Superkalle

It's not a taboo subject to talk about if you can or can't add geometries. The issue comes when you slip into talking about how to do it. So why is this? Let me discuss this, not adressed to you Trenton, but to everyone reading this: First of all, LDD is a proprietary software that opposed to Ldraw for example, is not meant to be open for tweaking or adding bricks. One of the problems with adding custom bricks and decorations is if you decided to share the MOC, custom bricks inside it will not be seen by others (you'll get the dreaded "X bricks removed from the model"). Sure, you could share the tweaked brickset also then, but there is not "central point of update" as with Ldraw. For personal use this may not matter (i.e you never intend to share the LXF-files and hence not the brickset), but the risk is always that you eventually start sharing your files anyway. Also, since LDD is not meant for adding custom bricks, the built in update functionality will overwrite any custom bricks. Sure, that can be worked around too, but you get the point. And no, I'm not trying to be a judge over what people can and can't do in a free world, just pointing out some core issues and that LDD is not open-source, but owned by TLG. It might be worth more for the community of LDD users are such to just be content with the bricks that are in side LDD, so that we can all rely on a common platform/standard. Secondly, and most importanly, since LDD is proprietary, we in the community don't want to alienate us with TLG. This is the standpoint from both EB as a whole, and this subforum. We have a good relationship with the guys in the LDD Team, for example that they add legacy bricks and take up requests for new bricks. To be honest, this forum is the only on the internet (besides LEGO's own for children) that deal with LDD on this scale and that the LDD Team uses for reference, so I think it's more worth that we play by the rules, then to start talking about cracking the software. And finally, we want to avoid that this forum to turn into a hang-out for people that are more interested in the challenge of software cracking then they are in actually designing/building/rendering with LDD/LEGO/Ldraw. Having said all this, I don't mind talking about these standpoints above, so if you have any comments, please post! But, to conclude, at EB and in this forum please don't: Ask for how to crack LDD or add custom bricks Link to cracked version of LDD or articles of how to crack LDD. Discuss how to get around copy protection or using LDD restricted in any way by the LDD EULA (End User Licence Agreement).

Great Generally it is important that the models in this topic are as accurate as possible so they can be used for reference in the future

I looked at the instructions and noted that the 41747 and 41748 mentioned seems to actually be two dark grey 41762 (which will then fit). I also noted that the 41747 and 41748 placed at the rear of the ship are dark grey in your build, but I believe they should be light grey,

I'm closing this topic as indicated back in July. Thanks for all the great index entries everyone and do keep posting your LDD MOCs in the appropriate theme forums here at EB. (tip: tag them with LDD+MOC and it will be possible to easily search for them)

I am trying hard to see how that would fit even with physcal bricks. Closing the roof must must squeeze the walls/hinges outwards? Anyone has the set and can see?

That's funny, I actually never took notice of this until now. For example placing 2x3 brick is pretty difficult until you "come in from the side". But this makes me curious - is there any brick that just can't be placed in the box at all with the "normal" methods. You mentioned there should be some, but which? No, that's actually the term for it

Glad you solved it. And welcome into the world of LDD. It's not a perfect tool, but the pros beat the cons. Tip: If you want to make a ball in the future, the best way is to use one of the Ldraw sphere generators, and then import the .ldr-file. There should be a couple of old topics here in the forum also about making balls. Search and hopefully you'll find them. PS: There's a lot of different CAD-tools being discussed in the forum, so I added a "LDD" to your topic title for clarification

My tip is that you slide the 2x 98546 apart a bit so you can squeeze the ball in between.That way the model looks more complete

I may have solved it. What I did was this: 1) Moved the 2x grey 41531 to the side 2) insert a temporary 3.2 mm bar in the front of the engine (i.e. in the top of the cone). 3) Rotated the entire engine assembly 5 degrees 4) reattached 2x grey 41531 5) Copied and replaced the entire engine to the other side. Note: the engines are not perfectly mirrored. The 1x3 plate is facing outwards on the left engine, but inward on the right. Is that a problem in relation to what the building instruction says? 75092 fix.lxf

What if you rotate the assembly of the 2x60208 a few degrees. Will not the 1x3 plates fit then?

Moving this topic into Town forum.

Moderator message I'm jumping in for Jim who's on vacation: Guys, let's keep the discussion as high quality as we can, and refrain from the "I'm very patient" type posts (and replies) that doesn't add to the topic. Thanks!

Thanks. Always curious to see what's working and not.... The tile thing could possibly be fixed by nudging the angles a bit since the clips don't fully attach in one end of the bow-of-three. Not sure....

Where were those parts placed?

That was well done Calabar. I tried to open the file in winzip, but it gave me parsing error.

I think RoxYourBlox is giving a fair and honest statement. It is in fact odd and a bit poor that TLG has not been able to communicate better with us. And that they don't invest at least a few manhours in updating the LDD software (GUI etc). I don't see it as rage. If they have a product out there, why not keep it up to standard? Even if it's free. At the same time I think you have a point too ThorsHammer. TLG is doing what they can as they see fit. And they have indeed kept the brickset updated pretty good through the years, even though it has been driven mostly by as few individuals around the LDD Team.

Hi and welcome to the forum. I helped you with a bit more descriptive post title

This great magazine needs no introduction and you know the drill. Just go ahead and download here and if you feel like it, join the discussion here Also, I'd like to say thank you to Carlos at Hispabrick for great co-operation over the years and welcome to lluisgib who is taking over his role.

Based on bits and pieces I've picked up over the years, my picture is that TLG doesn't officially use LDD for their internal digital design, but that there are a few designers that use it for mocking up and sketching. For finalizing the model, they then move on to an internal pro-tool. As a side note, this is where the LXF-format comes in handy - it's the same format for both tools. I was able to see this once on a fan event, how they opened a LXF model from LDD directly in their pro-tool, and then got all the high Level-of-Detail bricks. It's looked stunning. About the future of LDD - my personal view is that TLG seems to be focusing most effort on play related digital tools, such as Worlds. But Worlds will never be a true digital LEGO editor IMHO - that is not the intent, and to do any kind of serious design work, you need a specialized tool with the features that come with it. In Worlds you build "in-context" to do simple things for the play experience. It's a Minecraft challenger LDD is as a great intermediary between digital and physical, and I hope TLG is not giving up on it's only true digital building tool for their customers - I mean, even kids would eventually like to design something a bit more complicated then a simple car or house in Worlds. My biggest worry is that that more senior management at LEGO are unaware of LDD and how popular it is and that TLG need a true digital building tool.

No news from me, and I have no clue what's happening either. As I've said before, the only thing to do is to act - contact TLG one way or the other and raise your concerns.

According to BrickLink, only a couple of non transparent door fits the 6154, but I guess you already checked that. Besides that, at least I don't know any glass that would fit.

It's a known error. I believe it has to do with the algorithm that searches for connections. For some cases it fails.

I've actually already sent this bug report in some time ago, so I guess we'll have to wait and see. (PS: Cool idea BTW )

Over in the Digital Design forum, Scrubs (author of Mecabricks) has posted a pretty amazing picture by Zanna after MOCs by Stanislav94. The model was built with Mecabricks, the rendering done in Blender and everything touched up in Photoshop. Check out this and more here

I'll send it in as an error report and we'll see what happens and if there is an update.