How your building style has changed

[jorgeopesi]

Just curiosity to know how we evolved. I started like everyone else, leaving the realism aside and piling pieces until the unwanted MOC  . Later I tried to be more realistic in proportions, even too much, using the unnecessary amount of pieces and more  . Now I can say that a stud more or less does not matter to me if the MOC is consistent and that 20 more pieces do not matter if the construction is more modular. My aesthetics are becoming more minimalist as the previous Technic, it's funny because I build thinking to make it easy for others to do and I still do not do instructions  . What I can say that has remained constant is the search for functionality and maximum playability but never in exchange for fragility.

[Lipko]

I don't know how my style changed, it got only mature I guess. In my first builds I was over ambitious (most of them are abandoned or never got pass the daydreaming stage), but that was gone quickly. The evolution from messy to neat was quite linear, due to gaining experience (especially in goal oriented building*) and collecting sufficient parts inventory to maintain at least two builds of the same project at a time.

I can point out one specific style change: I used to hate placing (and seeing in others' MOCs) beams with holes pointing upwards as structural elements in the chassis. Now I'm okay with it if used with taste.

One trait remained unchanged during the years: my preference towards interesting solutions against super efficient solutions. Nowadays I think I could find effective solutions, but those are sometimes too dull to my liking. And also I still love to incorporate recurring motifs/solutions in one build. I wonder if anyone who built my models noticed these...

*by this I mean it was a quite linear learning curve from "looking for a problem to solve with a random specific part or micro assembly" (specific solution->fitting problems) to start from the problem and find the proper solution for it (specific problem->fitting solutions). I'm not sure that's clear. I guess the evolution was simply the consequence of the growing part and micro-assembly database in my mind.

Edited June 30, 2018 by Lipko

[Aventador2004]

I have learned:

• New parts are always helpful.
• It is more fun to freestyle build, than modeling.
• Small is not always complex, and large is not sparse.
• C modeling is a good way to improve your skills with limited parts.

[Zerobricks]

Interesting topic.

If I check my history at first models were very basic, with minimum details:

 

After switcing to mostly studless and power functions they became more functional

 

After getting the collection of 2010 sets with new panels, frames, motors, etc, the style changed

Models became more detailed, with less gaps, (generally) bigger and more rigid, thanks to the new frame pieces.

:

 

And in the last 3 years the models became ever more detailed, realistic, the design process was changed to include Lego Digital Designer in order to test build the models before building them in real life.

Addition of the new pieces, control and power sources like Buwizz and Sbrick allowed the models to be even more functional, compact and robust:

Of course also the quality of photography and videos improved along with the style, which became more streamlined and professional.

 

So in short, my models generally became asthetically more complete, with a reduced number of gaps in bodywork and with more additional details, while keeping high performance due to simplified and robuster powertrains.

Function-wise they became much more robust and powerfull thanks to the new pieces, building techniques and power sources.

The number of pieces also increased to about 4000 pieces for the Dominator TRS and currently the biggest limiting factors are the size of the wheels and the amount of required panels.

I no longer concetrate on function - only, but also give a lot of thought to the finished look of the models, I am trying to come up with new body lines and details in order to make the models more organic and less square-ish.

The process of designing the models shifted from simple picking of random pieces out of the bin to Lego Digital Designer, which I use to lay down the basic functions of the model. Only after I got the basic design ready in LDD, I start building in real life, perfecting the real and LDD design as I build along.

Edited June 30, 2018 by Zerobricks

[Leonardo da Bricki]

For me, I started out with a small collection (which has grown exponentially) and I learned through building other people's MOCs. I did a good bit of my own building, but it was almost never finished since I was too concerned with the aesthetics and realistic functions, and I could never find the balance I needed. Now, I have a lot more experience, and my models are improving a good deal. I have figured out how to balance functions/aesthetics in a model, by choosing a few of the most distinctive parts to be included. However, I now have a job and am going to college, so it takes much more time for me to get anywhere on one of my projects than I like.

