|
|
In lugnet.dear-lego, Chris Marx wrote:
> I would love to see TLG develop a marble run/ball track theme. Marble run toys
> are my favorites next to LEGO and it would be great if I could bring the two
> together.
I agree, this is an excellent suggestion, and in fact it is a mystery to me that
they are not doing it already. A few carefully designed specialised parts would
almost certainly increase the mass appeal of such sets. While making tracks
with existing parts is of course possible, it can be quite tricky and time
consuming. It would be very natural to have something that could be snapped
together with less fuss...
|
|
|
In lugnet.dear-lego, Bart Wistuk wrote:
> To all:
> I made a Lego Marble Run - made entirely out of Legos (acutally my
> children and I did). You can view the results here:
Wow - that's amazing, congratulations! I (and I expect others) would be very
glad to see some close-up photos showing exactly how your construction works...
|
|
|
In lugnet.ambassadors, Jean-Marc Nimal wrote:
> {I also posted this
> <http://www.meltingbricks.net/articles/2009/07/13/thoughts-on-lego-non-disclosure-agreement/lang-pref/en/
> as an article> on my own site but there isn't more to read over there, unless
> you want to browse 1+ year-old archives of silly stuff.}¬¬ Now that the next
> cycle of LEGO Ambassadors is beginning, and I'm not part of the program for
> this cycle, I'd like to share some thoughts I have about it. While there is
> of course a lot to be said about the Ambassadors program, I'll focus on the
> Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA) in particular, as I feel it's a seldom
> discussed but important aspect of the program.
>
> SNIP!
>
> So, as newly appointed Ambassador, should you sign the NDA? That's
> a personal question. I'd advise so, unless maybe if you're afraid to have to
> pay more attention to what you say. I remember someone last year saying that
> it was what the community he represented would expect from him. I don't think
> he actually asked them, but that would probably the wisest choice: discuss it
> with your community, and ask them what they think of it.¬¬ You do represent
> them, after all.
While I may not be an Ambassador, I feel I can offer some guidance as to why the
NDA may scare people. I think it's mainly because most people don't deal with
them every day. It's a case of fear of the unknown and what the consequences
will be if they breach it. Being the litigious society we are, everyone is
scared they are going to be penalized to the fullest extent if they slip. The
reality is probably much less severe. As I deal with these on a regular basis
(1-2 per week), I've become used to the language and what the NDA is trying to
protect.
In a nutshell, you should think about the information and whether it would be
useful to the competition. If it involves any pre-release set information, it's
probably best kept confidential until the set is released. The main goal of the
NDA is to keep competitors of TLG from getting any kind of leg up on the
development cycle. Adhering to the NDA is general common sense. If the
information is available anywhere in the public domain, it's probably fair game.
Again, I haven't read the NDA specifically...but I imagine it looks very similar
to what we use at work. I imagine there is also a 'reverse engineering' clause
in there somewhere.
So should a person sign it? I don't see why not. As you mention, it's a
personal choice though. I just don't think there is as much to be afraid of as
many people think. :-)
-Dave
ToT-LUG
|
|
|
I also posted this
as an article on my own site but there isnt more to read over there, unless
you want to browse 1+ year-old archives of silly stuff.
Now that the next
cycle of LEGO Ambassadors is beginning, and Im not part of the program for this
cycle, Id like to share some thoughts I have about it. While there is of course
a lot to be said about the Ambassadors program, Ill focus on the Non-Disclosure
Agreement (NDA) in particular, as I feel its a seldom discussed but important
aspect of the program.
Up to cycle 5, the NDA was mandatory - the very first
thing you needed to do before jumping in would be signing it, along with a
release form. The exact terms of the NDA are presumably not a secret, since
people receiving it arent under NDA; but they arent very interesting either -
in a nutshell, youre not supposed to disclose secrets you might encounter while
doing your Ambassador work. Or, I assume, any other work you might do for LEGO
under another NDA.
So far, so good. LEGO protects his assets, which is
understandable. Actually, the fact that theyre even willing to share
information with simple customers shows that theyre much more open than a lot
of other companies. That said, the amount of confidential information I
personally received as Ambassador during cycle 5 wasnt extremely high either.
Of course, I cant say anything about it; lets just say that most of it were
pre-release pictures of upcoming sets, and not even long before release. Ive
seen preliminary pictures of the Eiffel Tower set, for example.
Ooops.
I
dont know if you noticed, but I did just breach the NDA: I just disclosed some
of the confidential information I came in contact with at the time. Granted, the
breach is minimal, since I dont upload the pictures themselves, and the set is
since long on the shelves so you didnt learn anything of value, but its still
a breach. Actually, Im lucky, I realized it just in time, so I still can ask
for permission to publish this article and cover myself.
OK, Steve approves.
Pfew, that was close. Thanks, Steve!
This brings me to what I consider the one
big problem of the NDA: it scares people. Most of the time, I was afraid to say
anything because it didnt know if I was allowed or not. And I dont think Im
the only one, our discussion forums during cycle 5 were littered with questions
like May we share this information?, which wasted valuable time from the LEGO
Community Team.
Most importantly, the LEGO community at large got the
impression that Ambassadors werent allowed to say anything, and were forced to
silence, nearly vanishing from the online world altogether. Some resented this
as a fracture between the Ambassadors and the community. Which was Not Good™,
considering Ambassadors are there to represent the community.
