Do you like studs hidden or showing?

[Legoist]

Just a fairly simple question to all AFOLs and MOCers in particular. It was prompted by the latest comment from my wife as I finished building the Emerald Night, that "it doesn't look like it's made of Lego bricks"

Either in official sets you buy or in your own MOCs, do you generally prefer models where studs are largely visible, or do you prefer flat surfaces, with studs hidden under tiles for instance?

I'm sure that when I was a KFOL in the 80s, I constantly longed for more slopes and tiles as I wanted to get most surfaces flat. But now I get the feeling that all flat and smooth is a bit too much, and at least some studs should show. But I have noticed clearly that a lot of MOCers hide almost all their studs, and lots of current official sets follow the same idea.

So what's your preference?

[Dennimator]

I don´t really care. It´s LEGO after all, so studs are part of it, but some things look better tiled (for example roads etc.), while other things (for example grass) looks better with the studs showing. I usually use a mix between both, even in a single MOC. Some details tiled and some with studs showing.

[Rick]

I like the mix that TLG uses in their official sets. Fully tiled gives a really finished look, but it also takes away from the 'Lego look' of a MOC.

[Siegfried]

For the most part I tend to only tile over studs if I need the area to be smooth for functional reasons. Some things, such as modular building footpaths, should obviously be tiled to fit in with the rest, but when doing personal MOCs I prefer the studded look.

It's really untrendy I know, but that's my lot in life.

[mikey]

I personally I am not a fan of totally studless design. The stud should be celebrated for its clutch abilities! I think you can create nice contrasts between the smooth and studded areas, a great example being landscape where I think studs add to the design. So I like studs, but sometimes I also wish to hide them. I think the official sets have a good mixture of both effects.

[Captain Blackmoor]

I like both, smooth surfaces have to be tiled, tables and sometimes floors.

Tile a surface with brown tiles and you have a wonderful wooden floor which is impossible to make with studs.

For roads I like studs though, but for wall tops I prefer tiling again.

I like both, I just use tiles when it looks better. Water doesn't always need to be tiled.

Nice topic.

[Captain Green Hair]

Depends on what it should represent.

But I like my models to be as smooth as possible and only show studs that represent nails, a rough surface etc.

[blueandwhite]

I don't mind one way or the other however I do like to see some studs. I'm really not that fond of the smooth blue water that people have moved to in modern MOCs. The same can be said for cobblestone pathways. LEGO has a wonderful texture to it, yet it seems that many go to great lengths to eliminate it completely from their work. At the same time, there is no denying the beauty of certain studless elements. Tiled floors and brown plates as a wooden walkway are perfect and add greatly to a MOC. Moreover, builders who tend to work studless seem to build to a higher standard.

I personally feel that the best MOCs out there balance studless design with conventional techniques. There are incredible builders like DNL or Kris Kelvin who balance the two perfectly. Studs are used for effect just as effectively as studless aspects of their MOCs. Everything is deliberate. Sly Owl is another great example of a builder who uses texture brilliantly. In the end, it's the superior building skills of the aforementioned builders that really stands out. Studs or no; a MOC generally is defined by the talent of the builder more than anything else. I suspect much of the appeal for studless design comes from the fact that the best builders use it so effectively.

[Dennimator]

I personally feel that the best MOCs out there balance studless design with conventional techniques. There are incredible builders like DNL or Kris Kelvin who balance the two perfectly. Studs are used for effect just as effectively as studless aspects of their MOCs. Everything is deliberate. Sly Owl is another great example of a builder who uses texture brilliantly. In the end, it's the superior building skills of the aforementioned builders that really stands out. Studs or no; a MOC generally is defined by the talent of the builder more than anything else. I suspect much of the appeal for studless design comes from the fact that the best builders use it so effectively.

Seconded.

And when it comes to builders, don´t forget Ralph_S´ wonderful vehicles.

[Siegfried]

Studs are used for effect just as effectively as studless aspects of their MOCs. Everything is deliberate.

I've never liked the idea of using studs as texture. Once you do that you have to tile as otherwise any stud shown will be seen as a deliberate detail. I prefer to see things from the point of view that the studs are to be ignored.

I do however use studs and tiles for slight level changes... so I suppose I want it all!

[Dr. Steve]

Great Topic!

I like tiled floors and tiled water (ocean, lake, etc.). But prefer studs for grass and roads (1x1 rounds for the cobble stone look)

[Dr Kilroy]

It depends. On small surfaces (vignettes, eventually small dioramas) I like to hide the studs. On bigger surfaces I left the studs showing. I also hide studs in all City and Town MOCs.

[Big Cam]

I think it really depends on what your building, I don't know how else to answer this,.

