Holes in Technic MOCs

[Alex Ilea]

Hello all!

I want to talk about a think that I just can't get over. I see this in some Technic MOCs (mostly cars), made by great designers, that have big gaps or holes in roof, or in bodywork that can be solved with maybe 50 more pieces but the designer let's them there. Is this made to keep the Technic feel or something? I don't mean holes that require some conectors wizardry, but simple beams in some cases. They want to reduce weight or parts count? What are your thoughts? Maybe it is just me that I like @Lox Lego's perfect models to much 

Edited January 10, 2018 by IA creations

[Jurss]

Who knows. 

I also tr to fill holes, only if I don't leave them intentionally, but them all body would be somehow transparent.

[Aleh]

I think this depends on autor's skills and building style. For example Sheepo made perfect technic cars but with gaps. I'm trying to build with minimum gapes.

[Lipko]

You can't perfectly fill holes without introducing unwanted edges all around (for example runged edges in the middle of a surface that's supposed to be smooth). Then it's the designer's choice how she/he will balance these two contradicting demands (less large holes or less unwanted edges). For example I don't like Sheepo's body designs (the only exception is the Land Rover). They look like a patchwork of random pieces.

Edited January 10, 2018 by Lipko

[Rudivdk]

Same for me, I always try to fill everything as smooth as possible (which means sometimes there will be small gaps if no proper parts can fit), only gaps in roof I create are for roof window.

But it all depends on builders taste. Some builders want to expose all technical marvels inside their models... And maybe available parts in builders collection (I for example never buy loose parts from bricklink, only official sets). 

Edited January 10, 2018 by Rudivdk
Typo...

[BrickbyBrickTechnic]

In some instances, those gaps actually don't look bad at all. For example, I don't really care that there are gaps in Sheepo's MOCs because they still flow so nicely. I guess overall it's a styling and design decision. I personally try to build with minimum gaps.

[Alex Ilea]

5 hours ago, LvdH said:

Sometimes, less is more. I honestly prefer the soft axles and connectors with a couple of panels look more than a completely paneled up car. I like both though, just a preference. 

I also like (love) flexaxles bodywork.

[Meatman]

Some builders prefer a more natural practical look like you would see from TLG while others enjoy filling their entire models in with parts. Nothing really wrong with either style. Admittedly I enjoy building other people's mocs that have a traditional style rather than one that have unorthodox techniques used. As far as "Perfect" goes, the Lox Lego models are gorgeous, but they do use some techniques that traditional style builders would probably never use. So it mainly comes down to preference in what you may or may not find appealing.

[brunojj1]

I definitely prefer gapless looks of a model, especially when it represents a replica of a real vehicle. Areas around wheel arches usually are very hard to fill out – one of my biggest challenges in bodyworking. But IMO not least the technical marvels inside a MOC can be more interesting when they can´t be seen at the first glance. The functions can make one curious about what´s inside which can be examined by a closer second look. The model then needs to be grabbed, opened, turned around and so on. We can observe that the approach with the 42056 Porsche also pretends to cover gaps as much as possible. Even if many people complain about the gearbox and engine being almost invisible there, I appreciate that. The more difficult it may become to fill the ugly gaps around its big fender panels.

My favorite “gapless” builder is Dugald with his Aston Martin. As far as I know some of his genious building techniques are solid, e.g. even if attached at one point only, and not as far “illegal” than from his brother Lox.

 

The more traditional look with flex axles and some random panels here and there is something most of us have got used to. But it needs a lot of artistic skills to make you easily overlook the gaps. IMO one perfect example is the recent Ferrari from Jeroen Ottens!

 

Edited January 10, 2018 by brunojj1

[technic_addict]

This subject has been brought up before and most people either prefer one style over another.

[Aventador2004]

I agree with @brunojj1 those are great representations of the body I like. Also @madcow's P1.

[1gor]

@technic_addict answer is the most objective answer for this topic, there is not possible to please everyone and I think diecussion "pro" or "contra" some some style in design is meaningless. Every designer has her / his phylosophy and we have to respect it, but to respect it we have look from designers eyes. When we mentioned eyes I'll give you a simple wisdom for this topic:

Beauty is in the eye of beholder

[Erik Leppen]

You can't make a model that has no gaps at all. So the choice is large gaps vs. small gaps. Personally, gaplessness isn't a criterion for me per se. As long as the style is coherent and flows nicely. The two models @brunojj1 shows are perfect examples, but so is this one (which remains one of my favorite Lego cars)

The advantages of the open, flex-axle style are: fewer parts, less weight, and you see more of what happens on the inside. The closed paneled style may look better to non-Technic people, is more realistic in a way, and can be built sturdier (a removable body for example, is very hard to pull off with flex axles). For flex axles, you're limited to what's available in your color (axles and connectors) and only a few lengths of axles usually available. For panels, you're limited by the panel sizes (I still quite frequenly need a panel that's smaller than the 5x2x1 #21 and #22 panels.

Edited January 10, 2018 by Erik Leppen
Replaced image link by youtube link

[technic_addict]

On 1/10/2018 at 9:43 PM, Erik Leppen said:

 but so is this one (which remains one of my favorite Lego cars)

IMO this particular model looks much better in pictures than in front of you.  I was not very impressed when I saw it.  You also had to be careful not to breath in its direction because pieces would fall off.

Edited January 13, 2018 by Milan
Removed quoted picture.

[offroadcreations]

I'd say it's just a matter of personal taste combined the parts you have. Some people prefer lots of flex axles, and some like no gaps. Also, if you have little parts then you may end up using them sparingly. 

Personally, I try to get the general shape of the model when building. 

Edited January 10, 2018 by Offroadcreat1ons

[Didumos69]

If minimizing holes comes at the price of bodywork that comes apart easily and relies on flimsy connections than I rather look at holes. Don't forget that for LEGO-outsiders even the best-looking models look like insects, so it's all kind of relative.

[shadow_elenter]

 

I think hole less is best also, and not just in cars.
In my case(and probably a lot of other builders also) the limiting factor is that I don't have the right parts in the right color to fill it up nicely.
In my latest rollercoaster MOC I used all my panels and lift-arms to fill gap's but I just didn't have enough...

[Meatman]

11 hours ago, Didumos69 said:

If minimizing holes comes at the price of bodywork that comes apart easily and relies on flimsy connections than I rather look at holes. Don't forget that for LEGO-outsiders even the best-looking models look like insects, so it's all kind of relative.

I would have to agree with you there. I have paid for instructions for mocs that looked great, but turned out to be rather poor because the body had no structure and some areas were very flimsy or were stressing parts because the connections were too far off. When it comes to Technic, looks can be very deceiving.

If you are going to sell instructions for a moc, you should be confident knowing that the person who is building it isn't going to complain that every time they look at it something needs adjusted or has fallen off.

I think some people are just throwing together what ever they can hoping to make a buck instead of investing the proper time like other builders do.

Edited January 13, 2018 by Meatman