#openscad — Public Fediverse posts
Live and recent posts from across the Fediverse tagged #openscad, aggregated by home.social.
-
@tj Is there an open-source CAD program that has a GUI? That would help a lot, especially for kids transitioning from TinkerCAD to Fusion 360.
-
If you use CAD software and care about properly owning what you make:
Do not use Onshape.
Do not use Fusion360 (or any other Autodesk product).
Using these tools binds your work to someone else's profit motives. You are a temporary guest in their house. They *will* fuck you over the moment they decide they can make more money by doing so.
#freecad and #openscad are incredible tools. Learn them and become free.
-
🎉 Wow, folks! This groundbreaking article reveals the earth-shattering news that Google Antigravity 2.0 can, in fact, build a virtual Pantheon model. 🏛️ As if #OpenSCAD wasn't already thrilling enough, now we have an entire lineup of AI tools competing to see who can model ancient architecture more efficiently—hold onto your seats! 🚀
https://modelrift.com/blog/openscad-llm-benchmark/ #GoogleAntigravity2.0 #VirtualPantheon #AItools #AncientArchitecture #HackerNews #ngated -
Antigravity 2.0 Tops the OpenSCAD Architectural 3D LLM Benchmark
https://modelrift.com/blog/openscad-llm-benchmark/
#HackerNews #Antigravity #2.0 #OpenSCAD #3DPrinting #LLMBenchmark #Architecture
-
Antigravity 2.0 Tops the OpenSCAD Architectural 3D LLM Benchmark
https://modelrift.com/blog/openscad-llm-benchmark/
#HackerNews #Antigravity #2.0 #OpenSCAD #3DPrinting #LLMBenchmark #Architecture
-
Antigravity 2.0 Tops the OpenSCAD Architectural 3D LLM Benchmark
https://modelrift.com/blog/openscad-llm-benchmark/
#HackerNews #Antigravity #2.0 #OpenSCAD #3DPrinting #LLMBenchmark #Architecture
-
Antigravity 2.0 Tops the OpenSCAD Architectural 3D LLM Benchmark
https://modelrift.com/blog/openscad-llm-benchmark/
#HackerNews #Antigravity #2.0 #OpenSCAD #3DPrinting #LLMBenchmark #Architecture
-
Antigravity 2.0 Tops the OpenSCAD Architectural 3D LLM Benchmark
https://modelrift.com/blog/openscad-llm-benchmark/
#HackerNews #Antigravity #2.0 #OpenSCAD #3DPrinting #LLMBenchmark #Architecture
-
#hyperbook v0.94.0 introduced the #OpenSCAD element:
Drop in your .scad code and get an interactive 3D viewer inline. Great for documentation, tutorials, and teaching parametric modeling.
-
@ianp5a @LovesTha I've managed to mash-up a few designs (like attaching #gridfinity bases to existing designs) in #tinkercad but so far my experiences with #freecad have been frustrating. I suspect once there are more tutorials for the latest release that will help but for a novice like me tinkercad works really well. The advantage of adding the handles to a parametric baseplate in #openscad was I didn't have to redo for each grid layout.
-
@ianp5a @LovesTha I've managed to mash-up a few designs (like attaching #gridfinity bases to existing designs) in #tinkercad but so far my experiences with #freecad have been frustrating. I suspect once there are more tutorials for the latest release that will help but for a novice like me tinkercad works really well. The advantage of adding the handles to a parametric baseplate in #openscad was I didn't have to redo for each grid layout.
-
@ianp5a @LovesTha I've managed to mash-up a few designs (like attaching #gridfinity bases to existing designs) in #tinkercad but so far my experiences with #freecad have been frustrating. I suspect once there are more tutorials for the latest release that will help but for a novice like me tinkercad works really well. The advantage of adding the handles to a parametric baseplate in #openscad was I didn't have to redo for each grid layout.
-
@ianp5a @LovesTha I've managed to mash-up a few designs (like attaching #gridfinity bases to existing designs) in #tinkercad but so far my experiences with #freecad have been frustrating. I suspect once there are more tutorials for the latest release that will help but for a novice like me tinkercad works really well. The advantage of adding the handles to a parametric baseplate in #openscad was I didn't have to redo for each grid layout.
-
@ianp5a @LovesTha I've managed to mash-up a few designs (like attaching #gridfinity bases to existing designs) in #tinkercad but so far my experiences with #freecad have been frustrating. I suspect once there are more tutorials for the latest release that will help but for a novice like me tinkercad works really well. The advantage of adding the handles to a parametric baseplate in #openscad was I didn't have to redo for each grid layout.
-
Excited to announce the new era of terminal apps! 🎉
🐀 **ratSCAD** — CAD for the terminal!
🧀 Terminal IDE for OpenSCAD with live 3D previews.
🦀 Made possible by Ratty terminal: https://github.com/orhun/ratty
⭐ GitHub: https://github.com/qewer33/ratscad
-
Working in code is much easier than trying to align and drop things with the #freecad tools. I need a better way cut out the excess though - some sort of plane operation? I think I'll use more #openscad in future. https://github.com/stsquad/gridfinity-rebuilt-openscad/tree/add-handle
-
Today I'm experimenting to see if I can avoid learning #freecad and instead just #vibe in #openscad to add handles to a #gridfinity baseplate.
-
Today I'm experimenting to see if I can avoid learning #freecad and instead just #vibe in #openscad to add handles to a #gridfinity baseplate.
