Measurement Conversions

[the_green_avenger]

I was doing some measurements, for a ship recreation I was to do, And had to make some conversions of stud to brick, in order to make things minifig scale. So I worked out that if minifig scale is 1:44.307692307 (supposively minifigs are 6ft. tall) And they are exactly 5 studs tall, that means the ratio is 6:5, or for every five studs in lego, it is six feet in real life.

If you divide that, you get 1.2 feet per stud, or 0.8333... studs per foot.

So, say you have an 85 foot long ship. Simply multiply by 0.833 and you have a 71 (70.83) stud, in length, ship.

I'm doing a replica of the HMS beagle which is 90.3 feet long, calculated out to 75 studs and 24.5 feet wide, calculated out to 20 studs (just thought I might share an application of these conversions)

For those of you that don't use feet, in measurement, one foot = 0.3048 meters, so minifigs would be 1.8288 meters tall, meaning the ratio would be 1.8288:5 or for every five studs in lego, it is about 1.8 meters in real life.

If you divide that, you get 0.36576 meters per stud, or 2.7340332458442694663167104111986 studs per meter (just to be exact)

So, say you have a 45 meter long ship. Simply multiply by 2.734 and you have a 123 (123.03) stud, in length, ship.

Also here is a "stud converter site" That would probably help a lot too... (BTW calculations from this site are not exactly the same as mine, FYI)

If you feel like "setting" the height of your minifig, say, you think minifigs are 5 feet tall (like blueandwhite thinks) just convert to inches and divide by 1.625 (thats how many inches tall minifigs are if you include nub on top) to find the scale. Then, simply convert the length of the real life object to inches, multiply by the ratio in fraction form (1/x) to find the length of the model in inches, and since one stud is 0.3125 inches, divied the number you came up with by 0.3125 to find th length in studs...

For example, say you want figs to be 5'10", convert to inches (70), divide by 1.625, just add 1:x (or 1/x) and you have your ratio (1:43.076923 or 1/43.076923)

Then, if you wanted to make a real life object using YOUR OWN minifig scale, simply convert its length (say 24 feet) to inches (288 inches), then multiply that by the ratio in fraction form (288x(1/43.076923) and you have it length in minifig scale, in inches (6.6857142976530612458090379389447 inches), divide by 0.3125, and you have the length in studs... (21, really 21.394285752489795986588921404621 rounded)

*anyone need that in metric?

Edited February 28, 2010 by the_green_avenger

[ILikePi]

You might want to check out this handy dandy stud converter site.

I also remember that there was a topic on this stuff. I'll go and find it...

EDIT: Here it is!

Edited February 17, 2010 by ILikePi

[blueandwhite]

I don't really think that there is a fixed measurement. Personally, I prefer to treat minifigs as being short at around 5ft. It also makes for a very convenient 1:1 ratio where 1 stud is roughly a foot. Given that minifig proportions are so unusual it really doesn't matter what way you choose to measure your MOCs. My issue is that making a minifig 6ft tall results in doors and passageways that seem decidedly too narrow. Ultimately, these measurements are less significant when making a large scale MOC as very few creations are built at 1:1. The difficulty with LEGO minifig proportions is more pronounced when you look at smaller vehicles and structures where the odd shape of the figure always gets in the way. Either the vehicle looks too large, or the figure is too wide to properly be accommodated.

Just my feelings on the subject.

[the_green_avenger]

I don't really think that there is a fixed measurement. Personally, I prefer to treat minifigs as being short at around 5ft. It also makes for a very convenient 1:1 ratio where 1 stud is roughly a foot. Given that minifig proportions are so unusual it really doesn't matter what way you choose to measure your MOCs. My issue is that making a minifig 6ft tall results in doors and passageways that seem decidedly too narrow. Ultimately, these measurements are less significant when making a large scale MOC as very few creations are built at 1:1. The difficulty with LEGO minifig proportions is more pronounced when you look at smaller vehicles and structures where the odd shape of the figure always gets in the way. Either the vehicle looks too large, or the figure is too wide to properly be accommodated.

