Subject:
|
Re: A little math cioncerning ships, containers and Minifigs
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.boats, lugnet.trains
|
Date:
|
Thu, 20 May 2004 15:37:03 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
18558 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.boats, Jan-Albert van Ree wrote:
> In lugnet.lego, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
>
> > That container's 8 wide! I prefer my scenes more packed with detail rather
> > than doing one 10 foot long ship so that I can fit my to scale containers on.
> > (and, arguably, 10 foot is too short if you want 6000 TEU worth of containers
> > on it).
> >
> > Absolute to scale realism is for scale models. This is a toy. I want to evoke
> > a scene, not get the rivet count right. Think tinplate, not scale.
> >
> > Where on earth are you going to get space to show a 10 foot long ship, in
> > context with several others, and with containre cranes busily unloading, as
> > just PART of an overall layout? In the space you'd spend JUST on your ship, I
> > can do several, then fit in an engine yard, a farm and maybe a mountain.
> >
> > Selective compresssion is clearly the way to go here. I'm just myself not
> > sure if I switch to 6 wide containers or stick with the LEGO standard (1) 4
> > wide containers... I'll ooh and aah at your models as interesting academic
> > exercises, but I won't be building 8 wide containers.
>
> While on one side I'd say that you're right here, on the other hand some things
> in proper proportions can get a point across much better.
>
> http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=614099
> http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=614098
>
> If you've ever seen a real terminal, you'll know it's really overwhelming. I
> think using 4*6 or 4*8 containers and a crane like LEGO's 4555 doesn't manage to
> give you the same feeling. The above crane (by Ludger Havighorst) did manage to
> do that. Plus it's motorized ;) It's still not really to scale, but against a
> minifig it does look much more realistic.
> BTW the containers are 7-wide, and use some clever building techniques
>
> http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=68738
> --
> Jan-Albert van Ree
I can see both sides of this, but I'm more swayed by 'selective compression', as
Larry mentioned.
For example--
Jeff VW set up his harbour cranes at a few of our train shows--
http://sparky.i989.net/images/nmra0307/P009703.jpg
http://sparky.i989.net/images/rtl0301/p008660.jpg
http://sparky.i989.net/images/rtl0301/p008680.jpg
Using the 'standard' 4x8xwhatever freight containers. The cranes were motorized
and RCX'ed to pick up a container from the ship and drop it in the yard (k, that
part didn't work as well, but with a little more time for programming...)
Anyway, for me, if you have the room and the pieces, do the larger scale. I
don't have either the room or the pieces, so I'll have to stay with the
compression.
Those 7-8 wide containers are very nice, though :)
Dave K
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
9 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