[Princess Storm]

I prefer studs showing if it's a surface I might want to put minifigs or other objects onto - e.g. floors, tables, counters etc. However, for the tops of walls and for roofs, I prefer studless (though, when doing the crenelated top of a castle wall, it can be a pain to find enough 2x1 tiles to cover every part of it!). I don't like the un-lego look of MOCs with no visible studs at all.

[brickzone]

I like a mix similar to official sets. I am partly put off fully tiling for practical reasons (i.e. having enough tiles) but also because I think sometimes it doesn't make sense for surfaces that are "rough" in real life. I think leaving studs matters more too for particular details on models rather than the larger parts, in the former case surfaces should be tiled if they are flat, but in the latter case it can be ignored in my opinion - like picture made of large squares where when you look at it from further away, the squares are not really seen.

Some subjects really benefit from tiling even large areas though - there was a space hanger MOC recently that looked swish and shiny due to the use of tiles. I'm not such a fan of tiles for things like water, grass etc. as these are not usually smooth and flat in real life (excepting "seas like glass" etc.) Sometimes tiling can also draw attention to the "blockiness" of a model (studs make the surfaces less defined, and so you don't notice the edges quite so severely).

So even if I had more tiles, I would not tile with wild abandon, but would still pick and choose where to tile. Plus I agree about the fact that it is Lego and as such it is entirely reasonable to have some studs showing even if the true purpose of the stud is functionality.

[Peppermint_M]

I like a mix. I love the studded Lego Look but then if it looks "cooler" to cover all or just certain studs then I'll do that. It all depends how I feel at the time, looking through my MOCs I don't have any studless ones, but plenty of mixed MOCs.

[Svelte]

I prefer some studs, as I like my MOCs to look like LEGO, and part of the same LEGO system that I played with as a kid. There's an element of nostalgia in that, I suppose. But I also like LEGO to be playable and I hate minifigs that constantly fall over on smooth surfaces so I always have studs somewhere for practical reasons. The stud is the defining aesthetic component of the LEGO system, and to erase it completely seems needlessly snobbish (OMG! Realism!) or somewhat obsessive-compulsive. Out damn stud! As Lady Macbeth might say.

To compare two builders who seem to share similar interests () I have to say I prefer I Scream Clone's work to kris kelvin's for this very reason. Compare and contrast the recent Western MOCs! To me, ISC's Saloon MOC looks more fun and organic, and isn't ashamed of its studdy foundation - it's an inviting balance of detail and playability. While kris' work is beautiful, I find it a little too polished. Looking at Pif Paf City you can see what Siegfried means about using studs to add texture (like the road works or missing planks on the brown building) - once you start, then you sort of have to tile everything else as contrast. Great builders, very different styles - but I believe the stud should be celebrated not hidden away!

The Emerald Night must be one of the most studless official System models ever made at such a scale. It was instantly what I thought of when I saw this topic (before I read the first post). It's a beautiful train but I don't think I'd want everything in that style

[prateek]

I don´t really care. It´s LEGO after all, so studs are part of it, but some things look better tiled (for example roads etc.), while other things (for example grass) looks better with the studs showing. I usually use a mix between both, even in a single MOC. Some details tiled and some with studs showing.

I don't care either. It just has to look good. For instance, if there is a MOC with a tiled surface with random studs, then no.

[blueandwhite]

To compare two builders who seem to share similar interests () I have to say I prefer I Scream Clone's work to kris kelvin's for this very reason. Compare and contrast the recent Western MOCs! To me, ISC's Saloon MOC looks more fun and organic, and isn't ashamed of its studdy foundation - it's an inviting balance of detail and playability. While kris' work is beautiful, I find it a little too polished. Looking at Pif Paf City you can see what Siegfried means about using studs to add texture (like the road works or missing planks on the brown building) - once you start, then you sort of have to tile everything else as contrast. Great builders, very different styles - but I believe the stud should be celebrated not hidden away!

I'm a bit confused as both I Scream Clone and Kris Kelvin have used a mix of studless and studed design. In fact, Pif Paf City and I Scream Clone's Saloon look like they could be from a close family of MOCs with their tiled roofs and overhangs. Ironically, Kris' saloon has a studed porch whereas I Scream Clone went for a tiled one. Are these two MOCs really that different? I can certainly appreciate that you prefer I Scream Clone's work, but I don't see how you can suggest that Kris' work is ashamed of showing studs. As far as I can tell, Kris really hasn't gone to greater lengths to hide the studs in his MOC than I Scream Clone has.

Also, are builders who elect to work towards a studless appearance really snobbish or obsessive-compulsive? At the end of the day, it's just a personal preference.

[CP5670]

I often use tiles as accents in my models but make no attempt to actually cover up studs. I like to maintain that blocky and distinctive Lego appearance, even if it might make my models look less impressive.