Just my feelings on the subject.

true, but it is very commonly accepted that minifigs are 6 ft.

But if you want conversions for a 5ft. fig the scale would in fact be 1:1 so every stud equals a foot. (5 feet is still pretty short, avereage is about 5' 10" (I think)

Since one foot equals 0.3048 meters the scale would be 1:0.3048 so you could say every three studs is about a meter, but in truth it would be every three studs is 1.0936132983377077865266841644794 meters

You might want to check out this handy dandy stud converter site.

I also remember that there was a topic on this stuff. I'll go and find it...

EDIT: Here it is!

I could've guessed there was alrady some topic on it. Guess I probably should've checked, maybe bumped the topic. Oh well, thats more of just a discussion, plus mine is easy to understand, and you don't have to go digging through the forums to find it.

BTW, I like the site! very helpful! Thanks for posting!

Edited February 18, 2010 by the_green_avenger

[blueandwhite]

true, but it is very commonly accepted that minifigs are 6 ft.

But if you want conversions for a 5ft. fig the scale would in fact be 1:1 so every stud equals a foot. (5 feet is still pretty short, avereage is about 5' 10" (I think)

I've never heard that it was commonly accepted that minifigs are 6 ft. tall before. I suppose it depends on whether you view minifigs as being exceedingly short or morbidly obese. I think there has been a lot of discussion on what height is appropriate for a minifig, but I don't think there is a definite answer. This is similar to the 6 vs. 8-wide train debate. The proportions of minifigs simply don't allow for an ideal scale. I prefer to treat minifigs as being on the short side, but that's simply a personal preference.

[Ralph_S]

I was doing some measurements, for a ship recreation I was to do, And had to make some conversions of stud to brick, in order to make things minifig scale. So I worked out that if minifig scale is 1:40 (supposively minifigs are 6ft. tall) And they are exactly 5 studs tall, that means the ratio is 6:5, or for every five studs in lego, it is six feet in real life.

If you divide that, you get 1.2 feet per stud, or 0.8333... studs per foot.

So, say you have an 85 foot long ship. Simply multiply by 0.833 and you have a 71 (70.83) stud, in length, ship.

For those of you that don't use feet, in measurement, but one foot = 0.3048 meters, so minifigs would be 1.8288 meters tall, meaning the ratio would be 1.8288:5 or for every five studs in lego, it is about 1.8 meters in real life.

If you divide that, you get 0.36576 meters per stud, or 2.7340332458442694663167104111986 studs per meter (just to be exact)

So, say you have a 45 meter long ship. Simply multiply by 2.734 and you have a 123 (123.03) stud, in length, ship.

Also here is a "stud converter site" That would probably help a lot too... (BTW calculations from this site are not exactly the same as mine, FYI)

Figures are the equivalent of five studs tall. One stud corresponds to roughly 0.8cm, so 5 studs equals 4 cm. Consequently, if I take a figure to be approximately 1.8 m tall, I find a scale of 1/(180/4) is 1/45.

Conversion from metric to Imperial units is a pain in the behind, but a close equivalent would be:

One stud corresponds to roughly 1/3 inch, so five studs is 5/3 inch. If i take a figure to be 6ft tall (=6x12inch) the scale becomes 1/(6x12x3/5) is approximately 1/43.

Obviously with more precise conversions you;d find the same scale in both systems, but quite how you reach 1/40 is a mystery to me.

I've never heard that it was commonly accepted that minifigs are 6 ft. tall before. I suppose it depends on whether you view minifigs as being exceedingly short or morbidly obese. I think there has been a lot of discussion on what height is appropriate for a minifig, but I don't think there is a definite answer. This is similar to the 6 vs. 8-wide train debate. The proportions of minifigs simply don't allow for an ideal scale. I prefer to treat minifigs as being on the short side, but that's simply a personal preference.

