| |
In lugnet.build.schleim, John Neal wrote:
| |
In lugnet.build.schleim, Terry Prosper wrote:
| |
In lugnet.build.schleim, John Neal wrote:
| |
Nope. Mine are vastly superior in design:-) Initially I thought to simply
copy those, but when I actually took a look at their design, I knew I could
do a better job, so I did.
|
What’s the difference?
|
Mine design is more complicated. Compare these pics. The first pic is from
a person who claims to have reversed engineered the original TLC rose. The
second is mine:
As you can see, I made a better attempt to simulate more petals on the
interior of the flower. My opinion anyway.
JOHN
|
It’s a beautiful job, John! I like yours better than the originals.
Nicely done!
I may, at some future time, try to ‘reverse engineer’ your roses ;)
Take care,
Dave
|
|
| |
In lugnet.build.schleim, David Koudys wrote:
| |
It’s a beautiful job, John! I like yours better than the originals.
Nicely done!
|
Thanks, Dave.
| |
I may, at some future time, try to ‘reverse engineer’ your roses ;)
|
Ohh, sounds complicated:-) Here, I’ll make your job easier:
I think these pics reveal the basic idea here. One note-- the interior ring of
petals is being held by pressure between the sections of the “stem” (a Ross
innovation:-)
HTH,
JOHN
|
|
|
