 | | Re: Why not update BrickShelf to the present?
|
|
(...) You should trade the work back to them for $500K in bulk ordered specialty parts -- and then share it with all of us member lugnuts. In all honesty, it would be fair... -- Richard (25 years ago, 4-Mar-00, to lugnet.db.scans)
|
| |
| | Re: Why not update BrickShelf to the present?
|
|
(...) Forgive me if my memory is faulty -- but I thought it was you, Kevin, who interpreted a statement of Brad Justus' to mean that up to the present/current scans were okay. I think it was stated in one of those tedious threads about the Huw (...) (25 years ago, 4-Mar-00, to lugnet.db.scans)
|
| |
| | Re: Why not update BrickShelf to the present?
|
|
(...) The original purpose of the scans archive was as an historical archive. (...) It would cost them well over $500K, perhaps $1.5M do do it themselves. (...) I'm not opposed to having current sets but the current policy stands unless TLC offers (...) (25 years ago, 4-Mar-00, to lugnet.db.scans)
|
| |
| | Re: Why not update BrickShelf to the present?
|
|
Richard Marchetti wrote in message ... (...) disregard (...) get a (...) care; (...) making (...) Exactly. If Lego has a problem they will let it be known. At the very least, how about some 1998 scans? www.brickshelf.com still says no scans after (...) (25 years ago, 4-Mar-00, to lugnet.db.scans)
|
| |
| | Why not update BrickShelf to the present?
|
|
Hey y'all and especially Kevin: If I am wrong as to some very important particular issue here, just disregard the following... ...but why don't we, or Kevin, bring the BrickShelf scans current to the present date? Its my understanding that Lego is (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.db.scans)
|
| |
| | Re: 3033 1200-Piece Blue Bucket
|
|
Ok, for multiple sets I can see how it helps. I just hate to give up another field in that 80-character line. I guess I should just give up on the 80-character line.... John C. In lugnet.db.inv, Steve Bliss writes: [SNIP] (...) (25 years ago, 1-Mar-00, to lugnet.db.inv)
|
| |
| | Re: 3033 1200-Piece Blue Bucket
|
|
(...) Actually, I had keyed "bag1", "bag2", etc. But I figured the "bag" prefix was redundant (at least in this case). If I was inventorying 8448, where there are several boxes, each with multiple bags, I'd use a notation like "box1.bag3", or (...) (25 years ago, 28-Feb-00, to lugnet.db.inv)
|
| |
| | Please help!
|
|
Please tell me this is the right place to post this. If not I do apologize, I normally post in the Star Wars portion of Lugnet. Does anybody know if there is a such thing (piece) as a 4x4 gray/ grey turntable. My current project requires one. If you (...) (25 years ago, 28-Feb-00, to lugnet.db.inv)
|
| |
| | Please help!
|
|
Please tell me this is the right place to post this. If not I do apologize, I normally post in the Star Wars portion of Lugnet. Does anybody know if there is a such thing (piece) as a 4x4 gray/ grey turntable. My current project requires one. If you (...) (25 years ago, 28-Feb-00, to lugnet.db.inv)
|
| |
| | Re: 3033 1200-Piece Blue Bucket
|
|
Steve, How do you identify the bags? Just make up the numbers in hex? I really don't understand how this helps sorters. I sort for the most part but I don't pay much attention to what comes from what bag. as evah, John C. (...) [ETC...] (25 years ago, 27-Feb-00, to lugnet.db.inv)
|
| |
| | Re: Another (semi-) standard field for inventories
|
|
(...) Hmm. Who doesn't want to share? I'll share. The most recent set I noticed this phenomenon in was the 5978 Sphynx Secret Surprise. It was pretty annoying since a bag was missing from one of the sets I got. I wanted to know what pieces I was (...) (25 years ago, 27-Feb-00, to lugnet.db.inv)
|
| |
| | Re: 3033 1200-Piece Blue Bucket
|
|
(...) Hey, cool! I didn't know the web-interface did that. Nifty. (if you don't get it, go to (URL) to see what we mean. So much for arguing over spaces or tabs in inventory posts. Steve (25 years ago, 25-Feb-00, to lugnet.db.inv)
|
| |
| | Re: 3033 1200-Piece Blue Bucket
|
|
(...) <snip> Lines up for me... (25 years ago, 24-Feb-00, to lugnet.db.inv)
|
| |
| | 3033 1200-Piece Blue Bucket
|
|
Here is an example of an inventory with the bags identified. It's tab-delimited, so the columns won't line up, unless you mess with your tab settings or import the data into a spreadsheet. Read Todd's message in this thread about bag-inventories (...) (25 years ago, 24-Feb-00, to lugnet.db.inv)
|
| |
| | Re: Another (semi-) standard field for inventories
|
|
(...) Very interesting. I was wondering if bag-contents changed over time. But I could only think of one or two people who I was fairly certain would know the answer, and I wasn't sure they'd feel like sharing. So thanks for passing on that bit of (...) (25 years ago, 24-Feb-00, to lugnet.db.inv)
|
| |
| | Re: Another (semi-) standard field for inventories
|
|
(...) A side note: The contents of any particular bag in a medium- to large-sized LEGO set can change over time on different production runs. I've seen it happen many times -- one copy of the set has, say, a 2x3 black brick in the same bag as a 2x4 (...) (25 years ago, 24-Feb-00, to lugnet.db.inv)
|
| |
| | Another (semi-) standard field for inventories
|
|
I couldn't find a definitive prior discussion to followup-to, so I'm posting this fresh. So far, the general standard set of fields for an inventory has been: Part Name Part Number (where available) Color Quantity I'd like to suggest another field (...) (25 years ago, 24-Feb-00, to lugnet.db.inv)
|
| |
| | Re: REQ set 8286
|
|
(...) Thanks, Kim! You helped me find a couple parts I really need which are allready in my collection! Big thanks to you and others who do inventories! -John Van (25 years ago, 22-Feb-00, to lugnet.db.inv)
|
| |
| | Re: CD jewel case design for scan collections
|
|
(...) I can't save them in Word95/6.0 format since it doesn't support vertical aligned text in table cells, but you can open them with Word97, since there is no format differences between them, as far as I know. I updated CD labels with a more (...) (25 years ago, 18-Feb-00, to lugnet.db.scans)
|
| |
| | Re: CD jewel case design for scan collections
|
|
I don't have MS Word 2000, but the files open fine. Ryan (...) (25 years ago, 17-Feb-00, to lugnet.db.scans)
|