[1gor]

Honestly I did not pay much attention to my building style; at begining I have used studfull bricks and there were limited amount of parts. Change in thinking started in 2003 when I noticed great studless set 8455... After that I was evolving design and my mocs were stil very complex, but few years ago I have decided to make simplest mocs with more realistic look, technics and proportions...in the same scale (as small as possible)

Edited June 30, 2018 by I_Igor

[sirslayer]

@Zerobricks lol, I think im at your level on your first stages of models..  I wonder in 5 years what would i be building??  cool thread 

[BrickbyBrickTechnic]

For me, my style changes with every different set I do C models for. For example, when using 42055 I make use of every frame possible and leave some beams out (focusing most on the rigidity of the structure), but with 42054, use up pretty much all the beams (and focus more on the functions). I As each set includes more of a certain type of piece and less of other I adapt between sets. This means I have several different styles, and consequently, when building non-C model MOCs I become very puzzled and confused as to how to execute certain parts and they end up as messes in general because with different sets I focus on different things and with everything being there I lose focus. So I love having the part limit, and if my style changes in the future I will learn to embrace not having limits I guess.

[jorgeopesi]

I am delighted reading all this and it has reminded me of more things... for example the quality of my photography increased but for a couple of years it has been stagnant and even low level, there is no way I do not like that part of Lego. Although it is not part of the constructive process, I spend much more time looking for things that I can represent with dignity and I think that I have developed a sixth sense that when I build a part of a MOC, I do not know well why but I know that it can be done better, stronger or with fewer pieces.

[Bublehead]

My style has never changed, per se, but I came to Technic while I was older child. I was 15 when it came out, but didn’t get into it until after I left home when I was 18. My parents were not very rich, and we never had money for a big expensive European toy. I had to start making my own money after I joined the military in order to afford my first 8860 set.  So since then, I have bought and built almost every flagship set and my own MOCs and MODs have always stayed true to one philosophy.  It has to be cool.  No matter what else, when a child sees my MOC or MOD, they must go “KEWL!” or “Awesome!”

Now this isn’t really a building style as much as it is a life choice about what I am trying to accomplish with my hobby.  The over - all mindset I take when I build is, would this pass an inspection by real Lego designers and the rules they are burdened with? Are any functions questionable in their operation? Do they work by the same principles of a real official TLG design, which is, if you follow the building instructions, the functions work, and work well without any “tuning” and definitely on the first attempt.  Does it work like its real world counterpart? Does it look like it could really be a real life machine?  Ok, and before I get the litany of responses that TLG functions don’t always work first time every time, for the most part, however they do, especially if you are OCD enough to check every axle and gear for smoothness and proper alignment and don’t squeeze your beams.  I have had to tune a couple before.

So my build style has only really changed due to the nature of Technic, as studs gave way to studless and features have shrunk down to 1L dimensions, and model density has reached the levels of pure gold, the Chiron being one of the densest in recent history.  Looking back at my 8880 mods, and looking at how much room is in that model that is not used, I find it a bit strange that back then, I felt I was at the density limit of Technic. I don’t know how I would have reacted if you would have showed me a Chiron from the future... I guess I would have simply said “Cool!”

[Rudivdk]

I started Technic around 1990, straight from system without any 'dark age'. I still remember picking up 8880 brand new from the store a few years later with my hard earned weekend job money.  That changed my life. All my early builds where full studded off course, mostly reverse engineering sets I didn't have.

My real MOCcing only began way after the introduction of studless, and my style became mostly inspired by the dense style of Madoca and the clean style of Crowkillers. My goal nowadays is mostly to build something like irl, including the general positioning of elements and functions. Having two young kids as test team  makes sure everything is as rigid as possible. This is not always the most efficient in Lego, but gives me most satisfaction (hence the 3600+ parts in my 7seater familycar for instance, which could easily have been done with under 3000 parts if I would have made consessions to my philosofy). I would describe my style and its evolvement as increasingly dense and parts heavy,  but all parts should have a function (well, apart from bodywork which is only for show off course...). . My style follows the new available parts, so its evolving further as Lego evolves.

[mocbuild101]

For me, I don't really think my building style has changed that much, more so the way I have built my MOCs. I have always preferred function over looks, and I would build things to play with rather than display, though recently I found my MOCs looking a lot better than they used to - not because I've been building them to be that way, but because my experience has helped me build in a way that is much more structured and efficient - better choice of parts. (and of course, my ever expanding collection of parts!)

 

17 hours ago, Aventador2004 said:

It is more fun to freestyle build, than modeling.

I agree, though on occasion it can lead to some horrible MOCs - I can recall one MOC I built a few years ago, that was built completely freestyle (not goal or plan whatsoever) - it was my first attempt at a full RC car with suspension and a paneled body. I built it completely sequentially from front to back, and it ended up looking a bit like a Jeep crossed with a VW Beetle (in the most horrible way possible), and it was so heavy that it could barely even move, despite having two XL-motors in it (which lead to quite a few broken bevel gears in the differentials).

