mfeldt

That sounds great, I'll give it a try! Thanks1

Actually i started thinking along the same line - maybe its related to the fact that it's a Linux version while lDraw is a windows version in a .wine directory on an ext4 filesystem. I'll need to check if something is special with that particular part.

I agree it's just a different concept than in LDD and it does in fact make sense, especially when you also have submodels. It just takes a while (well, half an hour or so) to get used to! One thing though: In LDD what I like especially is that you can quickly recolor a whole group of bricks with a single click to a new color - I do this all the time when generating instructions. In LDCad, since you have to use submodels, this is harder, since you firstly have to do it in the submodel itself, and secondly it will affect all the instances of the submodel simultaneously. In fact, re-coloring an individual instance appears to be impossible.

LeoCad is using the same version of lDraw as the other programs, from what I can see it's dating from 2014. It's the Linux version of LeoCad, I may add. And as said, LIC has the same problem... strange.

Hello, yesterday I encountered a strange problem when importing a .ldr file into LeoCad. It simply wouldn't show my 2 x 3 plate with hole, ldraw part 3176.dat. The part renders fine in MLCad, LDCad, LDView and the like, but it shows only the 4 studs in LIC (instruction creator) and LeoCad's part window, while not showing at all in the rendered models using the latter two. You can see the difference in the two images attached. My question is - is this a known phenomenon? Are more parts affected than just this one? How can a part like this be used in LeoCad or LIC? Thx m.

All of them appear to have some quirks... LDD has all the modern parts and "simply works" - it's designed for kids after all. It can actually also generate pretty decent instructions with a little bit of tuning groups and subgroups. However, it strictly prohibits "commercial use" (many others do as well...), so you can do little with the products other than using them for yourself. It's the only program that reliably avoids parts penetrating other parts. LeoCad - for me, it strangely omits some parts. Rather normal ones, perfectly present in lDraw - it just pretends they are not around. LDCad - to me seems the best after LDD, but group handling is rather inexplicable. There is apparently no way to access a group other than clicking on a part of it. When deleting a group and then pressing undo, the group is ungrouped... The submodel concept still has some bugs (e.g. when you start moving a selection to a submodel but then have second thoughts and abort, submodels in external files appear not to work at all). Building at strange angles produces funny results and it's hard to get everything rotated in a way that parts match (and snap!) properly. LDD does that an infinite number of times better. MLCad - sorry, the user interface is so outdated, that can hardly be called a 3D design software anymore SR 3D couldn't get it to run yet under wine.... So in short: I love to use LDD, it simply works, it makes sure that the results can really be built, it has a modern and intuitive user interface. However, for doing anything than admiring the results, due to license limitations I have to then convert the model to lDraw, which in itself is usually problematic since lDraw is missing *a lot* of parts. When these are tediously collected from the net, added to the library and then manually in LDCad, instruction building starts. This is unfortunately never as easy as in LDD, although the images finally produced by tool chain ending up in povray do arguably look a lot better!

I'd say the guy is... - selling a bunch of bricks that are his property - legitimate - selling a model that he built - legitimate - selling something that is based upon someone else's ideas without giving credit - not legitimate. Except for the last point, I do not see a strong problem. I wouldn't even if someone made a decent instruction and sold those, since creating actual, well-done instructions is - in my experience - as much work, and just as much a creative effort as developing the original design. Sorry for all of those that do not like this practise of eraning money froms omeone else's ideas, but please - if you don't want that, make sure that your positngs are accompanied by a specific licence about what can and what cannot be done with your images/files.

Why not make a video of the song...?

May I ask what are those pieces that connect the wheels to the wire-rods? Techic or mindstorms elements?

There's a modern day variant in operation in form of the Padova Tram: http://www.metrotram.it/index.php?vmcity=PADOVA&vmsys=tgo&ind=0&num=6〈=eng Maybe also something for Lego?

I just installed brickficiency and wanted to be impressed... however, it cannot get any info from bricklink stores. As a remedy it suggests to log in, however the answer is always "Invalid Username or Password". I know that what I'm typing is not wrong, but maybe there's a problem with some special characters in the pwd? Is there a log anywhere where one could check?

Of course I did not... thanks a lot for the reference!

Hello, I'M thinking about making a camera dolly from techic parts, and for driving it I'd like to have it sort of clamped on a timing belt. As the envisioned length of that belt is between 4 and 9 metres, I'd prefer using a standard part rather than trying to make one from tiny Lego chainlets... Did anyone ever try to run Lego tooth wheels on, say, a standard GT2 timing belt as used in many printers? Which ones might fit? Thx m.