hrontos

I had the same problem, still not resolved.

May be access rights are the source of the problems. As the program tries to create some config file, it crashes. I run it on Win7 Home Premium 64bit, without problems. By the way, what happens if you export BrickStore settings using RegEdit and import it as BrickStock settings. Will it start working? I know, it is annoying, if you cannot configure it directly, but it may be still kind of workaround. BrickStore settings are in: HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\softforge\BrickStore. BrickStock settings are in: HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\patrickbrans.com\BrickStock Just export the BrickStore settings into reg file, do some search/replace in some editor and import it back to registry by double clicking on the reg file.

I am glad it worked. Do not forget to backup old DB. Removed the link. LZMA is a newer file format with better compression ratio than ZIP. May be that's the reason why it no longer works with BrickStore,

I am not sure if BrickStore can handle also the .lzma version, since such a file was not present in the BrickStore directory, so I uploaded zipped version here. I will remove the link, after Blackbird will download it.

Yes, you can use the database. I did a quick test by copying DB from BrickStock to BrickStore and the part 15100 appears in BrickStore. BrickStock DB is about 4MB zipped. A bit problematic to share.

May be even us parents are pushing TLG to RC. When there is a 120eur model first question asked by parents is if it is a RC model. In that price range parents somehow expect the RC. Moreover, with RC it is no longer a construction toy for 12+ ages. The same model becomes a RC toy for 8+ ages. Daddy helps building it and from that moment it is a RC. Kid will not try to disassemble it, rebuild, start create their own models. Especially when it is only 8+. It's a pitty. Since 12+ old kids focus on electronic toys, tablet, computers. It looks like TLG is trying to attract their attention and at the same time the atttention of 8+ kids which are able to play RC, but building technic is not for them. For me, PF are interesting only as long as it is not overdone. A model with 10 functions powered by 10 motors, virtually no gears, since each motor almost directly controls one function is overdone for me. Model with 10 functions, powered by 4,5,6 motors with some gearbox for selecting functions is perfect technic model enhanced by PF. Model powered by only one motor with many functions purely mechanicaly and automaticaly changed are one of my favourites. Brick sorting machines made by various people, braiding machine made by nico71 are nice examples of true technic constructions. They would be easily made with many motors, but with only one motor chanllenge is higher. Of course, there are some cases, when not enough motors and too much gear boxes and changing gears ruin the playability. Just like too many motors ruin the technic.

This is really nice how you managed to really play the Rubik's cube in the LDD.

LDD2POV generates minimum ini file which contains some output quality settings. When you "render" it, settings will apply. When you render pov fille directly, quality settings depend on what you selected in POV-Ray's GUI, entered in the ini files etc. That's why your output might be completely different quality and resolution.

It's a bit difficult, what the source of the problem with missing lights. You mentioned that you pasted some own source code for lights. If you will share it with us, may be we can help you find the source of the error.

No, once povray.ini is saved, it will be loaded whenever POV-Ray is started.

Anywhere. Order of lines is not important, each setting has to start on a new line like this: Library_Path="\\.\LDDIncludes" No space, semicolon or whatever before it.

As it was mentioned in some other question about maximizing clutch gear performance, the answer to your question depends on what drive train you will have before and after clutch gear. The ratio before the clutch gear determines if motor will have enough torque to activate the clutch without getting stalled. If motor is geared up too much, it will get stalled even with one clutch gear. The ratio after the clutch gear determines if the clutch will provide enough protection for the drive train. For example, if you reduce it after clutch gear 1:80, t will be able to break gears and u-joints even with clutch being installed.

Thank you for this info, I did not make any measurement myself, so this is useful for me.

The povray.ini file is a general configuration file of the POV-Ray. You can access it from Tools menu by clicking "Edit master POVRAY.INI" You have there somewhere the following line: Library_Path="\\.\LDDIncludes" For the other options that are configurable using this ini file, please, check the POV-Ray's help, but for "our basic rendering" you will not need to play with that file at all.