 

16 hours ago, Zerobricks said:

Of course also the quality of photography and videos improved along with the style, which became more streamlined and professional.

Same here, the quality of my photos has increased dramatically since I've started posting my MOCs online - I noticed I've been doing less and less editing as my skills have improved.

 

14 hours ago, I_Igor said:

(as small as possible)

That's one thing I've definitely been doing more of - keeping relatively the same number of functions, yet shrinking them down smaller and smaller each time - or as @Leonard Goldstein calls it, Shrink-O-Mania!

 

There is one thing that I know for sure - more building -> more experience -> better MOCs. And on that note, I think it's about time I did some more building...

Edited July 1, 2018 by mocbuild101
a bigger post leads to more mistakes...

[1gor]

@mocbuild101 I think that the main reason for my "downsizing" is the usage of Bent liftarms and 5 x 7 or 11 x 5 frames for stifness... When I built chassis to be stiff enough with reasonable number of functions ideal height is 5 studs...and with available LEGO tires my chosen models ended in some 1:17, 1:17,5 or 1:18 scale if I want them to have proper width and not to look as pimped machinery from some cartoon 

[Jeroen Ottens]

Interesting topic. My style has changed a lot over the years.

As a kid I tried to build realistic looking & functional models, but they typically were a letdown in the functiondepartment because I didn't brace properly or used wrong gearratios.
After returning from my darkages I discovered that my study mechanical engineering could be applied very well to LEGO models as well, so the models became much better, but at the same time my ambitions grew. Which then still resulted in models that were too ambitious.
Then I got my job at LEGO where I really learned to build economically and fit for children. This has had a massive influence on my buildingtechniques to this day forward. I still use a lot of the rules I learned at that time.
After I succumbed to studless building (I resisted until the introduction of the 5x7 frame) I again changed the style to be more visually pleasing, but less function dense. This was mainly driven by inexperience with the studless system and lack of parts which meant a lot of the volume in the model was needed for proper bracing etc.
As the parts availability grew I started to densify my models again, while maintaining the outer visuals (and even work towards more and more closed outer surfaces).
Now I see that I start to use more and more systembricks to detail my models (in my upcoming Ferrari commission the doors and chairs are 80% systembricks).
I don't think I will really crossover to the modelteam style, but there is definitely a trend there...

[dr_spock]

My style hasn't changed all that much as I didn't have Technic as kid.  I think my style has become more friendly.   My builds are what parts I have in stock at the time.  I never got the Bricklink addiction.  I still like showing some studs.

2010

Trailer by dr_spock_888, on Flickr

2016

Bucket Wheel Excavator GBC by dr_spock_888, on Flickr

 

[shadow_elenter]

interesting topic!

I started out in the realm of studded bricks and played around with that most of my childhood and it peaked when I got the first mindstorms set.

Sadly it died down around age 13 when I thought I was to cool for lego.

At age 19 I came to my sences bought my first studless set (8275 bulldozer)with PF motors.

I instantly fell in love wit the new style, parts and the PF system and bought a second 8275 the same month for parts.

Those 2 sets were the bulk of my technic parts collection and that's where my love for the black and yellow theme was born.
This is my first mock with the studless style:

 

Motorized functions became my world, but I was limited by the maximum of 8 channels in the world of PF IR, I found that with mindstorms nxt and a thirdparty part called hitechnic IR link I could expand to 11 motors and program it.
this was my first MOC with mindstorms:
 

I went into a dark age and sold all my lego(). when I came out in december 2016 I was thrilled with the potential of SBrick's 64 channel limit and instantly bought 4!
My mechanical knowledge went up significantly in my dark age and higher build density and complexity was the result. 
I built a loop with as many conveyor techniques as I could to learn to use the new parts

This was my first build after my dark age to reacquaint myself with LEGO:

All the positive reactions on this video(mostly from this forum) motivated me to start my dedicated youtube channel.
That's where the madness began and I started hording SBricks and PF motors...
This is the current collection:


And this is what I build with it lately:

It contains 19 motors, 6 SBricks, 4 lights, 1 laser, 1 electromagnet, 2 sirenes... yep , I went bananas!

Looking back I clearly see I have drastically increased in complexity when the limitation of the number of parts and motors was no longer an issue financially.