I agree. It is mainly a personal preference that IMO very much depends on what you want to do with your figures. I chose my scale such that the height of figures looks reasonable next to my vehicles, which leads me to use approximately 1/45. Consequently I cannot have figures sitting side-by-side in most of my vehicles. If you want figures side-by-side you'll have to chose a larger scale.

The 6 vs 8 wide train debate indeed is similar. If you want a realistic scale you end up with 8 studs wide. If you want it to actually fit on LEGO curves you'll have to go smaller. It all depends on what you want.

Cheers,

Ralph

[Dennimator]

Figures are the equivalent of five studs tall. One stud corresponds to roughly 0.8cm, so 5 studs equals 4 cm. Consequently, if I take a figure to be approximately 1.8 m tall, I find a scale of 1/(180/4) is 1/45.

Conversion from metric to Imperial units is a pain in the behind, but a close equivalent would be:

One stud corresponds to roughly 1/3 inch, so five studs is 5/3 inch. If i take a figure to be 6ft tall (=6x12inch) the scale becomes 1/(6x12x3/5) is approximately 1/43.

Obviously with more precise conversions you;d find the same scale in both systems, but quite how you reach 1/40 is a mystery to me.

I agree. It is mainly a personal preference that IMO very much depends on what you want to do with your figures. I chose my scale such that the height of figures looks reasonable next to my vehicles, which leads me to use approximately 1/45. Consequently I cannot have figures sitting side-by-side in most of my vehicles. If you want figures side-by-side you'll have to chose a larger scale.

The 6 vs 8 wide train debate indeed is similar. If you want a realistic scale you end up with 8 studs wide. If you want it to actually fit on LEGO curves you'll have to go smaller. It all depends on what you want.

Cheers,

Ralph

Seconded.

I´ve seen you bring that 1/45 scale discussion up in at least 10 topics..

However, as I said before I agree completely.

[Ralph_S]

Seconded.

I´ve seen you bring that 1/45 scale discussion up in at least 10 topics..

However, as I said before I agree completely.

Well, this topic keeps coming up! Pretty soon I'll start boring myself

[the_green_avenger]

Figures are the equivalent of five studs tall. One stud corresponds to roughly 0.8cm, so 5 studs equals 4 cm. Consequently, if I take a figure to be approximately 1.8 m tall, I find a scale of 1/(180/4) is 1/45.

Conversion from metric to Imperial units is a pain in the behind, but a close equivalent would be:

One stud corresponds to roughly 1/3 inch, so five studs is 5/3 inch. If i take a figure to be 6ft tall (=6x12inch) the scale becomes 1/(6x12x3/5) is approximately 1/43.

Obviously with more precise conversions you;d find the same scale in both systems, but quite how you reach 1/40 is a mystery to me.

I agree. It is mainly a personal preference that IMO very much depends on what you want to do with your figures. I chose my scale such that the height of figures looks reasonable next to my vehicles, which leads me to use approximately 1/45. Consequently I cannot have figures sitting side-by-side in most of my vehicles. If you want figures side-by-side you'll have to chose a larger scale.

The 6 vs 8 wide train debate indeed is similar. If you want a realistic scale you end up with 8 studs wide. If you want it to actually fit on LEGO curves you'll have to go smaller. It all depends on what you want.

Cheers,

Ralph

Yeah I just realised, that if minifigs are six feet tall, it is not 1:40 scale... (minifigs would be 5' 5") The scale would accually be 1:44.307692307 if they were six feet... but that has no impact on the rest of the calculations...

I've changed that, but I do feel a 1:40 scale would in fact be better if you were more into detailing, of course, like you said, its personal preference.

[Ralph_S]

Yeah I just realised, that if minifigs are six feet tall, it is not 1:40 scale... (minifigs would be 5' 5") The scale would accually be 1:44.307692307 if they were six feet... but that has no impact on the rest of the calculations...

I've changed that, but I do feel a 1:40 scale would in fact be better if you were more into detailing, of course, like you said, its personal preference.