-
I love it when a plan comes together... #CatEars #BadgeLife #OpenSCAD
-
I love it when a plan comes together... #CatEars #BadgeLife #OpenSCAD
-
I love it when a plan comes together... #CatEars #BadgeLife #OpenSCAD
-
I love it when a plan comes together... #CatEars #BadgeLife #OpenSCAD
-
I love it when a plan comes together... #CatEars #BadgeLife #OpenSCAD
-
Just designed and printed a vinyl record stand, but somehow something went wrong while printing 🤔
-
Just designed and printed a vinyl record stand, but somehow something went wrong while printing 🤔
-
Just designed and printed a vinyl record stand, but somehow something went wrong while printing 🤔
-
Just designed and printed a vinyl record stand, but somehow something went wrong while printing 🤔
-
Just designed and printed a vinyl record stand, but somehow something went wrong while printing 🤔
-
-
-
-
-
-
Modéliser vite-fait une pièce pour caler la caméra (dashcam) sur le vélo avec OpenSCAD.
-
Modéliser vite-fait une pièce pour caler la caméra (dashcam) sur le vélo avec OpenSCAD.
-
Modéliser vite-fait une pièce pour caler la caméra (dashcam) sur le vélo avec OpenSCAD.
-
Modéliser vite-fait une pièce pour caler la caméra (dashcam) sur le vélo avec OpenSCAD.
-
CW: Advice/opinions from visual art coders/pixel artists needed
So, I'm working on a library that aims to recreate the experience of using #OpenSCAD but for #pixelart. I decided to use js because that is what I am familiar with.
I'm between two approaches: one passes around images, so you are passing function results to transformation functions. This means you need an outside `draw()` function to draw the final image and a `merge()` function every time you need to combine images (just like in JSCAD union() is not implied).
This looks like this
draw(
merge(
translate([15,-5], merge(
translate([20,20],p("black")),
translate([31,31],p("black"))
)),
translate([21,21],rect([10,10],"black"))
)
)This implementation looks clean and I have a hunch that it will enable stuff like filtering or more complex image manipulation on the result of part of the pipeline.
The other approach, uses canvas context to translate/rotate the origin around and back, so you pass functions around. This looks more like OpenSCAD and it simplifies the library code significantly (I don't need to create offscreen canvases for every new item) but it makes the drawing code very idiosyncratically js, i.e. full of various kinds of brackets.
translate([15,-5],()=>{
translate([20,20],()=>{p("black")});
translate([34,34],()=>{p("black")});
})
translate([21,21],()=>{rect([10,10],"black")});I also have the feeling that with this approach I will at some point hit a wall because I will never really have an "instance" of a module/part/call-it-what-you-want. On the other hand, passing around code seems more versatile but I don't know why.
What do you prefer as a user of this thing? What would you choose as the creator of the library? What's the best coding practice in your opinion?
If you have followers that might have some input, please boost.
-
CW: Advice/opinions from visual art coders/pixel artists needed
So, I'm working on a library that aims to recreate the experience of using #OpenSCAD but for #pixelart. I decided to use js because that is what I am familiar with.
I'm between two approaches: one passes around images, so you are passing function results to transformation functions. This means you need an outside `draw()` function to draw the final image and a `merge()` function every time you need to combine images (just like in JSCAD union() is not implied).
This looks like this
draw(
merge(
translate([15,-5], merge(
translate([20,20],p("black")),
translate([31,31],p("black"))
)),
translate([21,21],rect([10,10],"black"))
)
)This implementation looks clean and I have a hunch that it will enable stuff like filtering or more complex image manipulation on the result of part of the pipeline.
The other approach, uses canvas context to translate/rotate the origin around and back, so you pass functions around. This looks more like OpenSCAD and it simplifies the library code significantly (I don't need to create offscreen canvases for every new item) but it makes the drawing code very idiosyncratically js, i.e. full of various kinds of brackets.
translate([15,-5],()=>{
translate([20,20],()=>{p("black")});
translate([34,34],()=>{p("black")});
})
translate([21,21],()=>{rect([10,10],"black")});I also have the feeling that with this approach I will at some point hit a wall because I will never really have an "instance" of a module/part/call-it-what-you-want. On the other hand, passing around code seems more versatile but I don't know why.
What do you prefer as a user of this thing? What would you choose as the creator of the library? What's the best coding practice in your opinion?
If you have followers that might have some input, please boost.
-
CW: Advice/opinions from visual art coders/pixel artists needed
So, I'm working on a library that aims to recreate the experience of using #OpenSCAD but for #pixelart. I decided to use js because that is what I am familiar with.
I'm between two approaches: one passes around images, so you are passing function results to transformation functions. This means you need an outside `draw()` function to draw the final image and a `merge()` function every time you need to combine images (just like in JSCAD union() is not implied).
This looks like this
draw(
merge(
translate([15,-5], merge(
translate([20,20],p("black")),
translate([31,31],p("black"))
)),
translate([21,21],rect([10,10],"black"))
)
)This implementation looks clean and I have a hunch that it will enable stuff like filtering or more complex image manipulation on the result of part of the pipeline.
The other approach, uses canvas context to translate/rotate the origin around and back, so you pass functions around. This looks more like OpenSCAD and it simplifies the library code significantly (I don't need to create offscreen canvases for every new item) but it makes the drawing code very idiosyncratically js, i.e. full of various kinds of brackets.
translate([15,-5],()=>{
translate([20,20],()=>{p("black")});
translate([34,34],()=>{p("black")});
})
translate([21,21],()=>{rect([10,10],"black")});I also have the feeling that with this approach I will at some point hit a wall because I will never really have an "instance" of a module/part/call-it-what-you-want. On the other hand, passing around code seems more versatile but I don't know why.
What do you prefer as a user of this thing? What would you choose as the creator of the library? What's the best coding practice in your opinion?
If you have followers that might have some input, please boost.