[blaz62]

In 2011 form this:

 

 

To this:

 

[Appie]

Hmm, how has my building style changed over the years? Well this was my first MOC since my dark ages:

(I still have this build lol)

And some of my more recent ones are barely any bigger always trying to cram in as much functions as I can. As @Aventador2004 pointed out, smaller isn't always more complex. At this scale you can get away with alot more to get a rigid build because the plastic can handle quite a bit and the forces applied at this scale. Bigger always needs alot of reinforcements eating up room.

One main thing I did learn about myself is that I can never work from the outside-in. I see some people build the most amazing bodywork first and then manage to get quite a few funtions into that empty shell after. I have a rough idea of the scale and looks of how I want something to look in my mind when it is finished, but I always need to build the internals first or the whole thing will fail.

 

[jorgeopesi]

21 minutes ago, Appie said:

One main thing I did learn about myself is that I can never work from the outside-in. I see some people build the most amazing bodywork first and then manage to get quite a few funtions into that empty shell after. I have a rough idea of the scale and looks of how I want something to look in my mind when it is finished, but I always need to build the internals first or the whole thing will fail.

 

Good point, me too and I can say that I have done the same with my drawings all my life. I draw from the detail to the main if I do superheros or cartoons I begin from the eyes if I do vehicles from the wheels. Sometimes I lost time making compact mechanisms that the scale did not need but at least it is something that you learn for another MOCs, building small is never bad.

[Jim]

On 7/2/2018 at 4:20 AM, shadow_elenter said:

interesting topic!

Hi. Can you replace the overzsized images for ones with a maximum width of 1024? The ones you have posted are huge.

Thanks

[1gor]

18 hours ago, jorgeopesi said:

Good point, me too and I can say that I have done the same with my drawings all my life. I draw from the detail to the main if I do superheros or cartoons I begin from the eyes if I do vehicles from the wheels. Sometimes I lost time making compact mechanisms that the scale did not need but at least it is something that you learn for another MOCs, building small is never bad.

Well I always start from tires, but there are only this realistic tires available from LEGO

https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=15413#T=S&C=11&O={"color":11,"iconly":0}

https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=32019&idColor=11#T=S&C=11&O={"color":11,"iconly":0}

https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=32003#T=S&C=11&O={"color":11,"iconly":0}

https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=92912&idColor=11#T=S&C=11&O={"color":11,"iconly":0}

and this

https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=23798&idColor=11#T=S&C=11&O={"color":11,"iconly":0}

to suite my mocs...

About small things we can say that

•  small is beautiful 
• poison is kept in small bottles 

 

 

[jorgeopesi]

1 hour ago, I_Igor said:

Well I always start from tires, but there are only this realistic tires available from LEGO

https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=15413#T=S&C=11&O={"color":11,"iconly":0}

https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=32019&idColor=11#T=S&C=11&O={"color":11,"iconly":0}

https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=32003#T=S&C=11&O={"color":11,"iconly":0}

https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=92912&idColor=11#T=S&C=11&O={"color":11,"iconly":0}

and this

https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=23798&idColor=11#T=S&C=11&O={"color":11,"iconly":0}

to suite my mocs...

About small things we can say that

•  small is beautiful 
• poison is kept in small bottles 

 

 

you are right first of all are the tyres to know the scale and the measures.

[1gor]

2 hours ago, jorgeopesi said:

you are right first of all are the tyres to know the scale and the measures.

But we are stil very limited (even) with them...

[knotian]

I have not been back from the dark ages ( only 3 years back) but one significant 'style' change was one of trying to fit my concepts within a club environment ,and it's included 'customs ', to one of building what and how I like to and aiming more for independent MOC's.

Believe it or not that gives me a greater appreciation of the club's collaborative and integrated builds. They have a greater imagination and skill level than I'll ever get, since I like to build using pictures and plans of equipment and buildings rather than imagination.

[jotta93]

I have changed as much as others, mostly unintentionally (I only realised I had changed after looking back at my models). From too many parts to more efficient building, from original gap-full Technic to panels, from too big/small to scale modeling (sort of).

One thing I've been intentionally trying to do is use different mechanisms for the same function (i.e. steering, outriggers, suspension, etc.)

One thing that has not changed at all is the way I build: through the night, like 4-5 hours straight until 2 a.m. (If only I didn't had to be at work  at 8 a.m. every single morning )

BTW, I think this is a very interesting topic, great idea @jorgeopesi