Subject:
|
Re: Follow-up: What *IS* a building instruction anyway?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.inst
|
Date:
|
Fri, 2 Aug 2002 06:45:10 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2205 times
|
| |
|
|
<snip>
> > In the ideal world, the BIs should *AT THE MIN* be of the same quality as
> > those made by TLC. Quality in terms of image quality, easy of use, easy of
> > transportablity, and universal.
>
> Wow... that's a high bar to set. Consider that most enthusiasts create BIs
> for fun or *minor* profit. TLC has been at the BI game for decades, and
> trying to say that if a fan created BI doesn't meet or exceed that quality
> may be overreaching a tad.
Okay I may be in a small far right wing fanatic group but I ENJOY creating
BIs and other 3D images MORE THAN playing with the actual brick. For me the
challenege when showing the world something of lego of mine is to come up
with something that NOBODY HAS DONE or has seen. Making high quality BIs is
something few people do, just like my LEGO Poems. I don't find any fun in
taking someone' design and modifiing it or making a new lego train engine
based on a real life one. Others have already done that sort of thing so I
don't find any fun in that.
It's NOT to say that others work are NOT important because I am very
greatful for all those LDraw authors who have allowed me the oppurunity to
use their ldraw train engines in my custom scenese but I find no challenege
in showing something already being done by others to the world.
I'm a fruit cake what can I say. =) I need to march to a beat of a drummer
only I can hear. =)
>
> > Quality of Image: MLCAD based images ARE IMOP sub-quality images. A 3D
> > COLOR rendered image is what you should make, one that clearly defines each
> > piece(like what MegaPov can do)
>
> I agree that non-rendered LDraw based images are sub-optimal; mainly because
> parts blend together.
>
> I still think that photos, sketches, textual descriptions are valid if they
> get the point across.
Again this is based on the definition on a BI. BIs, in my mind are
BLUE-PRINTS. The user should be able to recreate 100% exaclty the MODEL YOU
MADE!
You, Jake, and others follow a more 'lose' term of BIs in which you are
trying to convey and idea of someone else. I'm cool with that becuase it
your way the user of the BIs 'learns' how to better build a model than with
my definition. I'm not concerned with the user 'learning' building
techiques. I want them to build MY MODEL!
=)
> > Easy of use: Creating a set of images and posting them on brickshelf *IS
> > NOT EASY TO USE*. Images should be complied in a logical numerical order
> > and clreay numbered. Using a powerpoint or pdf file works best for
> > electrionic versions. Powerpoint slides works best for colored printed version.
>
> To each his own. I know some people who hate PDFs or PPTs.
True both were just examples...
<snip>
-AHui
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Follow-up: What *IS* a building instruction anyway?
|
| (...) I agree that they *should* be precise and clear. But even if they aren't, that means that they are less than perfect, not non-BIs. (...) Wow... that's a high bar to set. Consider that most enthusiasts create BIs for fun or *minor* profit. TLC (...) (22 years ago, 1-Aug-02, to lugnet.inst)
|
11 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