Maybe I
exaggerate the fear. As far as I can see, the Ambassadors are usually perfectly
able to decide whether the information they so much want to share with their
fellow fans is OK or not. Still, when in doubt, shutting up has always been a
safe choice.
On the other hand, there wasnt always much to say. The term
Ambassador is really an ambiguous one, most of the time understood by fans as
Ambassadors from LEGO to the community. Whereas it means Ambassadors from the
community to LEGO. The difference is important: our job is to relay your
desires, your complaints, your wishes to LEGO. Everything you want to say to
LEGO but dont know how can go through an Ambassador. While we do relay some
information from LEGO to fans from time to time, it is not the main purpose of
the program as I see it.
But back on topic. LEGO involves fans for much more
than the Ambassadors, for example for workshops (think about Power Functions or
Mindstorms), and there the information is much more sensitive (even showing fans
actual prototypes). There is no question that the NDA is vital there. But for
Ambassadors, wasnt it more of a nuisance?
If theres one good thing to say
about cycle 5, its that we were able to think clearly about the program itself
and how it should evolve. Maybe we did less LEGO-related stuff because of that,
I dont know, but this was necessary to ensure the program would thrive in the
future. Among other issues, we pointed out the NDA, and LEGO understood there
was a problem with it.
However, suppressing it would mean LEGO wouldnt be
able to consult Ambassadors on confidential matters, which would have been a
loss, so they did the next best thing: for cycle 6, they made it optional.
The
way it was done was that a part of the discussions would still be under NDA, and
only Ambassadors willing to sign it would have access to that. Everything else -
not covered by NDA. This allowed not only to allow people not to sign it if they
didnt want to, but more importantly, it allowed for a very clear and simple way
to identify confidential and non-confidential information.
When we were asked
whether wed sign the NDA or not, there was an overwhelming yes response. In a
way, that surprised me, as I had the impression more people were actively
against it. I myself had discussed the matter a lot (consider what Ive just
written so far and youll get an idea of how verbose I can be), so I felt I
needed not to sign it to be able to witness the difference. Im spoiler-hungry,
so this wasnt an easy decision, and Im still not sure it was a good one. I
write this just as a justification of sorts, in a way.
To be honest, at the
time, I hadnt expected the optional aspect of things - while a simple idea, I
simply hadnt thought about it; in my mind LEGO would either go on with or
without it. I also hadnt expected the fundamental difference it would make even
for people signing it, that is, the separate discussions and clear labelling of
what was confidential or not.
So there I was, not under NDA anymore. This
meant I could, and still can, talk about everything I witnessed during cycle 6.
Did I? Well, not that much. Most of whats going on there is sure interesting,
but it doesnt mean we should dump it all on the fans. Maybe other Ambassadors
did share more than I did; most of my discussions with fans were not online,
since I represent an actual physical club and focused on real contacts with
people, during various events in Europe. But it was good to know that I could
discuss anything and not risk to say something I couldnt.
By the way, that
actually happened to me during cycle 5, in LEGO World 2007: I had just seen some
prototype of something (notice Im not saying what, even though its out now),
and I wanted to discuss it with someone whom I was sure he knew about it yet, as
he had been ambassador earlier, and participated in various other NDA-covered
projects as well. Big mistake: he didnt know. That was a real-time oops, much
more embarrassing - no taking back, no cover. Luckily, hes a great guy and
stopped me before I even said anything too important, and even if I did, he
wouldnt have spread it further.
Still, the danger of knowing confidential
stuff is real, and while I trust most Ambassadors have a better judgment than I
do... what you dont know, you cant spread, so I was happy not to know anything
confidential during cycle 6. Well, except I still did learn a few things,
because some people still thought I was under NDA and I confess that sometimes I
played the game of not reminding them. But while I could technically speak about
it, Ill use whatever little judgment I have and not do it. Dont worry, there
isnt that much anyway.
To conclude, I think LEGO chose the good approach -
but whether under NDA or not, Ambassadors should always pay attention to what
they say, and not only for confidentiality reasons.
So, as newly appointed
Ambassador, should you sign the NDA? Thats a personal question. Id advise so,
unless maybe if youre afraid to have to pay more attention to what you say. I
remember someone last year saying that it was what the community he represented
would expect from him. I dont think he actually asked them, but that would
probably the wisest choice: discuss it with your community, and ask them what
they think of it.
You do represent them, after all.
|
|
|
In lugnet.ambassadors, Dave Sterling wrote:
> In lugnet.ambassadors, Jean-Marc Nimal wrote:
> > Straight from Steve Witt, the list of Cycle 7 ambassadors - congrats to all!
> I find it interesting, however, that we have nobody representing LUGNET. Was anyone even nominated? I know there was a thread on here regarding ambassador nominations, but I don't think it ever gathered any steam. Not to beat a dead horse...but is this another sign that LUGNET is dying?
>
> -Dave
I agree that LUGNET is missing, but I believe that everybody who participates
here is also (more) active somewhere else, LUGNET is a great inter-community
resource but there are few people who consider LUGNET their main LUG site.
On the other hand, the nomination of an ambassador related to the Brothers
Bricks might qualify in the same category... Maybe for the next round someone
can include LUGNET in his candidature much the same way as the ambassador for
Eurobricks is also ambassador for the SweLUG
Jetro
|
|
|
In lugnet.ambassadors, Jean-Marc Nimal wrote:
> Straight from Steve Witt, the list of Cycle 7 ambassadors - congrats to all!
>
>
> Announcing the members of the LEGO Ambassadors for Cycle 7
>
> This was a great year for nominations for the LEGO Ambassador Program. We
> received a total of 86 nominations and settled on 45 members who will be
> participating for the coming year.
>
> The new cycle represents 27 different nationalities and 50 different groups
> across the globe. Please congratulate the Cycle 7 LEGO Ambassadors.
>
> The following list gives the name of the Ambassador, what group(s) they
> represent, and what country they live in.
>
> SNIP!
>
> Congratulations to the LEGO Ambassador Group for Cycle 7!!!
>
> Steve Witt
> LEGO Ambassador Lead
>
> Tormod, Jan, Jim & Phil
> LEGO Community Team
Congratulations to all that were selected! It looks like we have a great and
very diverse group of people. I am sure that they will all do a great job
representing the community and I am very interested to see what they can
accomplish over the next year.
I find it interesting, however, that we have nobody representing LUGNET. Was anyone even nominated? I know there was a thread on here regarding ambassador nominations, but I don't think it ever gathered any steam. Not to beat a dead horse...but is this another sign that LUGNET is dying?
-Dave
|
|
|
Straight from Steve Witt, the list of Cycle 7 ambassadors - congrats to all!
Announcing the members of the LEGO Ambassadors for Cycle 7
This was a great year for nominations for the LEGO Ambassador Program. We
received a total of 86 nominations and settled on 45 members who will be
participating for the coming year.
The new cycle represents 27 different nationalities and 50 different groups
across the globe. Please congratulate the Cycle 7 LEGO Ambassadors.
The following list gives the name of the Ambassador, what group(s) they
represent, and what country they live in.
Sebastion Arts De Bouwsteen The Netherlands
Sue Ann Barber MUGs Australia
Patrick Begin QueLUG Canada
Heiner Berg MBFR Germany
Norbert Black ParLUGment Canada
Pitsanu Boonyarit Thai Brick Club Thailand
Andrew Bulthaupt BZPower USA
Pijarn Charoensri T-LUG - Thailand
Marco Chiappa ItLUG Italy
Ben Coifman Railbricks, ILTCO & COLTC USA
Fernando Correia PLUG Portugal
Yvonne Doyle Brickish Association the United Kingdom
Ben Ellermann Classic-Castle.com, GatewayLUG & ForbiddenCove.com USA
Adrian Florea RoLUG Romania
David Furphy CALG Australia
Lluis Gibert HispaLUG Spain
Tim Gould Brothers-Brick.com Australia
Matija Grguric Klub Kockice Croatia
Philip Heinrich Bricksinmotion.com USA
Tom Jacobs Classic-Pirates.com Belgium
Tsang Yiu Keung HKLUG Hong Kong
Sung-Wan Kim BrickInside South Korea
Christian Krutzfeldt 1000Steine Germany
Tuomas Kukkamaa Palikkatakomo Finland
John Langrish VicLUG Canada
Igor Makarov DoubleBrick & Phantoms Russia
Lino Martins LUGNUTS & SeaLUG USA
Matija Puzar Brikkelauget Norway
Don Reitz FBTB.net USA
Wagner Cavalli LUG Brasil Brazil
Harald Roossien LowLUG The Netherlands
Dan Rubin Classic-Space.com USA
Kazuyoshi Saito AFOL Japan Japan
Svend Erik Saksun Byggepladen Denmark
Verena Schaden LCOe Austria
James Shields Brick.IE Ireland
Josephine Shih TWLUG Taiwan
Mikael Sjostedt Eurobricks & SweLUG Sweden
Pedro Silva Comunidade 0937 Portugal
Ludo Soete BeLUG Belgium
Stacy Sterling MOCpages & TwinLUG USA
Saso Tomat Slobricks Slovenia
Jenn Wagner BrickLink Canada
Marcin Witkiewicz LugPol Poland
Cagri Yuz TurkLUG Turkey
Congratulations to the LEGO Ambassador Group for Cycle 7!!!
Steve Witt
LEGO Ambassador Lead
Tormod, Jan, Jim & Phil
LEGO Community Team
|
|
|
In lugnet.mediawatch, Abner Finley wrote:
|
Indianapolis, IN
April 6, 2009
Indianapolis Museum Exhibits LEGO: Castle Adventure
Hear ye, hear ye, calling builders of all ages... join The Childrens Museum
of Indianapolis as they debut the opening of LEGO Castle Adventure. The new
traveling museum exhibit begins at The Childrens Museum of Indianapolis and
will visit 12 major markets in North America through 2013, reaching more than
2 million children and families.
|
SNIP
Can we get a list of proposed dates and locations so hte LUGs can start working
on partnering plans with the local hosting venues?
Paul Sinasohn
BAYLUG
LUGNET #115
|
|
|
To all:
I made a Lego Marble Run - made entirely out of Legos (acutally my
children and I did). You can view the results here:
search Youtube for:
"Lego - Marble Run - 100% Lego - Final - Wistuk"
or try this link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mRTnFnTA0zQ
Nothing was cut, all peices can be reused and are available anywhere. The run is
highly flexible, easy to build and expand on.
I would be very happy to answer any questions you may have, as a ton of thought
has gone into this and I would love to share how it is done. It would have been
larger, but my wife started to complain.
Bart Wistuk
b5612@optonline.net
|
|
|
In lugnet.dear-lego, Chris Marx wrote:
(Last things first here...)
> So what do you think LUGNET? Is there any interest out there for
> this kind of thing from TLG, or am I all alone out here?
Given the the rise of the GBCs has been one of the most amazing things I've seen
in the AFoL community, I'd say you're far from alone. I'd love to see TLG come
out with some LEGO-based marble runs (or rolling ball sculptures, or any of the
numerous other names). I'm not sure why they've not done it already. With the PF
motors, there's a system to power lifts. Just package it up. They even have a
ready-made design study in the numerous GBC modules that are out there.
> 1. LEGO parts can be used to build almost anything imaginable.
> If we want to build ball tracks with LEGO it can certainly be
> done... That being said, specialized parts would be a huge
> advantage.
Also a huge (cost) disadvantage. Remember LEGO has tried to reduce the parts
pallet, so anything that expands it needs to really prove its worth. And since
it's quite possible to build GBCs/RBSs out of the currently existing LEGO parts,
I'm not sure I see a strong reason for expanding. The most difficult part is
building a reliable lift, and even that can certainly be done without new molds.
> 3. We know that there is some market for this type of toy.
That actually what puzzles me - there seems to be a strong market for this sort
of set, and it's one exploited by many of LEGOs direct competitors. Do they just
not wish to compete there?
> ...have special pieces to allow for the creation of custom shaped
> track geometries. I'm imagining some kind of bracket that would
> hold two rails for the marbles to run on, with the rails being made
> out of those hard plastic tubes that came with some of the technic
> sets.
It might be tough to join those very thin tubes with supports in a strong enough
way. The larger diameter "ribbed" tubing works quite well in this regard, with
normal parts (cross-blocks and similar) making for adjustable spaced brackets.
Would I buy these sorts of sets? Probably in a heartbeat, and I'll bet we could
sell them out anywhere a group GBC is displayed. The single most common question
being "where can I buy this?". 'Course, we've seen how well this sort of
argument worked for 9V trains...
--
Brian Davis
|
|
|
I would love to see TLG develop a marble run/ball track theme. Marble run toys
are my favorites next to LEGO and it would be great if I could bring the two
together. Here are some of my thoughts:
1. LEGO parts can be used to build almost anything imaginable. If we want to
build ball tracks with LEGO it can certainly be done. For examples just look at
http://www.baylug.org/zonker/ZMarble.html or any of the Great Ball Contraptions
that people assemble at LEGO conventions. That being said, specialized parts
would be a huge advantage. Think of how difficult it would be to create LEGO
model railroad layouts without special track and wheel pieces.
2. I think that marble tracks and complex looking rube goldberg machines have
the same kind of universal appeal as LEGO bricks. When you present someone with
LEGO bricks they just naturally want to pick them up and play with them.
Similarly, when you put someone in front of a marble track, they almost cant
help but drop at least one or two marbles in to see what happens. This sense of
kinesthetic curiosity is what drives folks to drop coins into those parabolic
funnels where the coins go around and around.
3. We know that there is some market for this type of toy. Every time I go into
Toys R Us I am tempted to pick up one of the marble tracks that are produced by
other companies. K'Nex has a set called "Motorized Madness Ball Machine" that is
very impressive, Magnetix makes the iCoaster set, and there are various other
ball tracks that are not part of a formalized building system, like the Skyrail
sets. There is even a toy called "Block and Roll Marble Maze" that is compatible
with Duplo bricks. At the higher price end of the scale there are some excellent
wooden ball tracks. The best in the world IMHO are the Cuboro sets made of 5cm
cubes. The next best is the Klimba system which adds specially designed track so
that the marble plays a melody by striking xylophone pieces on the way down.
Other great lines are the Quadrilla ball runs and HABA marble tracks. For the
truly old school, look up the Spacewarp 5000. A quick Google search can turn up
info and pictures on any of these for those who are not familiar with them.
4. So, knowing there are all these other types of marble run toys out there, why
am I so interested in having LEGO come out with their own system?
Well, the first reason is that I think there is some room for creative
innovation in marble track building systems. Cuboro is brilliantly designed but
limited by the fact that all the pieces are made of kiln dried 5cm beechwood
cubes. There are no long bridge type structures or spirals or even large curves.
Klimba is very specifically musical in nature and doesn't lend itself to
flexibility. All of the wooden tracks are a great value IMHO, but they are very
expensive, even for small sets. The K'Nex and Magnetix sets are neat but limited
in the ways the track can fit together. I think TLG could design a few new
pieces that would leverage the existing building system to create something more
open to creativity than any of the other sets.
The second reason is I could leverage my existing collection of bricks to make
bigger and cooler runs. :)
5. A marble track theme could be explored across multiple age groups. There
could be simple Duplo sets with large marbles, System sets with smaller marbles
and more complex tracks, Technic sets with motorized elevators, conveyor belts,
NXT marble sorters, etc...
6. Some of the challenges: A LEGO marble run should be well made, tightly
integrated with the current building system, and highly flexible. It should
allow for reuse of the pieces (some marble runs have you cut the rails to fit a
certain track layout), and have special pieces to allow for the creation of
custom shaped track geometries. I'm imagining some kind of bracket that would
hold two rails for the marbles to run on, with the rails being made out of those
hard plastic tubes that came with some of the technic sets. I'm sure we can come
up with something excitingly awesome if we put our minds to it.
So what do you think LUGNET? Is there any interest out there for this kind of
thing from TLG, or am I all alone out here? Thanks for reading this far, and
happy building.
|
|
|
Hey all, this is Andrew, one of the 2008/2009 Lego Ambassadors and Administrator
over at BZPower. Lego Community Development Manager Jan Beyer recently contacted
me with a task that I need everyone's help on. LEGO and their community team
would like a list of the various upcoming events for the rest of 2008 and 2009
so they know how to allot their resources. Other goals include getting more LEGO
employees involved, spreading the word about these events to other AFOLs, and
better marketing and planning through LEGO channels.
So what I need from you all is information about any Lego events you and your
LUGs and communities are planning. In addition, if you have contact with other
LUGs or groups, pass the word on to them. Let as many AFOLs know as possible so
we can generate a complete and thorough list.
Here's what I need:
- Name of the Event
- Date
+ If the event is still in the planning stages, at least give a month
+ Differentiate here between public days and closed days for set up
- Place
+ Country and city
+ Venue/address if possible as well
- Contact Person/Organizer including contact details
- Expected number of AFOLs
- Expected number of public visitors
- Webpage
- Any other relevant info
+ Theme based event
+ Part of a bigger show (e.g. NMRA)
+ How many times this event has been done or if it is a completely new event
+ Public or private
+ Etc
- (Optional) A very short description of the event - one or two sentences
Details can be emailed to me at andrew@bzpower.com (make the subject "LEGO Event
Listing").
Thanks everyone for your help and cooperation. Hopefully I'll see some of you at
these events next year!
-Andrew
|
|
|
About 3 months ago I posted an announcement for LEGO Ambassadors about getting
the new 1,500 page Unofficial LEGO Sets/Parts Collectors Guide on CD. I got
quite a few EMAILs, but due to a near death experience in the family, I didn't
reply (mom is doing well now, even though she wasn't expected to survive cancer
surgery complications).
So I'm asking again... if there are any Ambassadors who don't already have my
LEGO CD and are interested in an "Ambassador's Special", to please contact me.
The expanded version 2 CD has a lot of historic information such as....
1) Yearly LEGO catalogs going back to 1950.
2) A country by country history of LEGO sales and sales offices.
3) A history of the evolution of LEGO instructions (from catalogs-to boxtops-to
paper instructions) from 1950 until the advent of the modern instructions in the
1980's.
4) A history of the evolution of LEGO box top designs and artwork going back to
1949, as well as ALL the LEGO boxes that have Christiansen family members on the
box tops.
5) LEGO parts that were only produced in certain countries.(EU/UK/AUS/USA/CAN)
6) From 1950-65... color image of all the LEGO parts produced by TLG that
year... pictured in colorful diarama's together in 1-3 pages per year.
7) A LEGO Insurance Price List in either EUROs or Dollars for all sets from
1949-1980's. Each list has nearly 11,000 prices.
8) A history of many LEGO sets and parts that were produced as prototypes, but
just never made it into production (this section has doubled since the Version 1
CD).
9) A history of LEGO model shops, toy fairs and display models.
10) Over 1,800 colorful and black/white historic photos and artwork that spans
40 years.
11) Everything you ever wanted to know about LEGO trees/bushes, flags, road
signs, street lights, lighting devices, gas station accessories and garages
going from 1955-85.
12) An exhaustive list of promotional sets that spans 35 years and includes
Worlds Fair items.
13) A discussion of LEGO bricks that includes stud fonts, pat. pend, brick type,
plastic type and brick sizes.
14) The evolution of the beginning of many LEGO systems... Trains, Space,
Castle, Technic, Duplo, Dacta, spare parts packs and service packs, as well as
minifigs.
15) LEGO errors... catalog errors, set errors, set packing variations (and
errors).
Several Ambassadors already have the first CD, now the 2nd version (at 1,100
pages or 250,000 words of text plus a 400 page dollar and 400 page EURO price
guide), is the most comprehensive repository of LEGO information available.
If you're a LEGO Ambassador (or not), and might be interested in learning more
about TLG than even the folks at TLG...
Then send me an EMAIL at.... istokg@earthlink.net
Also to download some free chapters...
http://www.geminisystems.net/bricklink/
Sorry to post this here first (followups go elsewhere), but I never did get a
chance to respond to many of the Ambassadors who EMAILed me back in June.
Cheers
Gary Istok
P.S Fernando Correia, I've got you taken care of! :-D
|
|
|
The other day I got another "You still play with LEGO?". I replied with: "No, I
design and build models made from LEGO." That didn't seem to help much.
I'd like to start a list of ideas and suggestions on how we might improve how
other adults view LEGO as a hobby. Any ideas?
Something that I think would help is LEGO or LEGO branded items in the work
place. Nothing cooky or over-done, but something that is detailed enough to
have people ask "Wow, is that really made of LEGO?" I thought about making nice
looking book ends for my text books or a business card holder.
Of course, I'd also like to see some other things like a leather note pad with a
subtle LEGO logo and other items used or worn in the work place.
Thoughts? Any other ways to improve the hobby image of LEGO?
Thanks,
Scott
|
|
|
|
|
Perfection with anything that has to do with color is simply not possible,
|
It is if youre dealing with black.
Black trumps everything, at least in ABS.
|
Actually it really does not. I have polished literally thousands of black bricks
and when one brings the to a high polish variations are very evident to me. One
can tell which have red or blue or green regrind in them. It is true that black
does mask --but only if mixing with dark colors. At the Inside Tour that is
exactly what they said they did with much of their regrind--put it back into the
black and add enough to mask it. But there is actually another problem with this
approach. The Red, Yellow, Blue, and Green pigments are on an order of 10 times
more expensive than black.At least in the paint pigment market. And I am sure
the same in ABS as they use the same pigments. Especially lead free pigments.
It is actually much more economical to reuse red and those expensive colors back
into red than wasting it into the black. Years ago, for example dry toluidine
red was on the order of $10/lb--the color to make pure Coke red- whereas carbon
black was on the order of 50 cents to 1.00/lb depending on the grade.And one did
not have to use much black poundage wise to achieve hiding. One would never
waste say off color red paint into black but would use its tinting strength to
augment or at least not detract from another batch of red, orange or clear
brown. Of course we also then finished off each and every batch making slight
modifications to bring it up to standard before packaging. Something I am not
sure can be done in a contiuous manufacturing scenario.
|
The pigment they use for black ABS is carbon, which is strong enough to
overpower every color you might throw in for regrind (provided you dont
throw in too much off-color regrind, that is, or you actually could get color
streaks). In the case of a rarely-used color that they have trouble keeping
consistent, my first suggestion would be to suck up the cost difference and
recycle the special regrind into black bricks.
|
|
The obvious choice was black, because all that anyone had
to do was make sure that it was sufficiently mixed in with the black regrind.
|
It would seem that you would also have to increase the amount of black pigment
to overcome the white that would make it grey.
|
I believe we later experimented with having our extruder recycle it into OSHA
yellow and OSHA orange sheet, since their system was supposed to be
sophisticated enough to compensate for the difference (and we could afford to
have some noticable variation in color from one batch to the next.
|
That is really making a better use of the expensive white color for TiO2 is not
cheap.
|
unlike
The LEGO Company). Thing is, for all the slight variation we had with
yellow, orange, and even sometimes with white (like white LEGO bricks, our
white stock would yellow with age). There was never any variation in the
black sheet,
|
I bet there was if one looked closely. The eye can discern over 10,000 shades of
black and still call it black.
|
and we used a lot more of that than all other colors combined.
I would especially urge that they consider this possibility if it would
straighten things out enough that they could repeal this alleged ban on
purple parts.
|
As I said, they said at the factory in Billund that that is exactly what they
did with a lot of their dark regrind--dumped into black and overwelmed it.
I still contend except for blatant lapses, that LEGO does a pretty outstanding
job considering their enormity. Not nearly as good as a small shop paint
manufacture can obtain--but we are talking toys here--not automotive and
decorative finishes. We could always take business away from the big paint
companies because our constistency was so much better--because of lower volume
and higher personal attention.
It is an interesting topic. And the in this particualar industry, there is as
much an art to producing consistancy it as there is science, engineering, and
technology.
|
|
|
In lugnet.ambassadors, Tommy Armstrong wrote:
|
I actually had a pretty long and very interesting discussion with Bjarke
Schønwandt at BrickFair about the whole color issue. I am pretty much of an
expert in color quality control-it was my job for many many years to make
sure batch to batch color cosistancy of color in the paint we produced was
good. And our small factory achieved some very excellent results. In paint,
it is much more important than in say a plastic toy and thousands of hours of
paid labor are involved when colors drift and are inconsistant.
From what I gather, and this has been discussed before-probably by me, but
the general gist of the problem occurred when a paradigm shift in the
coloration of the parts was made. The way it was explained to me, and this is
from a bit muddled memory, was that now LEGO essentially mixes the colorant
at the machine. There are, if I understood him correctly, three hoppers --one
with the clear base ABS, one with ABS infused with concentrated colorant,
and the third hopper is composed of the scrap that occurs when the pieces are
cut from the molded piece. Essentially plastic necessary to create the piece
but not part of it.
Color variation can creep into the process from all these places. The ABS
base can have slightly different color dispersion characteristics, the
concentrated colored plastic will vary and because of the huge quantities TLG
uses they are bought from multiple vendors. If one did not do that, you would
have all your eggs in one basket and if one of the suppliers factories went
down, your entire production would be compromised. The scrap will of course
will be only as consistant as the batches that produced it. One then weighs
an appropriate amount of base, concentrated colored plastic, and scrap.
There is a word for the scrap that I cannot recall. One needs to add enough
colorant to insure opacity and saturation of color. But the colorant portion
is the expensive part of the mix.So one needs to add just enough but not too
much. If one adds too much the strength and stability of the molded part is
compromised. This is very analogous to paint--one wants to add enough
colorant to achieve good coverage in the paint--but too much will weaken the
film because of the plasticizers and dispersants in the colorant.
In the past TLG bought huge quantities of pre-mixed ABS of a certain color.
The new system is much more flexible in that one only has to stock much
smaller quantites of the colored component and has only huge quantities of
the base. Again analogous to the paint store in which one has a base and can
mix an almost unlimited number of colors from that base.
I did ask him if they mixed various colors at the site of production to
achieve the desired color like is done in paint and he said no. In other
words they do not take a certain weight of one pellet say red, and a certain
weight of another pellet, say yellow and come out with orange. In their
process this is not possible and therefore the concentrate is one hue made
for one specific end color. But from multiple vendors.
The human eye can discern millions of different colors--it being far more
sensitive than the finest machine. And very small changes in any step of the
process will be detected by an observing eye.
To make matters even more conplicated, parts in kits come from many different
factories made from different suppliers feed stocks so coordination of
quality across the entire company is necessary. They must all be on the same
page and having the same qc standards, etc. etc.
He insured me that they are acutely aware of this and have made great strides
addressing all these problems. But I know,there will always be problems in an
enterprise this large and with a process that is this critical and more
importantly easily discernable. The variables simply cannot be turned into
constants. He also insured me that when the fiasco of translucent pieces
became apparrent they went back and lookd at the whole broad range of
problems inherrent in this very difficult production process and reaccessed
what LEGO quality was.
I myself applaud TLC for achieving the quality that they do acheive in the
vast quantities that they deal with and with the thousands of parts that they
produce. I dare say few other companies do as good a job--and for sure no
other toy company of thier scale does.
Perfection with anything that has to do with color is simply not possible,
and one just strives to achieve a level of quality that in a great percentage
of situations is sufficient to achieve the goal. I really honestly think TLG
has done this for many, many years and has no intention sucumbing to lesser
standards. They did screw up a while back, but part of that is attributable
to a completely different way of production and perhaps the temptation to try
and cut a few colorant costs when economic times were dire. They know they
screwed up and are IMO well on the way to avoiding them in the future.
This whole color thing is really an incredibly complex task and most people
simply do not know how truly complex it is. Especially on the scale of TLG.
tommy Armstrong
|
Tommy,
The term for the scrap is more or less known as regrind. Ive got some
injection molding plastics manufacturing in my background. When molding at the
machine, the material thats not in the mold cavity that consists of the part
itself is known as the Sprue. In most operations, its commonplace to take the
sprue, toss it in a grinder, resulting in the sprue being ground to bits. Those
bits are called regrind. These bits can then be re-mixed in with new
material, usually at up to some percentage. The reason for the limit percentage
is that adding regrind essentially increases the material base for the color.
Being that the regrind already has some color in it, there can be potential for
some color variability, as youve stated. Its a science with a huge amount of
variability, and a good chunk of it cannot be calculated beforehand. Youve got
to run batches to see how the quality looks. Sometimes, a bad decision can be
made, due in part to local misunderstanding, or a lack of
communication/coordination from higher up. The only good thing to come out of
that is to fix the problem, and move on.
I liked the comment about the transparent parts becoming apparent problems..if
you think about that line, its kinda funny.
As with any venture--trying something doesnt always guarantee a 100% success
rate. All you can do is try, try, again until you succeed. Unfortunately, the
toy market worldwide is very cutthroat and experiences low overall margins
(usually no more than 10%). Also interesting is that so much of TLGs
sales/profits are heavily skewed to the fourth quarter, primarily due to
Christmas shopping season.
Scott
|
|
|
In lugnet.ambassadors, Tommy Armstrong wrote:
|
From what I gather, and this has been discussed before-probably by me, but
the general gist of the problem occurred when a paradigm shift in the
coloration of the parts was made. The way it was explained to me, and this is
from a bit muddled memory, was that now LEGO essentially mixes the colorant
at the machine.
|
Yes, that was what they announced sometime in the past couple years. I cant
remember when the change took place, but I do know that they had inconsistent
shading in the dark-purple bricks that they used to make the Knight Bus in 2004.
There were similar problems with dark-red bricks around the same time as well,
judging by the dark-red 1x10 bricks that I bought through Bricklink.
|
There is a word for the scrap that I cannot recall.
|
Its a sprue if its the plastic frame that small parts are molded into (like
the round thing that the 6-piece tool set ships attached to), I cant recall the
specific term for plastic thats ejected without being formed (but there is a
term for it), and everything thats been reclaimed and chopped up into pellets
that are small enough to be put back through the process is called regrind (I
used to work for a vacuum-forming/fabrication company that primarily worked with
ABS).
|
Perfection with anything that has to do with color is simply not possible,
|
It is if youre dealing with black. Black trumps everything, at least in ABS.
The pigment they use for black ABS is carbon, which is strong enough to
overpower every color you might throw in for regrind (provided you dont throw
in too much off-color regrind, that is, or you actually could get color
streaks). In the case of a rarely-used color that they have trouble keeping
consistent, my first suggestion would be to suck up the cost difference and
recycle the special regrind into black bricks. That eliminates the biggest
problem with ironing out the color consistency (that being that any past errors
will continue to taint future batches), while still making sure that the scrap
isnt wasted. I can guarantee that it works, because the company I used to work
for made white parts in FDA-grade plastic. That certification requires that no
post-consumer regrind makes it back into the new plastic, so in order to reclaim
our white scrap we had to recycle it into a different color of plastic. The
obvious choice was black, because all that anyone had to do was make sure that
it was sufficiently mixed in with the black regrind. I believe we later
experimented with having our extruder recycle it into OSHA yellow and OSHA
orange sheet, since their system was supposed to be sophisticated enough to
compensate for the difference (and we could afford to have some noticable
variation in color from one batch to the next...unlike The LEGO Company). Thing
is, for all the slight variation we had with yellow, orange, and even sometimes
with white (like white LEGO bricks, our white stock would yellow with age).
