Subject:
|
Re: 8 vs. 6 (was: Excited to Finally be here...)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.trains
|
Date:
|
Wed, 9 Feb 2000 04:38:22 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
johnneal@uswest.#Spamcake#net
|
Viewed:
|
1726 times
|
| |
|
|
Tony Priestman wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Feb 2000, Mike Poindexter (<FpMJo1.HDw@lugnet.com>) wrote at
> 18:38:12
>
> >
> > Lego has kind of put us AFOLS in a pickle here, because they mix scales
> > constantly. Some things are bigger than they should be, some are smaller.
> > They both look fine individually, but put them together and they look wrong.
> > Maybe a little, maybe a lot, but they are still off. Rounding everything in
> > the real world to the nearest 15 or 18 inches would make things look weird,
> > but shrinking this arbitrarily and randomly would make things look even
> > weirder. Most train layouts I have seen try to stay away from looking
> > weird.
> >
> > I would suggest that you pick a scale, then do the math and figure how many
> > inches each stud equals. Stick to that scale for everything you build,
> > including your trains. If the minifigs don't quite look right in that
> > scale, that is fine. They don't look quite right in any scale.
>
> This is quite a good argument for six wide.
>
> The fundamental difficulty with trying to make scale model trains in
> LEGO *is* the scale problem. Because there is no scale, you simply can't
> do it consistently within the LEGO world.
I would qualify that by saying one can't if one uses set designs rather than
MOCs (or maybe that is what you mean here).
> You *can* build trains that look right, by using TLC's idiom of
> selective and dramatic compression & omission.
>
> But to try and model a prototype *within* a LEGO world is to make so
> many compromises that the exercise is futile.
I disagree, or maybe I'm not getting your point. Even when I build 8 wide, I am
not striving for perfect model prototyping. I want my trains to be run by MFs
(hmmm, I don't know about *that* abbreviation;). So, for instance, instead of
modeling a door that is correct in proportion (but not a working door) to a
given prototype, I use train doors that are too wide but can be used by
minifigs. Model Railroaders are all about external appearances-- I want my
dining car, for instance, to have seating for my minifigs and a galley with a
cook and a restroom with a toilet and sink and a roof that removes so you can
see it all (which mine does).
My 8 wides are *more* realistic than 6 wides, but are still "minifig scale" and
are functional inside as well as outside, separating them from prototype
modeling as in the Model Railroad hobby world which concentrates on the external
appearance of models.
-John
> So you're left with making an accurate model but taking it out of the
> minifig realm, or making a representation suitable for minifigs, which
> can't be scaled up to look right in the real world.
>
> It seems to me that the six wide lot are trying to convince themselves
> that they can make scale models, when the simple fact is that they can
> only make toys.
>
> I'm definitely *not* saying that there is anything wrong with this. In
> fact, it's where the challenge lies. A literal interpretation is easy;
> using TLC's idiom to design & build a good looking train isn't.
> --
> Tony Priestman
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: 8 vs. 6 (was: Excited to Finally be here...)
|
| On Wed, 9 Feb 2000, John Neal (<38A0EF13.EBC9F60A@...west.net>) wrote at 04:38:22 (...) This is my point, really. It may just be that I've read things incorrectly, but it appears that many people want to do scale models with LEGO proportions (ie. (...) (25 years ago, 9-Feb-00, to lugnet.trains)
| | | Re: 8 vs. 6 (was: Excited to Finally be here...)
|
| Just a minor disagreement/clarification... (...) This is mildly incorrect. There are a lot of old school modelers who detail everything, INside and out. Right down to roofs that come off the buildings so you can see the details, very very tiny (...) (25 years ago, 9-Feb-00, to lugnet.trains)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: 8 vs. 6 (was: Excited to Finally be here...)
|
| On Tue, 8 Feb 2000, Mike Poindexter (<FpMJo1.HDw@lugnet.com>) wrote at 18:38:12 (...) This is quite a good argument for six wide. The fundamental difficulty with trying to make scale model trains in LEGO *is* the scale problem. Because there is no (...) (25 years ago, 8-Feb-00, to lugnet.trains)
|
40 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
|
|
|
|
