| |
Some quick answers...
In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Jim DeVona wrote:
> The new minimum-entries rule has inspired me to enter the LDraw.org Model of the
> Month contest. I have a few questions:
Excellent. Thanks.
> 1. Should entries that use unofficial parts (real LEGO parts that are not yet
> LDraw certified) include those parts in the MPD file? I know there is no rule
> requiring this, but I am curious if it would be helpful.
You should include the unofficial parts as submodels.
> 2. Does the rule against official LEGO models and box art-inspired models apply
> to entirely custom alternate models as well? (By "alternate models" I mean
> "MOCs" created only with pieces from a single set.)
So long as you invent it then it's yours to submit. We don't want someone to
post an MPD of the alternative model shown on the back of the box, other than
that it's up to you what parts you use.
> I assume for the purpose of the contest, if not in general, the answer to the
> question I pose at http://news.lugnet.com/cad/dev/?n=10660 is that submodel
> names should indeed be conservatively treated as filenames.
Probably best to be conservative. I don't think your entry would be vetoed if
you weren't but the less risk of extra work we (actually just Willy) have to do
the happier we'll be.
> One incidental point I would like to make about MOTM voting is that to me, the
> composition of an LDraw file is as important as the screenshot in judging how
> "good" the model is. For example, a well-composed model may be comprised of
> articulated submodels for each moving part, whereas a less impressive model
> might not utilize submodels, making it difficult to "pose" or otherwise
> manipulate the final creation. For other people, the STEP sequence may be
> important for creating intuitive instructions.
>
> In either case, I propose that the contestant LDraw files be made available to
> voters as part of the ballot. This requirement would have two advantages.
> Firstly, it would allow voters to incorporate substantive criteria in their
> decision by inspecting the structure of the actual LDraw file (after all, this
> is an LDraw contest). Secondly, it would be an excellent opportunity to
> encourage LDraw "best practices." As the LDraw format itself moves towards
> standardization, why not emphasize the value of well-designed models?
>
> Admittedly, this value is rather abstract, but with all the fuss about the
> standard and part certification, it seems reasonable to celebrate models that
> aspire to the same quality as the system with which they were built.
>
> So those are my two questions and my two cents!
>
> Jim
That's an interesting point and one which we will certainly take into account.
Expect some work behind the scenes on this (although possibly not a lot given
other more pressing issues).
Tim
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | MOTM Contest Questions and a Proposal
|
| The new minimum-entries rule has inspired me to enter the LDraw.org Model of the Month contest. I have a few questions: 1. Should entries that use unofficial parts (real LEGO parts that are not yet LDraw certified) include those parts in the MPD (...) (17 years ago, 23-Aug-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, lugnet.cad)
|
9 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