Sure, a bigger scale makes building certain things a lot easier. I build aircraft models out of LEGO (as you may know) and years ago I settled on a scale of 1/36 for those. I don't use minifigs with them, though, because they look too small next to them. Recently I have built minifig scale models of aircraft as well and build them to a scale of roughly 1/43. The difference might seem insignificant, but it is enough to make things harder.

I tend to be fairly precise about scale, but one thing I think you ought to be aware of is that there is a limit to how accurate you can make things anyway, especially when building a small object. In realistic terms, you can't make steps that are much smaller than a 1x1 plate. If I use a scale of 1/45 I might find that a particular car ought to be 5.2 studs wide, but I have to round that down to 5 because 5.2 simply isn't practical. If you can get the dimensions of what you build to within a stud of the dimensions it ought to have according to the scale you've chosen you've already done really well IMO.

Cheers,

Ralph

[Aanchir]

Neat work! Of course, the fact that minifigs are wider relative to their height than ordinary people complicates this for some things (for instance, cars or planes with adjacent seating).

Here's something else that might be helpful if you want to get really precise. Not counting studs, a 1x1 brick is (for all intents and purposes) 5/16 of an inch in width, and 6/16 of an inch in height. By extension, a plate is 1/8 of an inch in height, and a minifigure (without hair or headgear) is 1.5 inches in height. If you keep these values in mind you can convert from inches to inches rather than inches to studs, and save yourself some of the hassle of remembering odd decimal values. It's also convenient for remembering measurements when using SNOT techniques.

[davee123]

Hi, I'm DaveE, and I wrote that scale converter years ago, because I was constantly checking what appropriate "minifig scale" ought to be.

Minifig Height

A minifig is approximately 42mm tall. I think above, you're assuming that they're 5 studs tall, which would be 40mm, but that doesn't account for the stud on the top of their head, or on any headgear. I based the 42mm height on a normal minifig with the "standard" male hair.

You can also modify your minifig's height by doing one or more of:

- Using stubby legs

- Using 2x2x2 slopes (or otherwise) for minifig dresses (or other legs in general)

- Adding footwear (skis, flippers, snowshoes, etc)

- Adding neckwear (capes, epaulettes, armor, jetpacks)

- Changing headgear (different hair, helmets, caps)

- Adding Waistgear? (I think there are some official waistgears now in Star Wars? I'm ashamed that I don't actually know)

Anyway, this gives quite a variance in minifig heights, but I found that 42mm was a pretty good generalization.

Implied Minifig Height

How tall is a minifig supposed to be? 6 feet? 5.5 feet? Meh, this is difficult. It depends on gender, nationality, time period, age, and a whole mess of other factors. Any value from 5.5 feet to 6.0 feet is probably pretty good.

Building To Scale

If you're building a MODEL that you want to be realistic, it's important to pick a scale and stick with it. This will make your model look more like the real thing, and more likely to be confused with non-LEGO. As in, "Wow, that's made out of LEGO?!"

If you're building a MOC that's intended to work with minifigures as the focus (or as a functional element), then scale is out the window. You need to study up on "selective compression". That's where you build in a way that captures the FEELING of what you're building without necessarily being accurate. Sort of like making a caricature rather than a scale model. That's the way most LEGO sets are made, of course-- buildings that are only 12 studs wide, cars that only fit one person, and so forth.

Popular Scales

Generally, I find that people here in the USA build about 1 stud = 1 foot. They don't do this "1:44" or "1:35.6" stuff. They just use the stud as a rough guess for 1 foot.

I don't know enough Europeans (and other non-Americans) to say for sure, but it seems like the rule of thumb for them is 3 studs = 1 meter.

Back when I wrote the scale converter, part of my motivation was to try and make MORE people use MY estimation of 42mm = 6 minifig feet. So that was the default value I used, hoping that everyone would soon come to use that as the "de facto" standard. Didn't work, needless to say. I gave in and just added a little link to set your desired scale from one of the popular ones instead.

