Traditional or artistic builds?

[ootkaman]

I have been wondering about something for a while, and someone can give me better terminology if they know it. I was just wondering whether people preferred MOCs that were more like what Lego tends to produce vs. what many MOCers and designers do. Although this is not always true, if I had to mention some trends between each group I would say:

"Traditional" designers—Make sets with less illegal connections, emphasizing playability, minifigures, economy of parts, etc.

"Artistic" designers—Make sets look more realistic and detailed, often grand in scope, with a wide variety of techniques that may not emphasize playability or minifigures

Of course that is not always true on either side, but I was curious which type of set castle lovers tend to enjoy more as a whole (taking into account building, playing with, investing, displaying, etc.).

[Schreeuwwitje]

For me it's definately the latter "Artistic" design. I can off course appreciate the Traditional design, but artistic is my preference.

[legoguy1984]

I prefer a traditional approach with an artistic outcome. Similar to the Medieval Market Village set in my mocs but have yet to be happy with my results. I don't use illegal builds and everything needs to be solidly built, those are pretty much my only criteria when building.

[SirBlake]

I like a certain level of accessibility in my hobbies. Limitations of budget or space can be obstacles that require creative solutions.

I'd rather see a home built hot rod than a perfect show car, and that translates to Lego the same way.

I still marvel at the exotics and the impractical but beautiful builds, and thoroughly enjoy them, but there is often a story behind the things that aren't done with limitless resources.

With that said, I think the term "artistic" applies to both, but I see what you were getting at with the question.

[Isundir]

I'd like to find a balance between both, due to budget/resource limitations. Less (bricks) is more.

[ootkaman]

Very interesting insights! I like to see how everyone sees it and i am glad that we get all kinds of MOCs. I agree with a lot of what has been said. For me personally, I very much admire the highly detailed and grand MOCs but when I build my priority is playability and making a playable locale for minifigures. I also lean on the side of building things durable and solid, and putting realism to the side to have fun with special pieces that Lego has created (such as secret walls, hinges, etc.). Because of that, I think a lot of people see something classic or old in what I build. It all is a trade-off, I suppose.

[Regenerate builder]

I use Lego solely as an artistic medium. I do not play with them or have kids that do yet. Technique-wise, I am open to anything I can think of. My only rule is no glue or any other non-Lego means of keeping it together.

[gilpmren]

Similar to the Medieval Market Village set in my mocs but have yet to be happy with my results.

Edited August 8, 2015 by gilpmren

[Mike S]

I attempt to do a combination of both. Sturdy but with a bit more polish than official sets. Now all I have to do is perfect my photography.

[Captain Dee]

I like both styles. For example, I really like being creative with roof techniques but for walls I usually go studs-up and use less advanced methods to allow for full interiors. It just depends on what I'm doing. I appreciate heavily-textured designs, but simple, traditional methods can also be beautiful if done right.

[ootkaman]

I agree with all of these points. I avoid things like glue too, and try to make things as beautiful as I can while maximizing functionality and the features of Lego that I love. I feel the same way about photography too—some people post amazing pictures, with rendering, etc., and I just don't seem to have the skills or time to do so!