I prefer some studs, as I like my MOCs to look like LEGO, and part of the same LEGO system that I played with as a kid. There's an element of nostalgia in that, I suppose. But I also like LEGO to be playable and I hate minifigs that constantly fall over on smooth surfaces so I always have studs somewhere for practical reasons. The stud is the defining aesthetic component of the LEGO system, and to erase it completely seems needlessly snobbish (OMG! Realism!) or somewhat obsessive-compulsive. Out damn stud! As Lady Macbeth might say.

This is the main reason I avoid tiled floors. I like the look of such floors but minifigs are designed to integrate into models using studs, and you can't reliably keep them upright on a tiled surface. Some builders put hidden 1x1 plates where the minifigs are standing, which is a reasonable compromise, but it only works well for static scenes rather than the playable models that I like to build.

Also, are builders who elect to work towards a studless appearance really snobbish or obsessive-compulsive? At the end of the day, it's just a personal preference.

You are right, but I can see where he is coming from. A few models I've seen do give the impression that the builder sees studs as a kind of defect of the Lego system. If people don't like the studded Lego look at all, I think there might be other, non-Lego construction systems out there that are better suited to such models.

Edited January 30, 2010 by CP5670

[dr_spock]

I like a mix. I haven't created anything that's all studless. I need to show at least some studs to give it that Lego feel.

[badboytje88]

Here is my list of stuff I would build SNOT and stuff I would build SOT

Grass - SOT

Water - SNOT (But definately not tiled)

Rough water - SOT

Modern roads - SNOT

Old roads - SOT (cobblestone roads with lots of 1x1 rounds)

Pavement - SNOT

Rocks SNOT - (I love covering up all those studs with dark bley cheese)

Floors - SNOT (I am a huge fan of paterns made with 1x1 tiles)

Old floors - SOT (I'm also a sucker for paterns made with 1x1 plates)

Space hangars - SNOT (To make everything look smooth)

Other planet - SOT

Desert sand - SOT

Space ships - SNOT (For better swooshability)

Ship - SNOT

Cars -SNOT (If possible)

Furniture - SNOT SNOT SNOT

This is how I would build these things. Given that I'd have enough parts to tile them. I do however have a huge problem with tiled water. Tiled water looks awefull. Using blue bricks and building SNOT with them looks so much better.

Bart

Edit: It took me at least 3 times to edit this post... I'm like the post editor!

Edited January 30, 2010 by badboytje88

[Sandy]

Here is my list of stuff I would build SNOT and stuff I would build SOT

But this topic isn't about the SNOT technique, it's about whether to show studs or hide them. Tiling is different from Studs-Not-On-Top, you must know that.

As for me, I'm gradually moving towards tiling surfaces, because 1) my collection has increased so that I now actually have enough tiles to do it, 2) my building techniques have improved from watching all these gorgeous creations here, and 3) a tiled floor really does look better than a studded one, despite it's impracticality with figs (I've found jumper plates to be handy with minifig placement, though).

I will never hide studs completely, though, because I too appreciate them for what they are, and they really do bring texture to things. Studs don't really bother me at all, tiled surfaces look more finished but also less LEGO-like.

So yeah, I do love studs...

[Zorbas]

My thoughts on this is that I always have the impression that creations having visible studs are more playable and studless ones more for display purposes.

Perhaps I'm influenced from the past LEGO years. The thing is that when I first saw pictures from the new blue plane, I really liked that the wings were "covered" with studs.

So, I would say 80% studs and 20% studless sections in a creation/set is my choice.

The verdict? I want studs to show themselves!

[Ralph_S]

There's a common misconception about what SNOT means (or perhaps I don't understand it myself ) SNOT does not mean that you can't see the studs. Slapping tiles over your studs isn't SNOT. As far as I understand it any type of construction in which the tops of the bricks point in any direction other than up is an example of SNOT, irrespective of whether or not you can see the actual studs. I do a lot of SNOT building, but I do tend to have studs on my models.

An example: my Sea Knight helicopter. Studs on top, but full of SNOT building, in particular for the sides of the fuselage.

It's largely a conscious choice. No matter how realistic I may try to make my models, I prefer to show that they are made out of LEGO. A second reason is that for me the shape is far more important than the texture and by combining studs and tiles you can actual make a shape look more accurate. For instance, if you have a surface with studs but an edge of tiles around it it makes the surface look slightly curved. It's a technique they use quite frequently in LEGOLand (for vehicles in particular) and one that I use quite regularly too. Check out the roof on my Jaguar, for instance.

(I hope I can be forgiven for adding pictures of my MOCs to many of my posts. It's not because I want to 'pimp' my models, but because it's often far more easy to explain what I mean by showing a picture than by trying to describe it with words. )

I admire some of the studless building people do, but it isn't for me. I've also seen plenty of MOCs hat were studless (because it supposedly is more realistic), but that were rubbish regardless.

Cheers,

Ralph