All This Research is Secretly Fun

Ever since maybe 2000 or 2001, I've done tons of research on statistics comparing minifigs and actual humans. Demographics for different countries, average human height, width, and "depth", even comparing "average" minifig height variation to actual human height variation. I think back when I started investigating, I told myself that I was doing it because it was somehow important to know what the "best" scales really might be, and what strengths and weaknesses they had. But really, just between us, it's just fun to do that kind of research and stats gathering. Go figure, considering that I'm the son of an actuary. It's just fun to be anal!

DaveE

[Aanchir]

I just did a few measurements yesterday. An adult human could be approximated to be 6 feet tall by two feet wide (the width is a bit generous). There are a couple ways to equate this to minifig proportions:

• Convert the two feet width to the 1 inch of Minifig width. However, then the minifig's height is equivalent to only three feet in real-world height, which is ridiculous.
  
• Convert the six feet height to the 1.5 inches of minifigure height. But then the minifig's width is equivalent to four real-world feet, and thus would necessitate ridiculous sizes for doorframes and seats.
  
• The third option (and the one I arrived at as most reasonable) is halfway between these two conversion methods. Thus a minifig's 1 inch by 1.5 inches is equivalent to 3 feet wide by 4.5 feet tall.
  

Several benefits arise from this last conversion method. The minifig will have better proportions when seated on a chair with semi-realistic height (since minifig legs cannot bend down over the edge the way human legs do). They will also fit through a realistic three-foot doorframe (which is closely equivalent to the inside width of the typical four-stud doorframe pieces). Overall I think that a minifigure height of four and a half feet is the most convenient as a general rule, although it's always good to manipulate this on an individual basis for MOCs.

[the_green_avenger]

I just did a few measurements yesterday. An adult human could be approximated to be 6 feet tall by two feet wide (the width is a bit generous). There are a couple ways to equate this to minifig proportions:

• Convert the two feet width to the 1 inch of Minifig width. However, then the minifig's height is equivalent to only three feet in real-world height, which is ridiculous.
  
• Convert the six feet height to the 1.5 inches of minifigure height. But then the minifig's width is equivalent to four real-world feet, and thus would necessitate ridiculous sizes for doorframes and seats.
  
• The third option (and the one I arrived at as most reasonable) is halfway between these two conversion methods. Thus a minifig's 1 inch by 1.5 inches is equivalent to 3 feet wide by 4.5 feet tall.
  

Several benefits arise from this last conversion method. The minifig will have better proportions when seated on a chair with semi-realistic height (since minifig legs cannot bend down over the edge the way human legs do). They will also fit through a realistic three-foot doorframe (which is closely equivalent to the inside width of the typical four-stud doorframe pieces). Overall I think that a minifigure height of four and a half feet is the most convenient as a general rule, although it's always good to manipulate this on an individual basis for MOCs.

I think it would keep things simple if everyone agreed that minifigs were 6 ft. no matter how fat that would make them...

[blueandwhite]

I think it would keep things simple if everyone agreed that minifigs were 6 ft. no matter how fat that would make them...

Going by your original measurements, a minifig's wasteline is... 86 inches. That probably doesn't suit everybody's building needs. Moreover, the scale for one type of MOC may not make sense for another. I don't see why people need to conform to the idea that minfigs are human height considering they have giant heads and lobster claws for hands. I'm fortunate enough to build in a theme where scale isn't as significant (Castle) simply because the structures are fairly significant in size. Still, I tend to treat my minifigs as being a bit on the short side (5 ft.). I'm not changing my view to conform to a standard that is anything but universal.

Even when you look at the standard display, most MOCs are very inconsistent when it comes to scale. With larger structures like buildings, this often doesn't matter. For smaller creations like vehicles there is still some debate as some folks build 4-8 wide. You may have a preference when it comes to scale, but it will probably never be universally accepted given that LEGO themselves don't follow any single scaling system.

[Ralph_S]

If you want a proper scale model, you're probably better off not using minifigs in the first place, because they are just too awkward. However, I disagree that scale is out the window when using minifigs.

