| |
Daniel Siskind wrote:
> After more than two years on the project, all of the architectural details of my
> huge "Blood Stone Castle" project have been completed. While the interior
> decorators are still hard at work (and will be for several more months), I have
> posted 40 preliminary pictures in the Gallery on my site. I have not yet found
> the time to complete the captions, but I invite everyone to have a look at the
> progress so far.
>
> Please note my site is moving (soon to be BRICKMANIA.COM), but please visit
> using the following temporary URL:
>
> http://64.224.224.231/gallery.html
>
> Thanks and good night!
>
> Dan
WOW! That thing is huge! Where did you get so many red bricks?
|
|
| |
In lugnet.castle, Jonathan Wilson writes:
(snip)
>
> WOW! That thing is huge! Where did you get so many red bricks?
Red has always been the most common basic color, so that's why I always built my
castles with red ones. I'm actually going to start working on my next one soon,
and it will be gray to keep the purists happy.
Dan
|
|
| |
In lugnet.castle, Daniel Siskind writes:
>
> Red has always been the most common basic color, so that's why I always built • my
> castles with red ones. I'm actually going to start working on my next one • soon,
> and it will be gray to keep the purists happy.
>
> Dan
You could claim it was some Red Granite or some other stone that is mined
locally and unique to the area.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.castle, Kela Akira Kitkowski writes:
> In lugnet.castle, Daniel Siskind writes:
> >
> > Red has always been the most common basic color, so that's why I always built • my
> > castles with red ones. I'm actually going to start working on my next one • soon,
> > and it will be gray to keep the purists happy.
> >
> > Dan
>
> You could claim it was some Red Granite or some other stone that is mined
> locally and unique to the area.
Actually the stone was salvaged from the lost city of Nazarine, stained
eternally from river of blood left that washed over it after the butchery of its
citizenry at the hands of the Northmen... doh! I'm giving the story away!
Dan
|
|
| |
In lugnet.castle, Daniel Siskind writes:
> In lugnet.castle, Jonathan Wilson writes:
>
> (snip)
> >
> > WOW! That thing is huge! Where did you get so many red bricks?
>
> Red has always been the most common basic color, so that's why I always built my
> castles with red ones. I'm actually going to start working on my next one soon,
> and it will be gray to keep the purists happy.
>
> Dan
"purists"!? there are purists in .castle!? ;-)
THE original, most "purist" castle is bright yellow! red, being, as you
said, the most common lego color for bulk and diversity makes it the ideally
pure building color. the elaborate architectural details that you've
accomplished sooooo beautifully through the color choice are dynamicly
complimented by it! this same structure just would'nt look right in grey,
imho. (a b&w pic may prove this)
there NEEDED to exist a red castle. bloodstone is as pure as it gets!
thank you, dan, for creating and sharing this marvelous creation! i've
truly enjoyed following the progress, and am always looking forward to
what's next. (furniture, you say!? so, a mini-fig popuace, then?) bloodstone
is among the greatest lego castles i've seen. (in my top 5, honestly!)
these new pics amaze, delight, and inspire. (i'm beginnig my biggest castle
creation yet, also using red, but halved with black.)
later ~ craig~
|
|
| |
craig hamilton wrote:
> "purists"!? there are purists in .castle!? ;-)
Speaking of purism, I have another question along those
lines (and one that you can probably answer better than
anyone else, Craig).
So how much of a faux pas is it to modify plates, etc. for
your structures? I can see it for minifig character development,
but there are some parts that I "need" and can modify pretty
easily.
For example, to create the stopping mechanism for the
gearbox in my gate, I wanted to plug a 1x2 plate with the
horizontal side rod (#30236) into a 1x2 hinge base (#3937).
Unfortunately, the hinge base has a little nub that interferes
with the the middle of the side rod, so I'd like to carve that
out (actually, I think I'd take the middle of the rod out of #30236
instead).
The obvious disadvantage is that this is a one-of-a-kind, so
only I can build it. On the other hand, it's cool. :)
Comments?
Chris
--
Remove the nospam machine name in my email address to send a personal reply.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.castle, Christopher Lindsey writes:
> craig hamilton wrote:
>
> > "purists"!? there are purists in .castle!? ;-)
>
> Speaking of purism, I have another question along those
> lines (and one that you can probably answer better than
> anyone else, Craig).
>
> So how much of a faux pas is it to modify plates, etc. for
> your structures? I can see it for minifig character development,
> but there are some parts that I "need" and can modify pretty
> easily.
>
> For example, to create the stopping mechanism for the
> gearbox in my gate, I wanted to plug a 1x2 plate with the
> horizontal side rod (#30236) into a 1x2 hinge base (#3937).
