#11
|
|||
|
|||
Wow!!! OMG those are amazing instructions!!! Thank you so much you just gave me a huge confidence boost!
|
#12
|
||||
|
||||
We look forward to seeing your instructions.
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
I would just like to add that the isometric representation, and the axonometric and dimetric representations, are not projections, but rather use projections that are already available in 3D graphics programs with the represented objects placed in a particular way with respect to the main axes and planes. It is therefore possible (with one reservation) to produce these representations from a 3D model.
The axonometric representation uses the parallel projection and the isometric and dimetric ones use the perspective projection. For example, assume you've got a cube with its base in the x-z plane and a face parallel to the x-y plane. If you rotate it around the line from the center point of its base and parallel to the y-axis by 45°, tip it by 35°16' and apply the perspective projection using an appropriately placed focus, you get the isometric representation. With the dimetric representation, you would rotate the cube by 20°40' and tip it by 19°26'. I've kind of glossed over where to put the focus. The reason is that the book I'm referring to for the procedure assumes the reader is doing the drawings by hand using vanishing points. This is a method that makes it possible to make a projection without directly manipulating 3D data but it is inferior to the way it's done in 3D graphics programs, which use matrix multiplication. For the isometric representation, the focus should probably be on a line from the center of the edge of the cube that faces the viewer, parallel to the x-z plane. The reservation I mentioned is that the book says that foreshortening is ignored along lines parallel to the main axes in the "technical" isometric representation and in some but not all lines in the "technical" dimetric representation. This makes it possible to take measurements along the lines that aren't foreshortened. The computer won't do this, at least, not without a lot of extra effort, that wouldn't be worth it, in my opinion. If I were to ever do this, I would just note on the drawing that measurements can't be taken from the drawing, but I would do all the measurements I thought might be needed using the computer and print the values on the drawing. You could always create the drawing again if you needed different measurements. I've always planned to test this sometime but have never gotten around to it. The book I referred to is Böttcher/Forberg, Technisches Zeichnen, which won't do you any good unless you can read German. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
It would be helpful if you would quote the posts that you're replying to, so that readers of this thread would know what you're referring to in your own posts.
|
#15
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
This is one of the best websites you will ever find. Members and Admin really want to help, and insure that new members are well taken care of. Please ask more questions when you run across problems. Might jog our memory of how we fixed the same questions. Or help us with similar challenges. Very Happy you joined. Looking forward to you next project! Interested how you decide to show your instructions. Please share once you are working on them. Mike |
Google Adsense |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
What I meant was, if you're using a GUI application, you could edit the drawing or if you're using something like MetaPost or 3DLDF, you could edit the source code and run the program again to generate the drawing again with the desired changes. Obviously, you wouldn't have to do the whole thing again from scratch. There was plenty of that in the "bad old days".
|
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Yes that is true!! I will.
|
Tags |
how to, inkscape, instructions, model, pencil |
|
|