Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • 2 weeks later...
Posted

WOW that thing is HUGE! Awesome job, we should probably call you 'Crawlergod'. The exterior details are spot on and the scale is very impressive. What do you suppose its weight is? Terrific work!:classic:

Posted

The exterior details are spot on and the scale is very impressive.

Actually, there exists a patch of grey on the upper right side of cavegod's MOC which is noticeably too dense in comparison to the filming miniature. He also canceled some angles in the back (though that's probably due to the fact that it would leave gaps later). Don't get me wrong here, I think this is absolutely stunning regardless of how accurate it is, but we shouldn't give it more credit than is due. :wink:

For the record cavegod, the angles you've achieved in the front look really good and really has the feel of the original. Great work.

Posted

Actually, there exists a patch of grey on the upper right side of cavegod's MOC which is noticeably too dense in comparison to the filming miniature. He also canceled some angles in the back (though that's probably due to the fact that it would leave gaps later). Don't get me wrong here, I think this is absolutely stunning regardless of how accurate it is, but we shouldn't give it more credit than is due. :wink:

For the record cavegod, the angles you've achieved in the front look really good and really has the feel of the original. Great work.

Please, now you're criticizing a patch of stripped paint?

Posted (edited)

Please, now you're criticizing a patch of stripped paint?

Who's criticizing? He could have done it either way. On the one hand, if he felt it necessary, he could have added more brown to that area; on the other hand, if he felt it was better for whatever reason, he could have added more grey. It's obviously not accurate, but it doesn't detract from how recognizable the MOC is - in fact, I would say it enhances the MOC by getting the 'weathered' message across better. It is his MOC, so naturally he should be allowed some creative liberty, especially when he's working with a medium in which 100% accuracy is impossible. Whenever a flame war starts around here the complaints rarely come from the builder of the MOC in question - it's usually some third party.

Edited by fallenangel309
Posted

The point is, that's one of those niggling little things that don't actually contribute to accuracy in any way. Who said he was making the exact sandcrawler in that picture?

Posted

The point is, that's one of those niggling little things that don't actually contribute to accuracy in any way. Who said he was making the exact sandcrawler in that picture?

The former statement is subjective, so I won't respond to that. As for the latter, the 125cm model is the only complete, tangible sandcrawler I am aware of. The full-scale model was only partially constructed (i. e. the area I mentioned wasn't built) and all scenes not featuring the miniature used matte paintings or CGI renders. So what more reliable reference would there be? Neither the Essential Guide nor the Incredible Cross-sections have proved to be particularly reliable.

Posted

The former statement is subjective, so I won't respond to that. As for the latter, the 125cm model is the only complete, tangible sandcrawler I am aware of. The full-scale model was only partially constructed (i. e. the area I mentioned wasn't built) and all scenes not featuring the miniature used matte paintings or CGI renders. So what more reliable reference would there be? Neither the Essential Guide nor the Incredible Cross-sections have proved to be particularly reliable.

In general, the movie models aren't meant to be taken at face value. They could use several models to represent one specific ship, or one model to represent many ships. Or, in the case of the sandcrawler, the one and only model is never presented in such a way in the movie that you can recognize where each scratch and scrape is.

And on that note, I'm gonna block you.

Posted

...I think this is absolutely stunning regardless of how accurate it is, but we shouldn't give it more credit than is due...

It is absolutely stunning. Habitual critique of accuracy on a lego forum, less so.

Awesome stuff cavegod.

Posted

And on that note, I'm gonna block you.

Whoa, all fallenangel309 meant was that if this MOC was meant to represent the on screen one 100% it hasn't , BUT it perfectly represents an off screen one that looks very similar, note at no point did fallenangel309 say it ruined the MOC at all He still likes it.

Posted

It is absolutely stunning. Habitual critique of accuracy on a lego forum, less so.

Whoa, all fallenangel309 meant was that if this MOC was meant to represent the on screen one 100% it hasn't , BUT it perfectly represents an off screen one that looks very similar, note at no point did fallenangel309 say it ruined the MOC at all He still likes it.

This thread isn't about me, it's about cavegod's sandcrawler. Personal issues are why we have PM.

Posted

lol :laugh:

anyway you are right and that patch of grey will be changed as and when i have the parts, as you well no my mocs never get really finished they are always works in progress.

Yes i am pleased with the front angles, even with all the problems it has caused with the front ramp as the angle of the sloped sides is not a wedge plate angle.

the rear would be better sloped inward as the studio model is and could be done quite easily but here i went for ease of build rather than accurate as i am pretty sure no kids who will see this moc at future lego displays will notice.

Infact there are lots of parts i am not happy with and will be changed in the next 2 months.

And for the record i like Fallens or anyones posts that pic out faults i otherwise would not see myself or be bothered to change as it will improve the finished result.

Posted

lol :laugh:

anyway you are right and that patch of grey will be changed as and when i have the parts, as you well no my mocs never get really finished they are always works in progress.

Yes i am pleased with the front angles, even with all the problems it has caused with the front ramp as the angle of the sloped sides is not a wedge plate angle.

the rear would be better sloped inward as the studio model is and could be done quite easily but here i went for ease of build rather than accurate as i am pretty sure no kids who will see this moc at future lego displays will notice.

Infact there are lots of parts i am not happy with and will be changed in the next 2 months.

And for the record i like Fallens or anyones posts that pic out faults i otherwise would not see myself or be bothered to change as it will improve the finished result.

Constructive critisim is a way to improve your MOC, however there is certain way to approach it. You are using Lego bricks, so it will never possess a screen accurate representation. With that said your MOC, Cavegod, is awesome representation of the movies Sandcrawler. I look forward in seeing your next batch of updated pictures.

Posted

That looks Gigantic. What is the piece count on that bad boy?

i do not want to know but at a guess over 10,000

Jaw-droppingly amazing *oh2* ! you have loads of spare time!

actually i have more spare time than i know what to do with lol

  • 2 weeks later...
Posted

Ok the last WIPS before it's complete! Theres a few parts missing and a few changes i still want to make but here you go.

5825225654_146d0ba317_z.jpg

5824673747_904e1ff0f6_z.jpg

5825238914_6f6bdd0b32_z.jpg

5825244136_4074237854_z.jpg

Posted

Looks good! I love those greebles on the top and the back. You and marshal banana should arrange something and get both versions together :laugh:

Posted

IT's HUGE!!

How does it compare in terms of size against marshal_banana's version?

it is 2 studs wider than Marshalls and about the same length, as for weight it's heavy! peice count will be around the 10K mark but it all depends what i do with the interior.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...