I mainly use minifigs with town mocs combinating them with vehicles and buildings. I want my cars to look reasonably in size compared to the pedestrians. I want my trucks to look reasonably sized compared to my cars. I want my buildings to be reasonably sized compared to the lot. The way I do this is by choosing a scale and largely sticking to it. There always is a degree of fudge involved in the process, but I use the scale I chose to work out the rough dimensions of just about everything. The scale is not a goal as such, but a very helpful tool. I feel that the height of the figures in this sort of setting is a lot more important than their width. A compromise (trying to find a mid point between width and height) might work in some cases, but for my city stuff it would still look awkward. People tend to be a bit taller than regular cars and the height of a bus is such that a tall person can just about stand up inside it without their heads hitting the ceilings. That's why for my city MOCs I chose (roughly) 1/45, based on the assumption that figures are roughly 1.8 m tall. Because my cars tend to be five studs wide, the figures generally don't sit in the middle, which limits the awkwardness of there only being one figure in a car.

I keep repeating this, but every attempt to define a standard scale for minifigs is utterly futile, because people use their minifigs in different ways, as blueandwhite also mentions. I use 1/45, but 1/45 isn't perfect minifig scale, because there is no such thing as perfect minifig scale. I just feel it happens to be the best scale for the things that I do.

How exactly you calculate things is really a matter of what you are used to. Three studs per meter or one stud per foot might seem convenient, but both are too big for my tastes. I grew up using the metric system, use it all the time in my work (I'm a physicist), and it comes naturally to me. All this faffing about with non-decimal fractions seems terribly awkward to me and I work thing out using a calculator anyway. When I build a scale model of an airplane, I tend to use a three-view drawing. I look up the length of the real plane. I then work out how many studs that length corresponds to on the scale that I want to use (for planes, typically 1/36). I then measure how long the plane is in the three-view drawing (usually in cm) and then work out how many studs correspond to a cm in the drawing. This may sound complicated, but ultimately I end up with a single number and that's the conversion factor I use for everything else. Once that is done the rest is easy. I put the conversion factor into the memory of my calculator and I work out every other measure I'm interested in in studs from the three-view drawing.

Cheers,

Ralph

[the_green_avenger]

I keep repeating this, but every attempt to define a standard scale for minifigs is utterly futile, because people use their minifigs in different ways, as blueandwhite also mentions. I use 1/45, but 1/45 isn't perfect minifig scale, because there is no such thing as perfect minifig scale. I just feel it happens to be the best scale for the things that I do.

Exactly, so either everyone should agree minifigs are a certain height, or, I even provided a way for you to determine scale depending on preferred height

I understand that minifigs are not very humanly propartionate on a height to waist scale, so it'd be best to go by height, and ignor the minifigs' fatness.

The builders of miniland use about a 1:22 scale when they make thier models. The height of a minifig is about half that of the miniland people so minifig scale would be twice that, or a 1:44 scale.

Any disagreements there?

P.S. I just realised that your flikr name is madphysicist! Love your work!

Edited February 24, 2010 by the_green_avenger

[davee123]

Exactly, so either everyone should agree minifigs are a certain height, or, I even provided a way for you to determine scale depending on preferred height

I think the problem may be that you seem to think that everyone "ought" to accept a particular standard, and I don't think that's something many people would feel comfortable doing, and is unrealistic because people won't know about such a standard, and will disagree about the details.

A standard of scale is helpful for certain things that need consistency-- like if you're organizing a display with many builders, arranging rules for a contest, or perhaps organizing a project similar to the Moonbase project. Otherwise, I would encourage you not to attempt to convince people that their scales are wrong, unless there's some factual difficulties in their scale derivation.

For instance, if someone claims that they want to establish a scale based on minifigs being 6 feet tall, you can dispute their particular scale and cite standard human height and so forth. But when someone says they use "1 foot = 1 stud" because it's easy for reference, or they use selective compression for aesthetic reasons, you'll just have to let them be. If you continue to tout your particular scale as preferable or superior, you'll probably encounter some resistance.

