parts on and on perpetually, but with import option you just save such part separately as lxf and import to every model you intend to use it in (now imagine if such part would consist of 500 bricks, you see now?) :wink:

    Ehm, of course: one could also just COPY the part from model it is in and paste into one that he wants to have it in but that would be a real drag, wouldn't it? :laugh:

  7. Hi

    Bluerender is a wonderful tool ! I have replaced my old POVRay and LDD2Povray with this faster and easier tool. It seems easy to make animation but I have not found any documentation about that, I think I missed it. Do you know where I can find it ?


    No, you cannot make animations as that in BlueRender - you can, on the other hand, make 360 degree presentation of your model (BlueRendr GUI -> Parameters tab -> enable steps). :wink:

  8. You have first answer yourself WHAT FOR YOU NEED IT?

    * in case you want to be able "manipulate" separately with every floor the best solution to me is GROUP EVERY FLOOR SEPARATELY - all would be in one .lxf file and still individual manipulation with floors possible...

    * in case you want to be able re-using individual floors across different models (.lxf files) then SEPARATE LXF FILE FOR EVERY FLOOR would be the right solution...

    I hope this kind of explanation actually help you to decide which way is the right one for you. :wink:

  9. Looks like Benny has a new ride, although it's pretty terrible:

    A poor design in my opinion, but I thought it was interesting. Check out those partially transparent engine tubes. It's from this image (warning: huge).

    I'm still bummed we never got this set.

    Eh, to me this one looks much better than the one you are linking to wishing it as a possible LEGO set - for some reason this "open" design (with that Exploriens panel, as @Artis mentioned) is much more ClassicSpace IMHO (well, in case CS is our aim, of course) :classic:

  10. Hey folks,

    Blundering my way through editing this .sc file and getting some test renders fired off on my iMac. I've figured out the resolution thing now, and I'm fiddling with FOV.... but I can't for the life of me CENTER the model in my render. Camera on model in LDD is centered exactly how I want it, but no matter what settings I try, the render always takes up about 2/3s of the space, always situated in the upper left corner of the 2560x1440 render, leaving a big fat border of background on the right and bottom. I want to fill my render edge to edge with the model.... what setting have I missed? I suspect it's got something to do with " transform row %LDDCAMERA% " but I can't figure out what to change with it. Any tips for a newb?

    Can you post both your lxf and sc so I can look at it?

  11. No, wait you put your effort in it, and that's more than enough I was just nitpicking. I approve of this design!!!

    Aha, OK then...thanx once more, I guess it is quite good model with modification which pushed it much further so we can be proud both! :wink::thumbup:

    You see: I could strip it for not important parts that just adding small final touches to it like those two blue metallic containers on its feet lower parts, scrapping the 2nd crane (the one with the grippler hand - I do not like it that much as the 1st one with the nice trans-purple chain and hook :laugh: ) and things like that but if it would add to its sleekness...well, I am not that sure.

  12. But that is exactly what are you looking at: final version is hybrid between your model (cos my re-colorisation was just that and nothing more - your model with my colors) and my additions (lots of modularity and other stuff which is simply "a must" for a Techtroners MOC) so there really is no chance of making it "sleeker" (if that is your intention) - in fact I have completelly walk thru al your bricks and I found many of them not necessary - they were removed as much as it was possible to, others changed for more economical version of their/your design - so the version you are looking at is the most economic one I was able to come up with yet still having all its modularity...sorry. :sad:

    That said: no problem, I just scrap it and will not add it to Techtronrs line tho I have to say it is pity cos normally I do not like mechs but this one got under my skin somehow (maybe because I made this beast from initial rather simple model that actually could not do nothing - it was just a model and that was it which in turn as I said before is simply not enough for Techtroners MOC). :devil::wink:

  13. Fine, here it is - prototype of our cooperation on your mech that would be implemented to my official Techtroners line (in case you approve it, of course) + later tomorrow I would post some other pictures of its modularitiy cos there is a lot of it there and from this one single image one cannot see it at all (click image for FullHD vrsion):


    purpose: transportation of several equipment attached to mech's body over Pluto's moon Charon difficult surface - has special ability of accumulating drinkable water from surrounding space and cultivating bio food thus making it pretty self sufficient in many cases, habitable for several days/weeks

    transported stuff: 1x small portable station, 2x small personal vehicle, 2x small personal craft, 1x satellite, 2x protected containers

    personal equipment: 1x hammer, 1x screwdriver, 1x metal detector, 1x spectro-camera

    equipment: 1x freely positioned crane with chained hook, 1x freely positioned crane with robotic grip-hand, 1x freely positioned radar dish, 1x smaller white special-purpose tank

    Techtroners: 2 minifigs

    modularity: driver/operator cabin can be folded down right to the ground, all legs and hands can be positioned freely, disconnectable satellite, small white tank can be attached to the rear of the small portable station, protected containers and two other black/trans-clear containers on portable station are disconnectable

    side note: those bottom 2 pictures are the final model - those 4 at the top has slightly different lowest part of the feet joint/connection that would not allow us position it freely when legs are wide apart - final version solved it :classic::wink:


  14. No that's why I should see it! ;)

    So should I PM it to you so we not come out with the design beforehand or here publicly right away? :laugh:

    BTW: I am making some additional final touches to it, like changing some vehicles to a different types (craft to automobile)...should I show it anyway (got only 1 first initial prototype render BUT you wont recognize cos I added so many modularities and additional stuff...only hoping you will like it)? :classic: