 | | | | | |
I'm very proud to announce my space lego original creations page is
up! See: http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumIndex?u=56166&a=408710
My second station is an engineering miracle. Minifigs can pass
through the central corridor and look out the windows. It is
freestanding and counterbalanced. If you like any of the pics please
sign my guestbook. I also included a pic of my First National Bank of
Chicago model. The ships and vehicles are alternate models of a given
set. I think they are better than the original model on the box.
Enjoy!
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Rick Kujawa wrote:
>
> I'm very proud to announce my space lego original creations page is
> up! See: http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumIndex?u=56166&a=408710
>
> My second station is an engineering miracle. Minifigs can pass
> through the central corridor and look out the windows. It is
> freestanding and counterbalanced. If you like any of the pics please
> sign my guestbook. I also included a pic of my First National Bank of
> Chicago model. The ships and vehicles are alternate models of a given
> set. I think they are better than the original model on the box.
> Enjoy!
Holy cow, those space stations are big! Very cool!
How did you give the second horizontal layer the strength to stand on its own?
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.build, Jason Spangler writes:
> Rick Kujawa wrote:
> >
> > I'm very proud to announce my space lego original creations page is
> > up! See: http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumIndex?u=56166&a=408710
> >
> > My second station is an engineering miracle. Minifigs can pass
> > through the central corridor and look out the windows. It is
> > freestanding and counterbalanced. If you like any of the pics please
> > sign my guestbook. I also included a pic of my First National Bank of
> > Chicago model. The ships and vehicles are alternate models of a given
> > set. I think they are better than the original model on the box.
> > Enjoy!
>
> Holy cow, those space stations are big! Very cool!
>
> How did you give the second horizontal layer the strength to stand on its own?
It took 3-4 months off and on (mostly off) to redesign the internal
structure. This really shows how strong the stud/hole connection is
and how close the tolerances are to do this. Minifigs can pass thru
the central corridor (you can see all the way thru it!) and you can
see thru all the windows. Its an engineering miracle it doesn't
just snap both arms at the center. It creaks alot when I assemble
it (I keep the whole thing in 3 or 4 major sections - the circle
being one). I did not cheat and use glue. I wanted to really show
off how strong they are. I wanted to make it with only 2 arms
instead of 4 because it was harder and I was out to push the limits
of the bricks. I can explain SOME of the details privately if
needed.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
rick Kujawa wrote:
>
> In lugnet.build, Jason Spangler writes:
> > Rick Kujawa wrote:
> > >
> > > I'm very proud to announce my space lego original creations page is
> > > up! See: http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumIndex?u=56166&a=408710
> > >
> > > My second station is an engineering miracle. Minifigs can pass
> > > through the central corridor and look out the windows. It is
> > > freestanding and counterbalanced. If you like any of the pics please
> > > sign my guestbook. I also included a pic of my First National Bank of
> > > Chicago model. The ships and vehicles are alternate models of a given
> > > set. I think they are better than the original model on the box.
> > > Enjoy!
> >
> > Holy cow, those space stations are big! Very cool!
> >
> > How did you give the second horizontal layer the strength to stand on its own?
>
> It took 3-4 months off and on (mostly off) to redesign the internal
> structure. This really shows how strong the stud/hole connection is
> and how close the tolerances are to do this. Minifigs can pass thru
> the central corridor (you can see all the way thru it!) and you can
> see thru all the windows. Its an engineering miracle it doesn't
> just snap both arms at the center. It creaks alot when I assemble
> it (I keep the whole thing in 3 or 4 major sections - the circle
> being one). I did not cheat and use glue. I wanted to really show
> off how strong they are. I wanted to make it with only 2 arms
> instead of 4 because it was harder and I was out to push the limits
> of the bricks. I can explain SOME of the details privately if
> needed.
Wow. That is just... Wow. Very Impressive.
--
-Lord Insanity
"A little nonsense now and then, relished by the wisest men"
Visit me at: http://members.tripod.com/~LordInsanity
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
> I'm very proud to announce my space lego original creations page is
> up! See: http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumIndex?u=56166&a=408710
Yeah, yeah...just another space site...WOW!!!!!
I have a horrible addiction to looking at sites when they are announced on
these groups. This is a really big space station. Small questions...
How did you get the circular spiral look for the pods on the top of the
space station? Are they really 2xn blocks joined by 1xn blocks allowing
them to pivot?
And how many tubs did you need to put this all together?
This is a good example of LARGE scale building that isn't all angles and
wierd gun turrets all over the place...it has a sort of flow to it.
Nice work!
Cheers,
Ralph Hempel - P.Eng
--------------------------------------------------------
Check out pbFORTH for LEGO Mindstorms at:
<http://www.hempeldesigngroup.com/lego/pbFORTH>
--------------------------------------------------------
Reply to: rhempel at bmts dot com
--------------------------------------------------------
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.build, Ralph Hempel writes:
> > I'm very proud to announce my space lego original creations page is
> > up! See: http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumIndex?u=56166&a=408710
>
> Yeah, yeah...just another space site...WOW!!!!!
>
> I have a horrible addiction to looking at sites when they are announced on
> these groups. This is a really big space station. Small questions...
If u have a horible addiction, then i should post this... my page
http://members.tripod.com/Roode/lego/lego.html
take a look.
Alex "Spam R' Us Website: gimmiespamrus.com" Roode
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Ya, know, I looked at the small pic on the front page of it, and it
looks like a clown head to me! it looks pretty cool!!!! When I look at
the bigger pic though it kind of losing that effect :( I'm not much
into space though I appreciate some of it, I have to admit it looks
cool!
Keep up the good work!!!
Rick Kujawa wrote:
>
> I'm very proud to announce my space lego original creations page is
> up! See: http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumIndex?u=56166&a=408710
>
> My second station is an engineering miracle. Minifigs can pass
> through the central corridor and look out the windows. It is
> freestanding and counterbalanced. If you like any of the pics please
> sign my guestbook. I also included a pic of my First National Bank of
> Chicago model. The ships and vehicles are alternate models of a given
> set. I think they are better than the original model on the box.
> Enjoy!
--
Build everyday!
-Tamy
Follow the bouncing boxes!
http://home.att.net/~mookie1/jambalaya.html
http://home.att.net/~mookie1/
http://mookie.iwarp.com/ (mirror site)
Lego isn't a toy, it's a way of life!
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.build, Rick Kujawa writes:
> I'm very proud to announce my space lego original creations page is
> up! See: http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumIndex?u=56166&a=408710
>
> My second station is an engineering miracle. Minifigs can pass
> through the central corridor and look out the windows. It is
> freestanding and counterbalanced. If you like any of the pics please
> sign my guestbook. I also included a pic of my First National Bank of
> Chicago model. The ships and vehicles are alternate models of a given
> set. I think they are better than the original model on the box.
> Enjoy!
Not to nitpick too much, but I think you need to rotate your ring. In a space
station, gravity is made by spinning. This produces artificial gravity toward
the outside of the ring. This would make the very outside the floor, but you
currently have windows there. Each corridor should be rotated so that the top
is pointed toward the middle shaft.
See 2001: A Space Oddity for example.
Mike
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.build, Mike Poindexter writes:
> In lugnet.build, Rick Kujawa writes:
> > I'm very proud to announce my space lego original creations page is
> > up! See: http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumIndex?u=56166&a=408710
> >
> > My second station is an engineering miracle. Minifigs can pass
> > through the central corridor and look out the windows. It is
> > freestanding and counterbalanced. If you like any of the pics please
> > sign my guestbook. I also included a pic of my First National Bank of
> > Chicago model. The ships and vehicles are alternate models of a given
> > set. I think they are better than the original model on the box.
> > Enjoy!
>
> Not to nitpick too much, but I think you need to rotate your ring. In a space
> station, gravity is made by spinning. This produces artificial gravity toward
> the outside of the ring. This would make the very outside the floor, but you
> currently have windows there. Each corridor should be rotated so that the top
> is pointed toward the middle shaft.
>
> See 2001: A Space Oddity for example.
>
> Mike
Yeah, yeah, yeah. (No offense) I knew someone would point
this out. I did think about this and considered it, but I
decided I had to make some compromises for using lego in the
real (non zero G) world. First, if all the windows faced
inwards you would only see the bottom of the blocks when
looking at the whole station from the side (most views)(not
very asthetically pleasing). Second, the way it is now with
the studs facing up has gravity working to keep the station
together. If I built it sideways it would come apart way too
easily, and I refuse to cheat and use glue (I want to showcase
just how strong these suckers really are). I did however make
a crude animated GIF file that shows it rotating, which I need
to redo with more frames moving in smaller steps. I hope that
answers your critisisms.
I'd love to see someone make it the way you describe! I'd like
to see you (or anyone else) do what I did. Its not easy.
PS The station in 2001 had 2 circles and each one had 4 arms in
zero G. Mine only has 2 arms not in zero G which I believe is
much harder to do. I wanted to try it with only 2 arms because
it was harder and was up to the challenge.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Thanks to everyone who has visited my site, and especially those who signed my
guest book. I have had over 1400 hits in a little over a week! Does anyone
know of anyone who has made any things as original as mine? (using circles and
curves on a large scale?). Please LMK. How do you get on the cool lego site
of the week? I guess you need to be nominated by someone. I hope my creations
would qualify. I haven't seen any as original. Most of what I have seen are
just copies of existing buildings, vehicles, etc; or creations of future
vehicles/structures, not totally original shapes and designs.
In lugnet.build, Rick Kujawa writes:
> I'm very proud to announce my space lego original creations page is
> up! See: http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumIndex?u=56166&a=408710
>
> My second station is an engineering miracle. Minifigs can pass
> through the central corridor and look out the windows. It is
> freestanding and counterbalanced. If you like any of the pics please
> sign my guestbook. I also included a pic of my First National Bank of
> Chicago model. The ships and vehicles are alternate models of a given
> set. I think they are better than the original model on the box.
> Enjoy!
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Rick Kujawa wrote:
> How do you get on the cool lego site
> of the week? I guess you need to be nominated by someone.
here's my understanding of the procss
Anyone can nominate any site they wish. You can nominate your own. Todd
monitors the mail each week and makes a judgement call about which
nomination suggestions actually become nominations (that is, get listed
as a nominated site) Being nominated builds traffic quite a bit.
Once you're nominated, Todd again monitors the mail each week to see how
many votes come in for you. There is no mechanical voting process, Todd
basically calls it as he sees fit, and some week, you are the site...
Sites can stay "nominated" without winning for an arbitrarily long
period and may eventually be removed, again on Todd's judgement call, if
they didn't get chosen by him.
Sounds like a whim driven process. But it works surprisingly well. I am
amazed every time that I go back and look at past picks. Not every site
is one that I think is really really cool, but most of them are, and i
suspect that the majority of people think a given site is deserving,
even if not everyone does. So I think the process is working great and I
would hate to see it change. Todd's judgement is excellent.
We truly have had some amazing sites. Once GMLTC has their act together
and gets all the pictures posted there that are out there in one place
or another I expect that one to "win" handily.
> I hope my creations
> would qualify. I haven't seen any as original.
It's probably not useful to go down that reasoning chain. Coolness is
determined by a lot of things. You needn't worry about needing to be
better at building, that's not what this hobby is about. (1)
1 - I can say that because I know I'm the best at building the things I
choose to specialize in, no need for votes or awards to confirm it. :-)
Larry Pieniazek larryp@novera.com http://my.voyager.net/lar
- - - Web Application Integration! http://www.novera.com
fund Lugnet(tm): http://www.ebates.com/ Member ref: lar, 1/2 $$ to
lugnet.
NOTE: I have left CTP, effective 18 June 99, and my CTP email
will not work after then. Please switch to my Novera ID.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.build, Larry Pieniazek <lar@voyager.net> writes:
> Rick Kujawa wrote:
> > How do you get on the cool lego site
> > of the week? I guess you need to be nominated by someone.
>
> here's my understanding of the procss
>
> Anyone can nominate any site they wish. You can nominate your own. Todd
> monitors the mail each week and makes a judgement call about which
> nomination suggestions actually become nominations (that is, get listed
> as a nominated site) Being nominated builds traffic quite a bit.
Mostly, the judgment call is simple things like, Does this site do anything
which would miff TLG and make the online community look bad? (Examples:
Using the red LEGO logo on a splash page, or using the word "LEGO" in a way
which causes confusion as to whether the site is official or unofficial, or
using the word "lego" in a 2nd-level domain name.)
Those are objective judgment calls. Other judgment calls are -somewhat-
subjective, like whether the site is still under heavy construction, or
whether the subject matter is too thin, or whether the subject matter
obviously would never have any hope of being voted for (I get quite a few
nominations from kids with GeoCities pages that only contain links and a
guestbook.)
The most subjective judgment call is sometimes figuring out whether a
second-timer should be a re-feature as a "Past Pick Update" or as a totally
new entry... In some cases, I ask people what they think. For example,
although Ben Fleskes's main site was already featured last summer,
http://www.lugnet.com/cool/site-092.html
his new _Millenium_Falcon_ model
http://www.lugnet.com/cool/site-143.html
was clearly a totally hugely amazing new thing deserving of a whole separate
entry of its own.
But other than those types of thing, I'd say every site passing the critera
above basically goes onto the queue for voting at some point.
> Once you're nominated, Todd again monitors the mail each week to see how
> many votes come in for you. There is no mechanical voting process, Todd
> basically calls it as he sees fit, and some week, you are the site...
9 out of 10 times, the site with the most accured votes at the end of the
week is the one that gets "picked" that week. So the voting process (which
is actually mechanical -- all handled by a CGI script -- actually plays a
very important role).
Sometimes (especially when the vote is tied or extremely close), it makes
sense to pick one or the other of two sites arbitrarily, to keep the mix
from week to week a bit more fresh. (I don't want to feature 5 town sites
in a row, or 5 CAD sites in a row, for example.)
Also, sometimes a site has a confusing design and doesn't get very many
votes, even though what's buried there is super-cool if you just dig. So
sometimes sites like those get a boost, and they need a bit of extra
commentary to help navigate them and find the cool stuff.
> Sites can stay "nominated" without winning for an arbitrarily long
> period and may eventually be removed, again on Todd's judgement call, if
> they didn't get chosen by him.
I think only 2 sites have ever been removed...(2 which basically never got
any votes). All others have eventually gone on to be featured some week
when they finally accrued enough votes.
> Sounds like a whim driven process. But it works surprisingly well. I am
> amazed every time that I go back and look at past picks. Not every site
> is one that I think is really really cool, but most of them are, and i
> suspect that the majority of people think a given site is deserving,
> even if not everyone does. So I think the process is working great and I
> would hate to see it change. Todd's judgement is excellent.
Thanks. :)
BTW, if there's some site that hasn't made it to the top of the queue for
voting, and you really think it should get a priority boost, by all means
speak up -- I take repeat nominations seriously, especially when they come
from many different people.
> We truly have had some amazing sites. Once GMLTC has their act together
> and gets all the pictures posted there that are out there in one place
> or another I expect that one to "win" handily.
PNLTC was featured already...about 1 year ago...
http://www.lugnet.com/cool/site-097.html
...but there's no reason that it couldn't get on the list again if there
were something hugely new and cool there. At the very least, a "Past Pick
Update" may be in order for it at some point.
> > I hope my creations
> > would qualify. I haven't seen any as original.
>
> It's probably not useful to go down that reasoning chain. Coolness is
> determined by a lot of things. You needn't worry about needing to be
> better at building, that's not what this hobby is about. (1)
In my mind, Rick's creations qualify in a BIG way -- not simply because
they're cool, but also because they're so original.
Originality certainly does help here -- because the mission of CLSotW is not
only to expose people to pure eye candy, but also to a wide variety of
building techniques. (Or photographic enhancement techniques, or artistic
techniques, or CAD techniques, etc.)
CLSotW is, in other words, intended to be a well-rounded potpourri of cool
and thought-provoking sites.
--Todd
> 1 - I can say that because I know I'm the best at building the things I
> choose to specialize in, no need for votes or awards to confirm it. :-)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
I agree with everything Todd said except for the below part...
Todd Lehman wrote:
> Lar shared his wisdom thusly: <well, ok that wasn't the original attribution tag>
> > We truly have had some amazing sites. Once GMLTC has their act together
> > and gets all the pictures posted there that are out there in one place
> > or another I expect that one to "win" handily.
>
> PNLTC was featured already...about 1 year ago...
>
> http://www.lugnet.com/cool/site-097.html
>
> ...but there's no reason that it couldn't get on the list again if there
> were something hugely new and cool there. At the very least, a "Past Pick
> Update" may be in order for it at some point.
And PNLTC may well deserve an update. After all, it's got my cars there
so
it's by definition cool. But I was talking about GMLTC, not PNLTC.
The real GMLTC site is not up yet.
But here are some teasers for it.
http://my.voyager.net/lar/gmltc_pics.html
http://www.skypoint.com/~jkelly69/gmltc/default.htm
http://www.visi.com/~demlow/lego/nmra99/
http://www.execpc.com/~pfoster/nmra/
Lots and lots of images. Just not an organized website yet. More
personal LEGO
than you've ever seen in one place before.
When the real site is up, it will be at www.gmltc.org
When the real site is up, it will blow a lot of people away. At least
that's what
John K keeps saying. He says it a lot.
> > 1 - I can say that because I know I'm the best at building the things I
> > choose to specialize in, no need for votes or awards to confirm it. :-)
Note that Todd didn't disagree with that <grins, ducks and runs>
--
Larry Pieniazek larryp@novera.com http://my.voyager.net/lar
- - - Web Application Integration! http://www.novera.com
fund Lugnet(tm): http://www.ebates.com/ Member ref: lar, 1/2 $$ to
lugnet.
NOTE: I have left CTP, effective 18 June 99, and my CTP email
will not work after then. Please switch to my Novera ID.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Todd, has anyone in the past been nominated or won CLSotW from their MOC's
on Brickshelf? I know it's not really anyone's indivdual Website, but it
does contain alot of people's wonderful creations. What are your thoughts?
Eric
In lugnet.build, Todd Lehman writes:
> In lugnet.build, Larry Pieniazek <lar@voyager.net> writes:
>
> > Rick Kujawa wrote:
> > > How do you get on the cool lego site
> > > of the week? I guess you need to be nominated by someone.
> >
> > here's my understanding of the procss
> >
> > Anyone can nominate any site they wish. You can nominate your own. Todd
> > monitors the mail each week and makes a judgement call about which
> > nomination suggestions actually become nominations (that is, get listed
> > as a nominated site) Being nominated builds traffic quite a bit.
>
> Mostly, the judgment call is simple things like, Does this site do anything
> which would miff TLG and make the online community look bad? (Examples:
> Using the red LEGO logo on a splash page, or using the word "LEGO" in a way
> which causes confusion as to whether the site is official or unofficial, or
> using the word "lego" in a 2nd-level domain name.)
>
> Those are objective judgment calls. Other judgment calls are -somewhat-
> subjective, like whether the site is still under heavy construction, or
> whether the subject matter is too thin, or whether the subject matter
> obviously would never have any hope of being voted for (I get quite a few
> nominations from kids with GeoCities pages that only contain links and a
> guestbook.)
>
> The most subjective judgment call is sometimes figuring out whether a
> second-timer should be a re-feature as a "Past Pick Update" or as a totally
> new entry... In some cases, I ask people what they think. For example,
> although Ben Fleskes's main site was already featured last summer,
>
> http://www.lugnet.com/cool/site-092.html
>
> his new _Millenium_Falcon_ model
>
> http://www.lugnet.com/cool/site-143.html
>
> was clearly a totally hugely amazing new thing deserving of a whole separate
> entry of its own.
>
> But other than those types of thing, I'd say every site passing the critera
> above basically goes onto the queue for voting at some point.
>
>
> > Once you're nominated, Todd again monitors the mail each week to see how
> > many votes come in for you. There is no mechanical voting process, Todd
> > basically calls it as he sees fit, and some week, you are the site...
>
> 9 out of 10 times, the site with the most accured votes at the end of the
> week is the one that gets "picked" that week. So the voting process (which
> is actually mechanical -- all handled by a CGI script -- actually plays a
> very important role).
>
> Sometimes (especially when the vote is tied or extremely close), it makes
> sense to pick one or the other of two sites arbitrarily, to keep the mix
> from week to week a bit more fresh. (I don't want to feature 5 town sites
> in a row, or 5 CAD sites in a row, for example.)
>
> Also, sometimes a site has a confusing design and doesn't get very many
> votes, even though what's buried there is super-cool if you just dig. So
> sometimes sites like those get a boost, and they need a bit of extra
> commentary to help navigate them and find the cool stuff.
>
>
> > Sites can stay "nominated" without winning for an arbitrarily long
> > period and may eventually be removed, again on Todd's judgement call, if
> > they didn't get chosen by him.
>
> I think only 2 sites have ever been removed...(2 which basically never got
> any votes). All others have eventually gone on to be featured some week
> when they finally accrued enough votes.
>
>
> > Sounds like a whim driven process. But it works surprisingly well. I am
> > amazed every time that I go back and look at past picks. Not every site
> > is one that I think is really really cool, but most of them are, and i
> > suspect that the majority of people think a given site is deserving,
> > even if not everyone does. So I think the process is working great and I
> > would hate to see it change. Todd's judgement is excellent.
>
> Thanks. :)
>
> BTW, if there's some site that hasn't made it to the top of the queue for
> voting, and you really think it should get a priority boost, by all means
> speak up -- I take repeat nominations seriously, especially when they come
> from many different people.
>
>
> > We truly have had some amazing sites. Once GMLTC has their act together
> > and gets all the pictures posted there that are out there in one place
> > or another I expect that one to "win" handily.
>
> PNLTC was featured already...about 1 year ago...
>
> http://www.lugnet.com/cool/site-097.html
>
> ...but there's no reason that it couldn't get on the list again if there
> were something hugely new and cool there. At the very least, a "Past Pick
> Update" may be in order for it at some point.
>
>
> > > I hope my creations
> > > would qualify. I haven't seen any as original.
> >
> > It's probably not useful to go down that reasoning chain. Coolness is
> > determined by a lot of things. You needn't worry about needing to be
> > better at building, that's not what this hobby is about. (1)
>
> In my mind, Rick's creations qualify in a BIG way -- not simply because
> they're cool, but also because they're so original.
>
> Originality certainly does help here -- because the mission of CLSotW is not
> only to expose people to pure eye candy, but also to a wide variety of
> building techniques. (Or photographic enhancement techniques, or artistic
> techniques, or CAD techniques, etc.)
>
> CLSotW is, in other words, intended to be a well-rounded potpourri of cool
> and thought-provoking sites.
>
> --Todd
>
>
> > 1 - I can say that because I know I'm the best at building the things I
> > choose to specialize in, no need for votes or awards to confirm it. :-)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
...........................................................................
hi there, I was just curious how often the cool site of the week gets polled
as I only notice the last one listed was 2003..
| | | | | | |
