Technicopedia

[Finntech]

Maybe the bandwidth limit was exceeded?

Every other websites are opening just fine, this is the only one (where I surf daily) that just wont open. But the problem is probably somewhere in my computer/connections... Need to find out.

[backbone]

Every other websites are opening just fine, this is the only one (where I surf daily) that just wont open. But the problem is probably somewhere in my computer/connections... Need to find out.

It's excedeed bandwidth quota on server.

[Finntech]

It's excedeed bandwidth quota on server.

I see... Well I'm not surprised then, such a popular site. I'll wait...

[Blakbird]

I see... Well I'm not surprised then, such a popular site. I'll wait...

Should be available again Feb 1.

[searrius]

I don't want to pester you, but do you still consider Technicopedia an active project? I recently discovered it and have found it incredibly interesting to read about the Technic sets of bygone years, particularly being a bit of an old school builder myself (as well as a history nut). It even allowed me to read about the inner workings of set 8460 when I was considering buying it from Bricklink (it's built and sitting on my dresser now). Although I've never done more than lightly dabble with LDRAW (I can only imagine how much time you've spent making all those illustrations), as a full time web developer I can certainly appreciate the amount of work that goes into producing a working website, so I just want to thank you for starting such an ambitious project in the first place!

Edited February 8, 2013 by searrius

[DLuders]

Blakbird is very busy lately making Lego Technic Building Instructions for complex sets, and probably doesn't have free time to expand the Technicopedia history from 1996 onwards. Nevertheless, his Blakbird's Technicopedia website is a valuable resource for the "classic" Technic sets. Often, his website runs out of bandwidth (due to frequent visitors), so if he added more recent sets, the website would get bogged down. He pays for the computer server expense for hosting his website, as a service to the Lego Technic community. Blakbird owns ALL of the Lego Technic sets ever made, so what he doesn't post on his website is in his memory banks!

[Carrera124]

I don't want to pester you, but do you still consider Technicopedia an active project? I recently discovered it and have found it incredibly interesting to read about the Technic sets of bygone years, particularly being a bit of an old school builder myself (as well as a history nut). It even allowed me to read about the inner workings of set 8460 when I was considering buying it from Bricklink (it's built and sitting on my dresser now).

...so I just want to thank you for starting such an ambitious project in the first place!

This could have been my words, too. Althoug I collect all catalogs since I was a little boy (and therefore knew about nearly all technic sets), it is really interesting to read all the texts and watch all the pictures from Technicopedia.

I really would appreciate if it would be continued with the sets from 1996 and later.

[Alasdair Ryan]

Blakbird is very busy lately making Lego Technic Building Instructions for complex sets, and probably doesn't have free time to expand the Technicopedia history from 1996 onwards. Nevertheless, his Blakbird's Technicopedia website is a valuable resource for the "classic" Technic sets. Often, his website runs out of bandwidth (due to frequent visitors), so if he added more recent sets, the website would get bogged down. He pays for the computer server expense for hosting his website, as a service to the Lego Technic community. Blakbird owns ALL of the Lego Technic sets ever made, so what he doesn't post on his website is in his memory banks!

Man any one reading that would thing you are staking Blakbird.....

[DLuders]

No, I'm not "stalking" him at all. I've met him at Lego conventions -- nice fellow! We live in the same US state, and there aren't a lot of Lego Technic AFOLs around here! I respect him a lot.

[MadMax1998]

I wonder what it would take to get the website in line with the bandwidth usage that seems to bring it down regularly. I run a paid webspace with unlimited traffic and it's never been going down for excessive bandwidth usage (I mean, that *is* what unlimited traffic is about, right?), and it's really very affordable at 60 Euros a year. If he pays for his website, then how much do we have to donate for him to be able to move to a better service that provides no bandwidth caps?

Also, making Technicopedia a contributor project where other well-versed collectors can add their models and descriptions would keep the website moving even when Blakbird can't find time.

[searrius]

Since Technicopedia isn't running on a content management system I'm not sure it would be technically feasible to have multiple contributors. They'd all have to know how to edit HTML (or use a WYSIWYG editor like Dreamweaver) and presumably need to have FTP access, which would likely be a security nightmare. Besides, Blakbird is an engineer in real life and has collected every Technic set... how many people are as qualified as him to do this project? (It seems weird to be talking about him in the third person when he's a regular on this forum, but oh well.)

[TotalyWicked]

We can still help him by rendering images, creating ldraw models,

etc....

[Matt The Tuba Guy]

what if we started a Technic wiki?

With multiple people contributing, it should be possible to catalogue every Technic set ever made quite quickly.

There could even be pages for specific parts, like the PF system, linear actuators and pneumatics.