This looks like you did not added \\.\LDDIncludes as a library path to the povray.ini. LDD2POV when you click "Yes" to start POV-Ray passes lights.ini as a file to POV-Ray. Not the lights.pov. Lights.ini contain also the necessary library path and selected output settings. If you render using ini file, modification of povray.ini is not necessary. If you render using pov file, modification of povray.ini is necessary (or you have to add library path using command line arguments to POV-Ray).

Jim, could you please, make some suggestion to make it look more like model team? Does it lack some details? It is not vehicle. And if it is 1/90 scale, details are difficult to make since bricks are not small enough. Or is it missing some functionality? I am trying to learn, where the model team starts.

I agree, but I would not enforce this by rules. I am pretty sure, that everybody will try to make the model look best, so the render/photo/screenshot is custom decision of everybody. I can imagine many people not having patience/experience with rendering and if they will not learn, they will not earn the points. Jury will really see who made it just as quick as possible and who really invested some bricks or time to make the entry look best. And it should be visible on voting results. Of course, taking screenshot of a whole desktop with mailbox behind is not acceptable.

I understand, that people are cheating during elections, Miss Universe, Tour de France, Olympic games etc... But during AFOL community contest? I hope that everybody want to be a fair competitor and we will not ask Jim for army information system security measures.

Yes, this is definitely true. Real model has to stand, functions has to work. On the other hand, rules are quite "open" in the way a model should be presented. Video is not obligatory and that means, that from photos it is actually impossible to judge if the chassis is really strong, if the functions really work without grinding and damaging gears, if there are not illegal building techniques etc. Just the same problem as from the digital pictures. So actually taking a good photo is the main challenge. For kids competitions I would not allow digital entries. My goal is to get kids away from computer as far as possible, since these days kids spend a lot of time there. For AFOLs it is for me only a matter of personal taste. I am working with a computer in the office, so real bricks are better for me. But that's not a reason why I should find unfair if somebody will participate with digital entries. I would like to see many nice, good looking models and if there will be some minor structural flaws, they can be fixed, idea is important.

Yes, with digital builds number of parts is not limited. That's why I suggested digital entries only for C-model contest. I think in case of C-model contest digital entries are acceptable since they do not give any real advanatage. For me the digital entries would be also acceptable also for the model team contest but I also understand why they are not allowed. I am just affraid that number of entries will not be so high, since the size limits are quite high and therefore only more experienced collectors/builders will have enough bricks in right colors.

This is true, but only few voters really judge the entries. Most of them judge only by first look and in that case bigger is better. Only few voters care about good functions or smart use of parts. Thats why I would suggest selecting a particular set and allow digital entries. It sounds like a good idea to create a C-models contest for 2 mid-range sets each year. Or one for small and one for mid-range set. The idea that digital design is an aid and not a final product is good. On the other hand following it strictly is may be pedagogical, educational or whatever but it is mainly a bareer that prevents some people from participating in the contest. Even TLG recognized it during 41999 new crawler body design and they allowed any form of design. Drawing is may be too far from the final product, but digital entries are not that far.

This is something, that has been mentioned several times in exactly opposite direction. There were some doubts about structural integrity of the real entries. Even in the last MINI contest is was mentioned, that digital file should be obligatory so that trained eye can check the rigidity of the model. Yes, it is possible, that digital model will not stay together, just like in case of a real model it is possible, that it only stays together but nothing more - no rigidity, no proper bracing of gears, possibly illegal building techniques etc.

Thank you. You are right, it is part number 50904

There are some tricks how to make it faster. Either by composing the result as mentioned here or by rebuilding the transparent area from smaller transparent bricks (8x8 transparent plate renders much more slowly than 64 1x1 plates). "Don't bevel transparent parts" will also speed things up.

With 4 buggy motors it going to have a monster power. Looking forward to see it driving. By the way what are those gray parts with 3+3 pin holes seen on this picture: