The Mercury - New York Central #4915 K-5b with Henry Dreyfuss streamlining

[supertruper1988]

@AbleChristopher This is truly a great build! I am going to be gawking over the pictures for a long time to come!

8 hours ago, SteamSewnEmpire said:

Ah, the fallback. Well, you are nothing if not true to form.

I can only pound this into your head so many times: it makes literally no difference if a model is built or not. Moreover, it's like comparing a draftsman to a welder - so the little builder can snap bricks together. Bravo. I wonder what the going rate on such a talent is? If I pulled up next to the nearest 7-eleven and waved down an itinerant, do you think I could convince him to do the deed for sub-minimum wage? "Hola! Tu letrero dice que pintas paredes. Puedo convencerte de que construyas un modelo de Lego en su lugar?"

The art is in melding design with engineering, while keeping proportions as true as possible to the original - not in construction. Period. End of story.

And don't even begin to lecture me about making the thing run. There are only so many ways you can skin a cat - the internals of a Lego locomotive are not deep space rocket science; we're dealing with a dozen gears and a handful of motors. Achieving the proper shape and scale of the engine utilizing the extremely limited parts available is the challenge. Because the guts of these things only vary by degrees.

Pardon me for interrupting your virtual Shangri La by occasionally voicing dissent to the prevailing mind worm that you'd so DESPERATELY love everyone to just choke on. Believe me: I'm not posting any more projects after this - you don't deserve it. You think I'm going to continue to share work when the Eurobricks oligarchy promote intellectual theft? Oh, excuse - he built it. It must be his idea now.

But before I go, let's dig a little deeper on that notion of snobbery. You honestly - truly - believe that the fact that this one-post-wonder has cash to burn, but no ideas of his own, that makes his work superior? Well, to answer that, your words do speak for themselves, so it's unquestionable that you do. We'd better get on with condemning all the unconstructed buildings, I suppose; setting fire to the unpublished books. They're inferior. After all, all the hard work has been done, but somebody didn't hand over a wad of cash yet. What a shame.

If the above constitutes trolling and elitism, count me more than contented to stand apart from the rabble who would celebrate perfidiousness - being considered a rogue by thieves and their apologists is high honor indeed. And if that is too many words for you, then let me make it clear: you are a bad person, those who agree with you are similarly bad people, and I don't want to share your company anymore.

I see you got banned (again) for this tirade. Be sure to come back with a new account like or @ProvenceTristram or Shrike Arghast and lay your ode de pretentious on us in a few days. Remember that the difference between digital and real bricks is gravity and physics. Im sorry you dont understand that and you feel that insulting an entire race of people to make your point about a kids toy was needed. 

Not sorry to see you go  

[Hod Carrier]

Well, this has been a highly edifying discussion. It's a shame that someone's thread got hijacked for it, though. I will just say that the posting record of this forum does show that IP theft and blatant plagiarism are taken seriously here, and people have been called out for it in the past. But there is a whole world of difference between blatant copying and two builders coming up with similar answers to the same design and build problems, which is what looks like has happened here.

Where multiple builders have taken on the same prototype it is almost inevitable that the resulting designs will share a lot of the same features. Looking at the photos of the real loco under discussion in this thread I'm not sure how else you could reproduce the shape of the casing except in the way both builders have. If anything, the real loco looks like it's been built out of LEGO and is a very good example of a design that suits the building medium. But none of this adds up to blatant copying. I'm sure it wouldn't take very long to find other LEGO Q1 0-6-0s to compare to the one recently showcased here by @SteamSewnEmpire and to point out all the ways in which the respective builders have used the same techniques, but that doesn't mean that any particular builder copied any other's preceding design and certainly should not be construed as an accusation of plagiarism.

@SteamSewnEmpire Just a few points, if I may. There's no reason why another builder should have to credit you if they have not taken any inspiration or techniques from your design. That the two models appear similar is not a smoking gun, and I can't help but wonder how many other similar builds existed prior to your own and whether or not any of them deserve credit from you if you also took any inspiration from them. Also, "first" does not necessarily equal "best", nor does the fact that someone else makes different design choices make their design inferior. But most of all, please don't just fire off both barrels and then have a tantrum when folk disagree with you. If you feel that your design has been ripped off then we are not unsympathetic provided that you can show some compelling evidence, but bear in mind that we are not bound to agree with you.

On the digital designing discussion I will just say that I agree with @SteamSewnEmpire, but only up to a point. I build both in real bricks and in digital ones and all my real world builds were designed in LDD or Stud.io first, and I will just say that it irks me when folk denigrate a digital design as somehow "not proper". Whether the bricks are real or virtual, I am still using the same techniques and bound by the same limitations (in fact, both LDD and Stud.io impose restrictions on some connections that do not exist with real bricks, so I would argue that it is not the no-holds-barred free-for-all that some people make it out to be). All of my digital designs are designed with strength and stability in mind so that I can build them for real if the fancy so takes me. However, I do also know that sometimes things that look fine on a screen will not work as expected in real life, such as chassis/bogie articulation, and I have had to make changes to builds as a result of this. But as I learn what works and what doesn't, these lessons get built back into my virtual builds. As such, I do feel that when someone tries to run-down a digital build or suggest that the designer has not taken account of how it will go together in real life they are just taking a cheap shot that may just be entirely unwarranted. As much as a render may not show the structures inside a virtual build to convince a viewer of it's viability, so also the photograph of the outside of a MOC. A nicely posed photograph of a stationary loco or piece of rolling stock does not show that some large part is not hanging on for grim life by just a stud or two and in danger of coming adrift after a couple of spirited laps. Happily this is not an issue that comes up on this forum too often as the community ethos here is very strong and the members largely encouraging and inclusive, but just sometimes I feel like there is a slight undertone which makes me feel twitchy.

Lastly, I would just like to say to @AbleChristopher that sharing designs here does not usually start a firestorm. Please don't be discouraged by what has happened today in this thread and continue to share with us whatever you wish. In the interests of fairness, I would also like to say the same to @SteamSewnEmpire because he has contributed up to this point and I would hope will be welcome to continue to do so if he wants to. We may not all agree on everything but I don't see that it has to be a problem provided that it can be done with respect. 

[Phil B]

@Hod Carrier fwiw, I never said it was easy to do a digital build. I stressed that going from digital to physical is yet another level of complexity, and that (my personal opinion having done both) it is easier to build something digitally vs building “in the brick”, starting with the fact that most of us don’t have every brick in every color to our disposal.

Not sure if my post was included in your comments, but just making sure you understand I never dissed digital building.

[Brickwolf]

Excellent build!

Edited March 19, 2021 by Brickwolf

[ivanlan9]

This is a fabulous engine & build. And I don't even like steam!

The only thing I think you should change is those rods:  as soon as funds permit, please replace the clunky technic parts with custom rods.  There are a couple of makers out there (I need to get some for my Croc!).

Metta,

Ivan

[Shiva]

I am interested to see your future locomotives too.

[Gadg8eer]

On 3/17/2021 at 7:55 PM, SteamSewnEmpire said:

I don't even get a slight shout-out? All you had to do was just say 'thanks to Steamsewnempire for working out 95 percent of the body-shaping design, which I faithfully copied.'

These forums.

I'm done uploading projects. I expect people to imitate me - it's the nature of Lego. I also, however, expect credit to be given where it is due.

Your version doesn't even look like it's made using any of the same pieces. You don't deserve credit just for building the same locomotive first.

On 3/17/2021 at 9:08 PM, AbleChristopher said:

Hey SteamSewnEmpire, I hate to see things go this way, I really like your model as well. I did a lot of research for this project and I wont pretend that I didn't see your post on here, just like I saw posts by many Lego creators building all kinds of streamlined designs. I guess all I can say is that we modeled the same thing, and when trying to replicate a streamlined locomotive with non-modified lego pieces there is only so many you can pull from for the locomotive exterior, especially since the real Mercury's shroud is in sectioned plating like we've both modeled. If you look at the front of the locomotive, the pilot truck, drivers, valve gear, trailing truck, cab and so on however, there are clear distinct differences which would of course require different internals. Counting pieces it looks like mine is shorter too and obviously the tenders are quite different. We also have different designs to address the handling of lego curves, which requires a different internal frame and so on...so yeah like I said, I do like your model, and by posting my attempt at this build I didn't mean to squash yours.

Cheers

@AbleChristopher Don't worry about it, I think SteamSewnEmpire is just sore because he's a glory hog. People like him boil my blood so much.

On 3/17/2021 at 9:27 PM, SteamSewnEmpire said:

Yes, I can see that your model is inferior in several distinct ways. However, you can call the titan arum by whatever name you like - the stinky rose remains plagiarism. This is not a case of "I did independent research and just happened to stumble onto the same brick alignment as you in every complex geometric shape on the locomotive" - you took the screenshots I posted, hunkered down, and spent many hours laboring to copy my work, then conveniently failed to credit me in what turned out to be your first post ever on the forum. Just amazing how lightning just strikes like that, eh? I worked for a solid week to achieve that something that you conveniently stumbled onto in one try. Man, coincidences. What astonishing things they are.

For all that, you fell short, clearly, in certain areas - such as the chintzy terraced downslope at the front of the boiler, and the way that the cab and the running boards don't actually align (having the cab 8w and the running boards 9w makes for a 9w locomotive, btw) - but, make no mistake: your magnum-opus-first-postus is the fruit of nobody's tree but my own.

Cheers.

 

Complex geometric shape? Are you insane?! Plagiarism is more than just "general alignment", TV Tropes came into existence - and then got replaced by All the Tropes wiki (the .org one) , entirely because artists borrow general ideas all the time. It's about adapting and reinterpreting ideas, or giving them different implementations. If this was actually plagiarism, literally 99% of all art would be so.

On 3/18/2021 at 12:08 AM, supertruper1988 said:

I have to level with you. His is better than yours first and foremost because it is actually built. Your design looks good but the fact he used a couple of the same parts you did while also clearly using a lot of his own ideas is how it works in LEGO. there are only a few ways to create some shapes so the execution is to be expected to be the same. Add in the fact it navigates LEGO track with all that beautiful cowling makes it very impressive. 

I have seen you on here for years being a general snob about all things trains but to what end? You dont even like building LEGO because it "hurts your hands", nor have you ever once showed that any of your designs are actually buildable, let alone look as good in the brick. 

Why are you here? What is your goal? Is it to just troll all of us? You act all mighty train builder but where is your proof? In your mercury thread you ask basic questions about powering models and gearing. Happy to see you got the help you needed, but at the same time, that same lack of basic knowledge doesnt reinforce that you are the god of LEGO trains. 

I'm going to add that @AbleChristopher made the just plain better one, aesthetically speaking. It has actual train wheels, while SteamSewnEmpire used gears to make the wheels and that's somehow better? What kind of excuse is that?

On 3/18/2021 at 12:30 AM, SteamSewnEmpire said:

Ah, the fallback. Well, you are nothing if not true to form.

I can only pound this into your head so many times: it makes literally no difference if a model is built or not. Moreover, it's like comparing a draftsman to a welder - so the little builder can snap bricks together. Bravo. I wonder what the going rate on such a talent is? If I pulled up next to the nearest 7-eleven and waved down an itinerant, do you think I could convince him to do the deed for sub-minimum wage? "Hola! Tu letrero dice que pintas paredes. Puedo convencerte de que construyas un modelo de Lego en su lugar?"

The art is in melding design with engineering, while keeping proportions as true as possible to the original - not in construction. Period. End of story.

And don't even begin to lecture me about making the thing run. There are only so many ways you can skin a cat - the internals of a Lego locomotive are not deep space rocket science; we're dealing with a dozen gears and a handful of motors. Achieving the proper shape and scale of the engine utilizing the extremely limited parts available is the challenge. Because the guts of these things only vary by degrees.

Pardon me for interrupting your virtual Shangri La by occasionally voicing dissent to the prevailing mind worm that you'd so DESPERATELY love everyone to just choke on. Believe me: I'm not posting any more projects after this - you don't deserve it. You think I'm going to continue to share work when the Eurobricks oligarchy promote intellectual theft? Oh, excuse - he built it. It must be his idea now.

But before I go, let's dig a little deeper on that notion of snobbery. You honestly - truly - believe that the fact that this one-post-wonder has cash to burn, but no ideas of his own, that makes his work superior? Well, to answer that, your words do speak for themselves, so it's unquestionable that you do. We'd better get on with condemning all the unconstructed buildings, I suppose; setting fire to the unpublished books. They're inferior. After all, all the hard work has been done, but somebody didn't hand over a wad of cash yet. What a shame.

If the above constitutes trolling and elitism, count me more than contented to stand apart from the rabble who would celebrate perfidiousness - being considered a rogue by thieves and their apologists is high honor indeed. And if that is too many words for you, then let me make it clear: you are a bad person, those who agree with you are similarly bad people, and I don't want to share your company anymore.

One post wonder? Have you seen his posts since then? You called his inferior for "snapping bricks together"? I don't think he just did. I think he made his own and you're jealous because you did it first but now he did it better. Wah wah, go cry me a river. You're inferior, SteamSewnEmpire, morally and as an artist. Glad you were banned long ago, I don't want to know what your arrogant response would have been.

On 3/18/2021 at 6:09 AM, Phil B said:

@supertruper1988 Amen to this. You took the words right out of my mouth.

@SteamSewnEmpire : This is now the third time that you have been utterly aggressive at the slightest suggestion of something less than praise on this board. First in the debate on "building for a patron", second as a response to the Mercury post, third to @supertruper1988's response to you. There are ways to have dialog on a public message board, and there are ways to voice discontent. The way you do it is not the way to go - you create an air of entitlement around yourself that is unjustified.

I really appreciate the great digital designs you have contributed to this board over the last year and wish you would continue to do so. I also wish you acknowledge that those designs are merely digital drawings and are unproven until built "in the brick", and that doing so and making the engine run reliably on (standard LEGO or third-party) track is an art on its own. You are free to make only digital builds, and if you keep documenting them as you have done, you are a great addition to this board.

With regards to the Mercury - I think it would have been a good courtesy of @AbleChristopher to acknowledge your Mercury _IF_ he had indeed taken inspiration from your digital build. I cannot judge if he did - there are only limited parts in LEGO, so when trying to build a complex shape 2 builders will independently likely use several similar constructions.

@Phil B He's a new-gen entitled artist, basically most famous Millennial artists are jerks who jumped on the Hipster bandwagon soon after 2008; I say this as a Millennial speculative fiction writer, many of my peers got famous by becoming infamous. They don't care about their craft unless it makes them feel like a rock star and it's honestly the entire reason I felt the need to respond to all this in this way.

On 3/18/2021 at 9:11 AM, supertruper1988 said:

@AbleChristopher This is truly a great build! I am going to be gawking over the pictures for a long time to come!

I see you got banned (again) for this tirade. Be sure to come back with a new account like or @ProvenceTristram or Shrike Arghast and lay your ode de pretentious on us in a few days. Remember that the difference between digital and real bricks is gravity and physics. Im sorry you dont understand that and you feel that insulting an entire race of people to make your point about a kids toy was needed. 

Not sorry to see you go  

@AbleChristopher It's awesome, that's the other reason I posted. Is it okay if I send you a PM?

On 3/18/2021 at 6:40 PM, Hod Carrier said:

Well, this has been a highly edifying discussion. It's a shame that someone's thread got hijacked for it, though. I will just say that the posting record of this forum does show that IP theft and blatant plagiarism are taken seriously here, and people have been called out for it in the past. But there is a whole world of difference between blatant copying and two builders coming up with similar answers to the same design and build problems, which is what looks like has happened here.

Where multiple builders have taken on the same prototype it is almost inevitable that the resulting designs will share a lot of the same features. Looking at the photos of the real loco under discussion in this thread I'm not sure how else you could reproduce the shape of the casing except in the way both builders have. If anything, the real loco looks like it's been built out of LEGO and is a very good example of a design that suits the building medium. But none of this adds up to blatant copying. I'm sure it wouldn't take very long to find other LEGO Q1 0-6-0s to compare to the one recently showcased here by @SteamSewnEmpire and to point out all the ways in which the respective builders have used the same techniques, but that doesn't mean that any particular builder copied any other's preceding design and certainly should not be construed as an accusation of plagiarism.

@SteamSewnEmpire Just a few points, if I may. There's no reason why another builder should have to credit you if they have not taken any inspiration or techniques from your design. That the two models appear similar is not a smoking gun, and I can't help but wonder how many other similar builds existed prior to your own and whether or not any of them deserve credit from you if you also took any inspiration from them. Also, "first" does not necessarily equal "best", nor does the fact that someone else makes different design choices make their design inferior. But most of all, please don't just fire off both barrels and then have a tantrum when folk disagree with you. If you feel that your design has been ripped off then we are not unsympathetic provided that you can show some compelling evidence, but bear in mind that we are not bound to agree with you.

On the digital designing discussion I will just say that I agree with @SteamSewnEmpire, but only up to a point. I build both in real bricks and in digital ones and all my real world builds were designed in LDD or Stud.io first, and I will just say that it irks me when folk denigrate a digital design as somehow "not proper". Whether the bricks are real or virtual, I am still using the same techniques and bound by the same limitations (in fact, both LDD and Stud.io impose restrictions on some connections that do not exist with real bricks, so I would argue that it is not the no-holds-barred free-for-all that some people make it out to be). All of my digital designs are designed with strength and stability in mind so that I can build them for real if the fancy so takes me. However, I do also know that sometimes things that look fine on a screen will not work as expected in real life, such as chassis/bogie articulation, and I have had to make changes to builds as a result of this. But as I learn what works and what doesn't, these lessons get built back into my virtual builds. As such, I do feel that when someone tries to run-down a digital build or suggest that the designer has not taken account of how it will go together in real life they are just taking a cheap shot that may just be entirely unwarranted. As much as a render may not show the structures inside a virtual build to convince a viewer of it's viability, so also the photograph of the outside of a MOC. A nicely posed photograph of a stationary loco or piece of rolling stock does not show that some large part is not hanging on for grim life by just a stud or two and in danger of coming adrift after a couple of spirited laps. Happily this is not an issue that comes up on this forum too often as the community ethos here is very strong and the members largely encouraging and inclusive, but just sometimes I feel like there is a slight undertone which makes me feel twitchy.

Lastly, I would just like to say to @AbleChristopher that sharing designs here does not usually start a firestorm. Please don't be discouraged by what has happened today in this thread and continue to share with us whatever you wish. In the interests of fairness, I would also like to say the same to @SteamSewnEmpire because he has contributed up to this point and I would hope will be welcome to continue to do so if he wants to. We may not all agree on everything but I don't see that it has to be a problem provided that it can be done with respect. 

@Hod Carrier Oh, there's a "reason", just not a good one; Because SteamSewnEmpire's ego needs to be fed at all costs, even if that means attacking anyone who threatens to take away their precious source of validation.

Anyway, that's all I have to say on the matter. Sorry if this is overly hostile, if it's too much for this community it won't happen again. @AbleChristopher Please don't stop and I hope you're still around because I couldn't sign up in 2021 for some strange reason due to a weird bug in the sign-up page. I was looking through my bookmarks and found this, and decided to check if the bug was fixed, and finally got through! Anyway, good work!

Edited May 25, 2023 by Gadg8eer