Reviews could also be included as a sub page of the main set pages.

Basically like Brickipedia, but specifically for Technic.

[allanp]

Yeah, we could call it technicopedia......oh wait!

Once Erics masterpiece is finished there really won't be much to add besides box pictures and TV ads, but even then, that's only promotional stuff and not much to do with the model itself.

[Blakbird]

Firstly, thanks to everyone for supporting my site and saying so many nice things. On the one hand it humbles me, but on the other hand I feel very guilty for leaving the site stagnant for so long. DLuders summed up the situation pretty well. As some of you know, a few years ago I was forced to move and I had to disassemble my entire collection and then build it all again. The process took nearly 1.5 years. In the interim, there was a time when I did not have a place to live and all my sets were in storage, so that is when I started getting into the CAD side of things because I only needed my computer. I made lots of renders and starting making many models in LDraw including MOCs. I soon also got started on making instructions which introduced me to the idea of replicating my favorite MOCs. This came at a very good time because I was done collecting official Technic sets and needed more to build. To put this in perspective, the entire history of Technic models comprises about 115,000 parts. Since I started building MOCs, I have added about 75,000 parts' worth of models. Collecting the parts, building the models, and making the instructions has kept me extraordinarily busy. So it is not that I am too busy for my LEGO hobby, it is that I have been spending my efforts elsewhere lately. At this very moment, I have projects in the works involving about 10,000 more parts, some of which will be revealed soon!

I leave it to the community to decide whether all this other effort is worthwhile and also useful to everyone, or if people just want me to forget about instructions and go back to Technicopedia.

In answer to the original question, yes I do still consider it an active project. When I look at updating it lately, I am starting to find it very dated. When I launched the project, the concept of hosting videos was out of the question except for companies with massive bandwidth, so I went with animated GIFs. They are fun to make and allow me to show motion without any human interference. However, now that Youtube is available I really could have videos of everything which I think would be much better. But I don't want to switch over to video in the middle, I would want to go back to beginning and make video for my existing pages. The concept is daunting. Even if I were stick with stop motion, it really takes a massive amount of time. On top of that, creation of the CAD files is also very time consuming. Doing the actual writing goes very quickly.

Sorry for the stream of consciousness. The unexpected reawakening of this thread has got me thinking about things I haven't in a while, and I'm not entirely sure how to move forward.

[Erik Leppen]

First and foremost you should do what you enjoy doing. You can't make something well if you don't enjoy making it. So, just do what you like most.

What I personally love most about Technicopedia is reading your extensive writing on everything. Personally I don't even really care that much about the animations and computer images, although I understand they're there for completeness's sake (after all it is a -pedia). If you want to be productive (I do not say you have to be productive, but IF that is your goal), it's a matter of evaluating the added value vs. the amount of work, of every aspect of your site. Creating the digital files adds a whole lot of extra work, so do you think it adds the same amount of added value, in comparison to the text?

[Interceptor]

Dear Blakbird,

First of all I would like to say thank you for partly being the responsible for getting me hooked again on LEGO, especially on Technic, 7 years ago. This passion gave me lot of joy during the last years. My coming out from dark ages wouldn't have been the same without your glorious site: Technicopedia. I believe it is a kind of online compass for a lot of Technic enthusiast around the world.

Regarding your dilemma I share Erik Leppen's opinion. I like your extensive text on the sets the most. Your texts are professional, point out the greatness of each set, mark out your adoration and your personal thoughts (which I also like very much to read, for example the one for 8868 ). Your texts help the beginners and also the experts a lot to find out which sets would suit their personal demand the most. Your texts create one of the greatest online source of Technic assays.

Of course I like the high resolution pictures as well, they are indispensable on a modern site. But regarding pictures I like the most the pictures which compares the similar sets to each other (category pics). This is unique thing and probably you are the only one who can do these because of your complete collection. I would love to see pics about the original instructions and boxes as well (I mean photos about the cover only). Your animations are pretty attractive. Personally I care less about the renders (I can imagine how much work it can be to create these), but you could save effort on these I think. And I really don't care about videos. There are plenty of them on youtube in case I would like to watch one. The last two things would probably help to make your site complete but are not the ones that add the most value to your site in my opinion.

But these are just my thoughts. Simply do, what you enjoy doing the most.

Greetings from Hungary,

Kari

Edited February 10, 2013 by Interceptor

[RohanBeckett]

I think you should alternate between the both! Do another year... then another set of instructions/renders!