Anyway, you can argue in favor of a wide variety of scales that could be "correct" for minifigures-- so it's generally nice just to know what are the most useful or common scales available, or what range is a good ballpark.

DaveE

[Ralph_S]

Exactly, so either everyone should agree minifigs are a certain height, or, I even provided a way for you to determine scale depending on preferred height

I understand that minifigs are not very humanly propartionate on a height to waist scale, so it'd be best to go by height, and ignor the minifigs' fatness.

The builders of miniland use about a 1:22 scale when they make thier models. The height of a minifig is about half that of the miniland people so minifig scale would be twice that, or a 1:44 scale.

Any disagreements there?

P.S. I just realised that your flikr name is madphysicist! Love your work!

I'm glad you like what I do, but you seem to get the meaning of what I wrote exactly wrong.

I use 1/45 for my city stuff because I think that for the things I do the height of the figure is important. That is not always the case and it comes at a price. I'll show you two examples from a blog post I wrote about this very thing a few months ago after seeing a model of a Fairey Swordfish on MOCpages:

(I used the thumbnail because the full size piture is too small and I obviously can't rescale somebody else's pictures. Clicking the picture ought to bring you to the page on MOCpages).

In 2008 I built a Fairey Swordfish myself, but to a much smaller scale. So here's mine.

In the first shot you can clearly see that the accommodation for the figures is really cramped. I only just managed to find enough room to squeeze them in there. That's an obvious drawback of the small scale.

I chose the scale because it was supposed to match a ship (HMS Hood) built by a friend of mine. He chose 1/43 because on that scale the size of the sailors on the deck looks reasonable. Consequently, as you can see in the picture below, when the figures are stood next to my model they look fine

The builder of the one on MOCpages writes he knows my model but doesn't like it and thinks it's too small. (I think he copied rather a lot from a model he doesn't like, but that's another matter entirely). I say that's a matter of personal choice. My scale is defined by the height of the figures, his seems defined by wanting enough room for the figures and (probably) by convenience, because building it to a larger scale in some respects is easier.

Bottom line: the scale that is appropriate depends on what you do with your models. I want figures standing next to mine to look right (in which case height is the appropriate measure) but if I were to want a detailed interior with enough space for the figures I'd have to chose something bigger.

Cheers,

Ralph

Edited February 24, 2010 by Ralph_S

[the_green_avenger]

Bottom line: the scale that is appropriate depends on what you do with your models. I want figures standing next to mine to look right (in which case height is the appropriate measure) but if I were to want a detailed interior with enough space for the figures I'd have to chose something bigger.

Your right, though I guess it would be safe to say that you see most models as fairly close to a 1:44 scale. I would agree that interior detailing would require a larger scale, so It all depends on the model being built. But conversions are usually for finding the size of REPLICATIONS of things, so eying it would help, for the purpose of minifigs apearring to be "the right size"

P.S. I have seen LegoMonster's hood. It is really, really, really, really, really, really awesome. I find it hard to make a good streamline shape on ships like brigs/frigs. My brain would be pouring out my ears if I attempted something like this. What want to know is how he managed to obtain hundreds of thousands of bricks without breaking the bank...

Scale is always arguable. But whats your opinion is yours and whats my opinion is mine, and i'm perfectly fine with that.

[Ralph_S]

Your right, though I guess it would be safe to say that you see most models as fairly close to a 1:44 scale. I would agree that interior detailing would require a larger scale, so It all depends on the model being built. But conversions are usually for finding the size of REPLICATIONS of things, so eying it would help, for the purpose of minifigs apearring to be "the right size"

P.S. I have seen LegoMonster's hood. It is really, really, really, really, really, really awesome. I find it hard to make a good streamline shape on ships like brigs/frigs. My brain would be pouring out my ears if I attempted something like this. What want to know is how he managed to obtain hundreds of thousands of bricks without breaking the bank...