There was never any variation in the black sheet, and we used a lot more of that
than all other colors combined. I would especially urge that they consider this
possibility if it would straighten things out enough that they could repeal this
alleged ban on purple parts.
|
|
|
I actually had a pretty long and very interesting discussion with Bjarke
Schønwandt at BrickFair about the whole color issue. I am pretty much of an
expert in color quality control-it was my job for many many years to make sure
batch to batch color cosistancy of color in the paint we produced was good. And
our small factory achieved some very excellent results. In paint, it is much
more important than in say a plastic toy and thousands of hours of paid labor
are involved when colors drift and are inconsistant.
From what I gather, and this has been discussed before-probably by me, but the
general gist of the problem occurred when a paradigm shift in the coloration of
the parts was made. The way it was explained to me, and this is from a bit
muddled memory, was that now LEGO essentially mixes the colorant at the machine.
There are, if I understood him correctly, three hoppers --one with the clear
base ABS, one with ABS infused with concentrated colorant, and the third
hopper is composed of the scrap that occurs when the pieces are cut from the
molded piece. Essentially plastic necessary to create the piece but not part of
it.
Color variation can creep into the process from all these places. The ABS base
can have slightly different color dispersion characteristics, the concentrated
colored plastic will vary and because of the huge quantities TLG uses they are
bought from multiple vendors. If one did not do that, you would have all your
eggs in one basket and if one of the suppliers factories went down, your entire
production would be compromised. The scrap will of course will be only as
consistant as the batches that produced it. One then weighs an appropriate
amount of base, concentrated colored plastic, and scrap. There is a word for
the scrap that I cannot recall. One needs to add enough colorant to insure
opacity and saturation of color. But the colorant portion is the expensive part
of the mix.So one needs to add just enough but not too much. If one adds too
much the strength and stability of the molded part is compromised. This is very
analogous to paint--one wants to add enough colorant to achieve good coverage in
the paint--but too much will weaken the film because of the plasticizers and
dispersants in the colorant.
In the past TLG bought huge quantities of pre-mixed ABS of a certain color. The
new system is much more flexible in that one only has to stock much smaller
quantites of the colored component and has only huge quantities of the base.
Again analogous to the paint store in which one has a base and can mix an almost
unlimited number of colors from that base.
I did ask him if they mixed various colors at the site of production to achieve
the desired color like is done in paint and he said no. In other words they do
not take a certain weight of one pellet say red, and a certain weight of another
pellet, say yellow and come out with orange. In their process this is not
possible and therefore the concentrate is one hue made for one specific end
color. But from multiple vendors.
The human eye can discern millions of different colors--it being far more
sensitive than the finest machine. And very small changes in any step of the
process will be detected by an observing eye.
To make matters even more conplicated, parts in kits come from many different
factories made from different suppliers feed stocks so coordination of quality
across the entire company is necessary. They must all be on the same page and
having the same qc standards, etc. etc.
He insured me that they are acutely aware of this and have made great strides
addressing all these problems. But I know,there will always be problems in an
enterprise this large and with a process that is this critical and more
importantly easily discernable. The variables simply cannot be turned into
constants. He also insured me that when the fiasco of translucent pieces became
apparrent they went back and lookd at the whole broad range of problems
inherrent in this very difficult production process and reaccessed what LEGO
quality was.
I myself applaud TLC for achieving the quality that they do acheive in the vast
quantities that they deal with and with the thousands of parts that they
produce. I dare say few other companies do as good a job--and for sure no other
toy company of thier scale does.
Perfection with anything that has to do with color is simply not possible, and
one just strives to achieve a level of quality that in a great percentage of
situations is sufficient to achieve the goal. I really honestly think TLG has
done this for many, many years and has no intention sucumbing to lesser
standards. They did screw up a while back, but part of that is attributable to a
completely different way of production and perhaps the temptation to try and cut
a few colorant costs when economic times were dire. They know they screwed up
and are IMO well on the way to avoiding them in the future.
This whole color thing is really an incredibly complex task and most people
simply do not know how truly complex it is. Especially on the scale of TLG.
tommy Armstrong
|
|
|
In lugnet.ambassadors, Timothy Gould wrote:
|
In lugnet.events, David Laswell wrote:
--snip--
|
In lugnet.events, Timothy Gould wrote: Ive heard about unspecified
physical quality issues, inconsistent coloration of parts, and how they were
unhappy with the whole Flextronics deal, but not a single word about the
possibility of sloppy mold allignment. So, since the LEGO Ambassadors are
supposed to be representing the fan community at large, I hereby request
that someone represent me on this issue, or point me to a place where it has
been made public (which I have been unable to find).
|
Passed on. Ill be sure to pass any answer back as soon as I have access to
one.
Tim
|
Very kind of you!
John P
|
|
|
In lugnet.events, David Laswell wrote:
--snip--
|
In lugnet.events, Timothy Gould wrote: Ive heard about unspecified
physical quality issues, inconsistent coloration of parts, and how they were
unhappy with the whole Flextronics deal, but not a single word about the
possibility of sloppy mold allignment. So, since the LEGO Ambassadors are
supposed to be representing the fan community at large, I hereby request that
someone represent me on this issue, or point me to a place where it has been
made public (which I have been unable to find).
|
Passed on. Ill be sure to pass any answer back as soon as I have access to one.
Tim
|
|
|