While I do enjoy all the animations of the geartrains/mechanisms... maybe just limiting yourself to the main ones in each model... eg: skip some of the boring steering ones

Yes, the site is looking a bit dated, but really.. it doesn't matter as much as the content.. I'm sure you could get Sariel or someone to give it a little facelift! ;)

I agree with Interceptor, about the text... it's actually great when a site like this is written solely by one person.. you really get a sense of passion from the one voice.. (rather than multiple opinions).. and that's a strength, sometimes!

Videos would be good.. but the site could still hold it's own, with just text and pictures.

I love reading about an old set, (usually an overlooked one) that has some neato function that I never realised... makes me want to obtain it.. or at least build it myself from parts...

RB

[Carrera124]

To be honest: the renders of the complete models are less interesting for me. But I like the "new parts" section and pictures, and I like the texts both for the complete year and the models/sets.

[lazylegoist]

First and foremost you should do what you enjoy doing. (...)

What I personally love most about Technicopedia is reading your extensive writing on everything.

I agree with both of those statements.

Your writings about the Technic models are really insightful, and they make me want to have sets I wouldn't have considered otherwise. Now that might have disadvantages too (for my bank account), but speaks volumes about how infectious your enthusiasm for Technic is, and how much of that enthusiasm is condensed in your texts. Even if Technicopedia were text-only, it'd still be a major resource, and a fun read!

Looking forward to whatever you do next,

LL.

[SheepEater]

Like most, I love Technicopedia and I await Blakbird's next update.

My favorite parts of the site are

1) the details about the new technic parts each year brings. By far my favorite feature.

2) the grouping of sets by subject. Ex: a list of all the backhoes, a list of all the mobile cranes, all the helicopters, etc

With that said, I do enjoy the animations of the mechanisms, but that's probably what's taking the most work.

[Chilly]

I'm new to EB, and even newer to Technicopedia, but like the others above, it's the text that grabs you by the throat and makes you want to buy what you've just read about. (Sorry bank balance.) In the space of an hour's reading I decided my collection would be complete only after I add two more sets - the Control Centre II and the Air Tech Claw Rig, plus a new set - the one everyone on here seems to rate (and it's the one the other half wants too) the Unimog. I'd previously dismissed the AirTechCR as being "not me", but after reading what it contains and the enthusiasm of Blakbird I've got to have it.

Don't worry about updating the site, it teaches us history, and like history, things change. Use new technology in the next parts you write, but don't go backwards. Your writing style will bind it all together.

I haven't looked at any of the renders, but do like the little animations, particularly of the gears. I just love the one showing the worm gear moving along the axle, then not moving when it is contained within the gearbox. These are the things that make it such a useful resource. There seem to be many experts on here who could help out with the techy side and take on some of the load, leaving you to spread your enthusiasm and knowledge more quickly.

[allanp]

You just have to do what makes you happy. All of it makes us happy so it's all good! If you have too many things to choose from on your plate that makes you happy, then that's a good problem to have and just requires some time management. Maybe alternate, one week you work on technicopdia, the next week you work on MOCs. Might even help to keep the hobby fresh for you. There is a case for skipping the computer renders of the entire models in technicopedia, as they usually get a prolonged glance from the reader which is not much for the amount of work that goes into them. However, as far as I know you have done renders for most of the models already, if so it would be a shame stop using them halfway through. My favorite parts are the renders of the internal mechanisms. Maybe you could skip the less interesting ones where a photo shows all there is to see. I bet it made you smile when you did this render:

This got more than a prolonged glance from me, it was my screen saver for ages, with all the icons placed round it so as to not obscure the view!

Edited February 10, 2013 by allanp

[Kumbbl]

You just have to do what makes you happy. All of it makes us happy so it's all good! If you have too many things to choose from on your plate that makes you happy, then that's a good problem to have and just requires some time management. Maybe alternate, one week you work on technicopdia, the next week you work on MOCs. Might even help to keep the hobby fresh for you. There is a case for skipping the computer renders of the entire models in technicopedia, as they usually get a prolonged glance from the reader which is not much for the amount of work that goes into them. However, as far as I know you have done renders for most of the models already, if so it would be a shame stop using them halfway through. My favorite parts are the renders of the internal mechanisms. Maybe you could skip the less interesting ones where a photo shows all there is to see. I bet it made you smile when you did this render:

This got more than a prolonged glance from me, it was my screen saver for ages, with all the icons placed round it so as to not obscure the view!

could not say it better - agree 100%

[OneMoreBrick]

Hey, just wanted to say well done for your continued efforts Blackbird. It's a great site and a rare resource of old-school technic sets. I must admit that until reading it I had no idea 8880 was so packed with features. As a child of the 80s I have recently come back to the lego technic fold and through the help of sites like yours and bricklink I'm starting to fill in the gaps in my relatively small but expanding collection :)