Recommended Posts

I could not find a discussion on this already so here goes:

I am a professional freelance LEGO artist. My fondness for the LEGO System developed partly because of the challenge and restraint of the system. When ever something is called LEGO, that is what I relate it to.

I sometimes see some pretty renderings of so-called digital LEGO builds on places like Flickr, and they are promoted as LEGO builds via LEGO groups. The problem is that these builds are often rendered with parts in colors that those parts have not been released in, and thus the build might as well have clone parts in it. That's when it does not belong in a group sharing things build with the LEGO System anymore. People doing this, could just as easily call it something else (Brick Art or something) and everything will be totally ok with me, but calling it LEGO is just misleading, frankly cheating.

What do you guys think? Here is the latest example using a Slope 45 2 x 1 with 2/3 Cutout in Trans-Black for the windshield. I have nothing against the guy, but calling it LEGO just because LDD was used... Perhaps the problem only really lays with the groups accepting these contributions.

28993688350_c142917e5e.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You ask how much purify own models must|should|can be when creating digital Brick Art or something similar to LEGO design ?

For me Brick Art is really good supplement for all this stuff that do not have only officially signed parts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you want to protect the LEGO-ness? And if 'LEGO' think so, they should delete/disable a the free Paintable parts functions in LDD, LDraw, or other digital application.

Edited by KamalMYafi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you want to go there, color is not the only trick/cheat. For example, there’re many digital builds that are not buildable in real life (unattached floating bricks…).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you want to go there, color is not the only trick/cheat. For example, there’re many digital builds that are not buildable in real life (unattached floating bricks…).

also, "Home-Made parts, Home-Made Decorations, and Home-Made Stickers".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It really gets on my nerves when people nag creators they don't use existing colors in LDD MOCs. Just ignore it and if you don't like that (which is in my opinion a weird thing to dislike) then don't use Extended mode.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a LDD user, I often let my creativity go wild, and build with bricks in non real life colors, and I'm fine with naming my creations Lego Models, because I just don't care about it, It's LEGO Digital Designer after all, there's nothing wrong with it. Recolouring a brick in LDD Expanded mode is not cheating, it's a mechanic implemented in the software by it's makers. We are still operating with LEGO bricks, in a LEGO program, made by The LEGO group. So, yeah, Lego it is, no matter how outlandish colors or techniques you use. Also, don't you have any better topic for discussion?

Edited by Eggyslav

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, most of the LEGO's licensed video games are notoriously known for featuring elements in non existing colors, and even elements and molds that never before have been produced, so there's LEGO contradicting your opinion(s) of their system! Though, I indeed understand and believe, from first hand experience, that building with existing colors, even more so with proper techniques, brings out creativity; in saying the constraints actually being beneficial!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can use what you what, name as you have .

But what you must have: LEGO Design Art is Brick Art . But not everything is Brick Art can be LEGO Design Art. That why we have MOC and MOD. Right.

This is simple mathematical conclusion : all the elements of A to take the set B; but not all elements of the set B must belong to the set A.

Edited by Jarema

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ummm... No, MOC stands for My Own Creation, that is, a model you concieved by yourself, and built it from scratch, and MOD stands for Modification of an existing Lego model, whether it be an official Lego set, or some other builder's MOC. I think, that at this point, the discussion is, well, pointless, since your argument about Lego nomenclature confuses and misinterpretates two of the basic terms within this very nomenclature you're trying to defend. In other words, Your argument is Invalid. Have a nice day, good sir. Poza tym, mój drogi rodaku, podćwicz trochę swój angielski, bo ledwo zrozumiałem o co ci chodzi... :wink:

Edited by Eggyslav

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For me even the models with 3rd party parts are cosidered lego models as long as the lego is the core of the model. The non available colors many times is only matter of time, maybe some day those colors will be available , no one knows

Just "leg godt"

Edited by LXF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's quite simple. The concept I'm putting foreward, is synonymous with the rules of building competitions in LUGs, which is a way to create equal conditions for all participants. According to some of you a MOC can be anything build from anything. Great, add some clay in there too. It's gonna look really good and hey... it's a MOC.

To critizice me for starting this topic, is quite laughable. The outcome was not meant to change the way I build. I was asking your opinion and I appreciate the honesty, but I am a bit surprised by the rhetoric. Then again, it's the internet. Keep them coming, almighty guardians of eurobricks.

Edited by Ulrik Hansen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, come on, I can agree on competition rules, but outside of said competitions, these rules simply do not apply, It's free for all, baby, everyone builds how they like, with custom bricks, non real life colors and even clay if you want. Lego is all about creativity, vision, and most of all, fun, and artificial boundaries, and silly semantics of "What is, and isn't Lego" just kill these three. And sometimes your MOC just needs to transcend these arbitrary rules, so it can be faithfull to your vision. Lego isn't just a brand of plastic bricks, It's a lifestyle, and artistic medium. And you should know it, since you're supposed to be a "Professional Lego Artist". So, yeah, you wanted our opinion, and now you're complaining about getting those opinions? It's a little bit inconsequent, don't you think? You asked for it, so don't go crying about it. And the "Almighty Guardians of Eurobricks" bit wasn't nessesary.