> Unfortunately, the hinge base has a little nub that interferes
> with the the middle of the side rod, so I'd like to carve that
> out (actually, I think I'd take the middle of the rod out of #30236
> instead).
>
> The obvious disadvantage is that this is a one-of-a-kind, so
> only I can build it. On the other hand, it's cool. :)
>
> Comments?
>
> Chris
>
> --
> Remove the nospam machine name in my email address to send a personal reply.
well this throws the "have you ever warped or broken parts" thread into a
new light of consideration!
~ doing it on purpose! if it's a good idea, such as yours and you can
spare the piece, why not!? i'm looking at these pieces now, and will go for
it myself! you are not alone! why is it a disadvantage if you are? i have
lots of 'figs that no-one else has, and i wouldn't want it any other way!
_all_ great lego creations are "one-of-a-kind & only i can build it" anyway!
it's a bit better, if you choose to modyfy, to use a worn or dinged piece,
giving it a "second life" as something unique and useful.
bear in mind that a 1x1 plate with top clip on a 1x2 tile w/ single
centerd top stud would achieve the same type of base holder in a purist
mode. what you describe will work with just a small modification that
shouldn't impair the element's original function.
there. i've made one.
this new element has a cleaner look than the purist solution, though the
fit is a bit looser than i'd've thought. the side rod slides back and forth
a bit too freely. removing the side rod and pressing the grips of the hinge
holder together a bit solves this easily enough. nonetheless, this make for
a cool custom element, which i can see many uses for!
purism is a limitation imposed by one's own unigue outlook.
experimentation is limitless, however.
later ~ craigo,
purveyor of the purism of modification, dubbed "craigoism" by jeremy sproat.
|
|
| |
craig hamilton wrote:
> I well this throws the "have you ever warped or broken parts" thread into a
> new light of consideration!
Oooh, I must have missed that one... But I've got a doozy involving 24
gray castle walls if the thread resurfaces. :)
> bear in mind that a 1x1 plate with top clip on a 1x2 tile w/ single
> centerd top stud would achieve the same type of base holder in a purist
Ick. :) Then you're suddenly at brick height with a slightly lesser range
of motion...
> there. i've made one.
:)
> this new element has a cleaner look than the purist solution, though the
> fit is a bit looser than i'd've thought. the side rod slides back and forth
> a bit too freely. removing the side rod and pressing the grips of the hinge
> holder together a bit solves this easily enough. nonetheless, this make for
> a cool custom element, which i can see many uses for!
Cool! I just went ahead and made one too after reading about your
experience. I can see what you mean about it having the potential to
slide, so I cut a notch in the side rod that was only as wide as the center
num in the hinge base. That anchors it in the center. All in all, I'm quite
pleased with it!
> purveyor of the purism of modification, dubbed "craigoism" by jeremy sproat.
The purism of modifcation? My brain hurts... :)
Chris
--
Remove the nospam machine name in my email address to send a personal reply.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.castle, Christopher Lindsey writes:
> craig hamilton wrote:
>
> > I well this throws the "have you ever warped or broken parts" thread into a
> > new light of consideration!
>
> Oooh, I must have missed that one... But I've got a doozy involving 24
> gray castle walls if the thread resurfaces. :)
>
>
it's only a few hours old in .build!
> > bear in mind that a 1x1 plate with top clip on a 1x2 tile w/ single
> > centerd top stud would achieve the same type of base holder in a purist
>
> Ick. :) Then you're suddenly at brick height with a slightly lesser range
> of motion...
>
>
> > there. i've made one.
>
> :)
>
> > this new element has a cleaner look than the purist solution, though the
> > fit is a bit looser than i'd've thought. the side rod slides back and forth
> > a bit too freely. removing the side rod and pressing the grips of the hinge
> > holder together a bit solves this easily enough. nonetheless, this make for
> > a cool custom element, which i can see many uses for!
>
> Cool! I just went ahead and made one too after reading about your
> experience. I can see what you mean about it having the potential to
> slide, so I cut a notch in the side rod that was only as wide as the center
> num in the hinge base. That anchors it in the center. All in all, I'm quite
> pleased with it!
gah! now i have to do another one! that would work even better! the pieces
fit together quite nicely, anyway if not for that center nub. accomodating
it is better than removing it. the side bar plate isn't too wildly modified
and doesnt prevent original use, and greatly expands what it can now do. i
like this better than modifying the hinge base, and is much sturdier. the
modified hinge base still works fine with the original hinge top, btw,
this new piece combination, though it requires modifying said 1x2 plate w/
side rod, is very cool. it can be attatched many different ways and has a
nice 90 degree range of movement. i can see lots of uses for it, especially
in smaller constructions and details.
later ~ craig~
> > purveyor of the purism of modification, dubbed "craigoism" by jeremy sproat.