Scale is always arguable. But whats your opinion is yours and whats my opinion is mine, and i'm perfectly fine with that.

Indeed. Minifigs can add a lot to a creation or a scene, but as I wrote before, if I really go for a scale model, I tend to do it without figures.

LegoMonster's Hood indeed was awesome. He's currently working on something bigger!

Cheers,

Ralph

[Aanchir]

I just recently went about testing my 1:36 scale on LDD and found it works very effectively for road vehicles. At least, it does for those I tested. Any road vehicle over 8'-6" in width in real life will probably be too big for a 10-wide lane of a LEGO road. The proportions worked well for a Smart car (not much different in scale than the Small Car set) and a Ford Excursion (although LEGO still needs a better 6-wide windshield to match the appropriate angle). The excursion, notably, is the same width as the SUV from the Horse Trailer set, although considerably longer (a Ford Crown Victoria will have the same proportions).

Also, it's certainly a WAAAY too large scale for things like passenger planes and space shuttles, so I ought to test if a scale that equates minifig height to 6' is more appropriate for those enormous vehicles.

[the_green_avenger]

Indeed. Minifigs can add a lot to a creation or a scene, but as I wrote before, if I really go for a scale model, I tend to do it without figures.

LegoMonster's Hood indeed was awesome. He's currently working on something bigger!

Cheers,

Ralph

yeah, the intrepid. (I didn't realise it was bigger)

aren't you helping out a bit?

I just recently went about testing my 1:36 scale on LDD and found it works very effectively for road vehicles. At least, it does for those I tested. Any road vehicle over 8'-6" in width in real life will probably be too big for a 10-wide lane of a LEGO road. The proportions worked well for a Smart car (not much different in scale than the Small Car set) and a Ford Excursion (although LEGO still needs a better 6-wide windshield to match the appropriate angle). The excursion, notably, is the same width as the SUV from the Horse Trailer set, although considerably longer (a Ford Crown Victoria will have the same proportions).

Also, it's certainly a WAAAY too large scale for things like passenger planes and space shuttles, so I ought to test if a scale that equates minifig height to 6' is more appropriate for those enormous vehicles.

like I (kinda) said earlier, you should stay between a 1:40 and 1:45 scale when building, and use a bigger scale for smaller models (like cars ) and a smaller scale for larger ones (like Ralph pointed out, the HMS Hood)

[the_green_avenger]

But really, just between us, it's just fun to do that kind of research and stats gathering. Go figure, considering that I'm the son of an actuary. It's just fun to be anal!

lol, I agree

P.S. did you ever notice that lol looks like a tie interceptor viewed from the top?

Edited February 27, 2010 by the_green_avenger

[Ralph_S]

yeah, the intrepid. (I didn't realise it was bigger)

aren't you helping out a bit?

It's definitely bigger and I will indeed be involved. I'll be designing the aircraft.

like I (kinda) said earlier, you should stay between a 1:40 and 1:45 scale when building, and use a bigger scale for smaller models (like cars ) and a smaller scale for larger ones (like Ralph pointed out, the HMS Hood)

This is a practical idea if you build stand-alone MOCs, but if you start combining different things it's trickier. One of the few examples that I know is a wonderful Russian diorama built by Gambort

The cars are built to a larger scale than the buildings, but not so much that it becomes an issue. The builders of the Miniland sections of the LEGOLand parks also do it. Cars and people are all roughly 1/20, but the buildings are often smaller, with only the street-level floors having a height that corresponds to 1/20.

For my city stuff, I try to stick as close as I can to one and the same scale.

Of course, scale is all relative. Most of my non-minifig scale models are actually larger, including most of my aircraft. If your collection is large enough, building reasonably big things to a big scale isn't really an issue. I'm not so much into airliners, but some of you may have seen my B-1 bomber. Scale 1/36 (IMO too big for minifigs) and a whopping 1.2 m long.

Cheers,

Ralph

Edited February 27, 2010 by Ralph_S