Edited by Eggyslav

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can certainly call this LEGO. It's built in an official LEGO program, it's an official LEGO part, it just doesn't yet exist in that color. If I built a set in LDD, and used parts that don't exist in certain colors to replace others, that's clearly still LEGO. How is MOC'ing any different? By your logic, there shouldn't be a hide tool, or a clone tool, or a paint tool, or an eyedropper tool, or ANYTHING WHATSOEVER that can't be done with real LEGO in this program. And yet, it's so much easier to build digitally with those tools.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[…] And the "Almighty Guardians of Eurobricks" bit wasn't nessesary.

Because your

[…] Also, don't you have any better topic for discussion?

was?

Besides, if you don’t like this topic, why are you participating? Or why don’t you propose a better one?

———

Getting back on the topic, LEGO themselves use non-plastic parts: strings, fabric (capes, skirts, sails…), paper, etc., and also non-brick plastic parts, like the cape of the CMF-14 Spider Lady and others.

And what about glue?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, I admit, I was a little bit salty, but hear me out, When I said: "Don't you have better topic for discussion", I expressed my opinion, that talking about some made-up, arbitrary rules on building in LDD is pointless, because it won't lead to any conclusions. So, yeah, my point there was valid, While Ulrik's quip was a desperate attempt to provoke a shitstorm, to distract us from the fact, that he's out of merithorical arguments. And I never said I didn't like the topic, I just stated that it doesn't make sense, and now I participate in it to express this statement, and justify it with valid arguments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally don't mind if non-existing colors are being used. Although, when I build something digitally, I always use existing brick/color combinations only (in the case I want a real-life version of it), I can see why a lot of people don't mind.

You know, everyone enjoys Lego for their own reason.

Some people just like to be creative and digital building is the perfect solution: endless amounts of bricks in ALL colors. Some people love the challenge of building something with restrictions. Everyone has their own reason.

In this case, in my opinion, their is no good or bad, it's completely personal.

And to keep within the Lego spirit: if you want to build something someone has made with non-existing parts, you can always modify it and make it yours :classic:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My understanding is that the core aspect of Lego is that its a construction toy. And therefore it is completely valid and fine to build it in whichever way you like, digital or not, with custom-parts or not, or whatever. Personally though I prefer my builds being made physically, without any custom-stuff. But I'm not going to push my preferences onto anybody else. That's not how it works anyway :wink:

What I would like to see though is it that people make clear if their model is digitally created or actually built and if any customization was involved. If nothing, that will simply make it easier for other builders to replicate certain building techniques and show if the construction is solid enough to be actually build.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lego isn't just a brand of plastic bricks, It's a lifestyle, and artistic medium.

This sentence to good to be forgotten. So I put this as my signature.

I agree with this

I personally don't mind if non-existing colors are being used. Although, when I build something digitally, I always use existing brick/color combinations only (in the case I want a real-life version of it), I can see why a lot of people don't mind.

You know, everyone enjoys Lego for their own reason.

Some people just like to be creative and digital building is the perfect solution: endless amounts of bricks in ALL colors. Some people love the challenge of building something with restrictions. Everyone has their own reason.

In this case, in my opinion, their is no good or bad, it's completely personal.

And to keep within the Lego spirit: if you want to build something someone has made with non-existing parts, you can always modify it and make it yours :classic:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, I admit, I was a little bit salty, but hear me out, When I said: "Don't you have better topic for discussion", I expressed my opinion, that talking about some made-up, arbitrary rules on building in LDD is pointless, because it won't lead to any conclusions. So, yeah, my point there was valid, While Ulrik's quip was a desperate attempt to provoke a shitstorm, to distract us from the fact, that he's out of merithorical arguments. And I never said I didn't like the topic, I just stated that it doesn't make sense, and now I participate in it to express this statement, and justify it with valid arguments.

I think it does make sense to bring about whether you like it or not. I did not want to start a shit storm. I needed to illustrate my point by linking to an example and I wanted to know if anyone else like myself would prefer a clearer label for non-physical builds with custom part liberties taken. If people have nothing but good intentions they wouldn't mind a clear label. Any third party company or magazine can do fine without LEGO in their name/title, like "brick-something". Don't you ever have discussions about such things?

I have no problem understanding that there is endless amounts of fun in having limitless bricks (I was a big fan of the LEGO Creator in the late 90's and then LDraw and LDD) and I am working my way into different 3D software titles which of course offers nearly unlimitless amounts of creative shaping. I started my post by admitting I couldn't find previous discussions about the subject, so I started a new one. I take that you have either not touched upon the subject or find it somehow unpleasant.

I'd like to thank those who shared with me how they feel about the subject, one way or the other.

Edited by Ulrik Hansen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In other case. When I watch

on YT. I can say:
  • before modification is it LEGO
  • after modification is it ROL /Related To LEGO/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Ulrik Hansen: First of all, you ignored my previous post before the one you quoted. Second, the post you quoted was Directed to SylvainLS, not you. Third, when I said "While Ulrik's quip was a desperate attempt to provoke a shitstorm, to distract us from the fact, that he's out of merithorical arguments", I ment the "Almighty Guardians of Eurobricks" thing, not the discussion as a whole. And, as you can see, you didn't convince us to your arguments, nor did we convince you, we all didn't agree on anything. Isn't it a pointless waste of words?

Edited by Eggyslav

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You and us – I love the polarization. Are you so sure everyone agrees with you? Try reading again. I rest my case and the multiple points I did not comment on. I wonder how I even thought anything good would come of this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.