>
> The purism of modifcation? My brain hurts... :)
>
> Chris
hey, you asked. i've set forth a lot of my self-imposed restrictions
(purism) of modifying. if it uses a fairly common piece, and is a logical
extention of existing modularity, it is good. the less done to achieve the
desired element, the better, and not loosing original functon is ideal. of
course, i've had pieces go far beyond loosing original function to the point
of nonexisence! but the specialty brown accessory pieces that are on the
brickenstein monster and hunchbrick 'figs (on my transy-lego-vania pages):
http://community-1.webtv.net/craigo-lego/craigolegoindex
... are of more use to me than yet another un-used adventurer backpack
lying about. and like an indian on a buffalo, i didn't waste a bit, using it
all to create four new elements. (brown animal skin cape, hunchback element,
and pair of wrist cuffs)
in any case, (and imho), a good modification looks, "feels", and works as
if it were a manufactured piece.
later ~ craig~
> --
> Remove the nospam machine name in my email address to send a personal reply.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.castle, Daniel Siskind writes:
>
> Actually the stone was salvaged from the lost city of Nazarine, stained
> eternally from river of blood left that washed over it after the butchery of • its
> citizenry at the hands of the Northmen... doh! I'm giving the story away!
>
> Dan
Hey...waitaminute!! That sounds awfully familar...
|
|
| |
Hmm, just stumbled into this discussion, I'm wondering if you are aware
of a similar LEGO pure solution? The 2x4 plate with hinge (<part 3315>)
will work with the hinge brick (for a use, look at the draw bridge in
6086), so if you can live with a 2x4 plate instead of a 1x2 plate, and a
slightly larger spacing, no part modification necessary. Note that <part
3639> would also work. Of course what this also means is that a bunch of
parts work together, so to list them all:
Female 1x2 hinge components:
<part 3937> (1x2 tilt hinge brick)
<part 2440> (plow blade/radar antenna)
<part 3597> (2x4 plate w/hinge on top)
<part 3640> (2x4 plate w/vertical hinge at end)
<part 2443> (octagonal window frame)
<part 30200> (cockpit)
Male 1x2 hinge components:
<part 3938> (1x2 tilt hinge plate)
<part 6134> (2x2 tilt hinge plate)
<part 3639> (2x4 plate w/vertical hinge at end)
<part 3315> (2x4 plate w/horizontal hinge at end)
<part 2518b> (6x6 octagonal canopy)
<part 2418a> (6x6 octagonal canopy)
<part 2598> (10x10 octagonal canopy)
It wouldn't surprise me if there aren't a couple more parts.
--
Frank Filz
-----------------------------
Work: mailto:ffilz@us.ibm.com (business only please)
Home: mailto:ffilz@mindspring.com
|
|
| |
Frank Filz wrote:
>
> Hmm, just stumbled into this discussion, I'm wondering if you are aware
> of a similar LEGO pure solution? The 2x4 plate with hinge (<part 3315>)
> will work with the hinge brick (for a use, look at the draw bridge in
> 6086), so if you can live with a 2x4 plate instead of a 1x2 plate, and a
> slightly larger spacing, no part modification necessary. Note that <part
> 3639> would also work. Of course what this also means is that a bunch of
> parts work together, so to list them all:
>
> Female 1x2 hinge components:
>
> <part 3937> (1x2 tilt hinge brick)
> <part 2440> (plow blade/radar antenna)
> <part 3597> (2x4 plate w/hinge on top)
> <part 3640> (2x4 plate w/vertical hinge at end)
> <part 2443> (octagonal window frame)
> <part 30200> (cockpit)
>
> Male 1x2 hinge components:
>
> <part 3938> (1x2 tilt hinge plate)
> <part 6134> (2x2 tilt hinge plate)
> <part 3639> (2x4 plate w/vertical hinge at end)
> <part 3315> (2x4 plate w/horizontal hinge at end)
> <part 2518b> (6x6 octagonal canopy)
> <part 2418a> (6x6 octagonal canopy)
> <part 2598> (10x10 octagonal canopy)
>
> It wouldn't surprise me if there aren't a couple more parts.
Yup, forgot about
Male: <part 828> (Tractor Chassis Excavator Arm, Large)
Female: <part 3433> (Tractor Chassis Excavator Bucket, Large)
--
Frank Filz
-----------------------------
Work: mailto:ffilz@us.ibm.com (business only please)
Home: mailto:ffilz@mindspring.com
|
|
|
