When logic and design collide.

[metalgeekzy]

I love designing my own stuff. But my biggest hurdle is logic. 

Like ive been on a huge alien planet space science type kick. So all the buildings i make has to be "air tight". I will still detail the crap out of the inside of the buildings. beds, tool racks, charging stations for the space helmet suits, ect. Than i slap a roof on the thing and most the design cant be seen. 

If  build a rover taller then a minifig i have to have a ladder or some other sort of way to get the guy in and out. If the rover has something that can be loaded/unloaded i have to have some sort of crane or something to move it. 

And i end up blowing a lot of pieces on a lot of logic based details then end up with not enough pieces to finish what i have in mind. 

How do you ignore logic and focus on design? I cant seem to be able to do that. 

[Peppermint_M]

Seriously. I would stick a lantern brick with a keypad printed tile in, put some Transparent+Colour crystal or dish piece on and call it a Field Generator. Now there is no worries about oxygen, because the field holds it in. Or add a single rung/hand hold and act like the gravity is low enough that they can jump the gap with no problems. 

When I have enough parts to cover it all, then I'll skip those little details, but mostly I will excuse one thousand problems with one little thing.

[Stuartn]

Just don't worry, politicians and Disney have worked that way for years

I completely agree with everything Peppermint_M said, things don't have to be exactly sensible, sometimes though, form will follow function, and if you feel adding details for that improves your MOC, then feel free to go with it, if there are parts limitations, as has been said previously, creating your own solutions through creativity (building or storyline) can work out well.

7 hours ago, metalgeekzy said:

Than i slap a roof on the thing and most the design cant be seen

A removable roof could be good, but also building halves of a building, or open backed, could fix that specific issue, its a shame to hide all details inside.

Edited September 12, 2021 by Stuartn

[MAB]

You could do a rough design of the shell first, without worrying about interior detail. Then look at it and decide what interior parts of the build  can be seen from the outside and then place things you want where they can be seen. Or include more windows or other viewing ports to open up more of the interior.

[Mylenium]

On 9/12/2021 at 12:12 AM, metalgeekzy said:

How do you ignore logic and focus on design?

I'm sure Amazon has some books on it, but the basic gist is that as a designer you should never worry about logic. Once you do, you create "bad" design. That's where engineering has to take over to make it work and then the whole iterative process back and forth to adapt the design to the tech specs and vice versa. And that is probably what you need to do in the most literal sense as well. Do not work on the same two sides of the coin all the time, but set yourself achievable goals and milestones on individual aspects only, then force yourself to get off the project and only work on it again under a different hat the next day, next week or whatever. also consider working on multiple completely different projects to get your mind off. Not saying you should become a master of the eternally unfinished like I am with a graveyard of projects in various states, but taking a hint from my creative work as graphics artist/ 3D animator it really helps if sometimes you get a little distracted with other things. and of course if you have a family, buddies and colleagues that may even extend to the physical world of letting them in on your work and occasionally steer you.

Mylenium

[TeriXeri]

I personally don't mind back or hinged foldable builds, but I can imagine if it has to be displayed in a 3D space that full enclosed with either removable roof, or easy to lift and then hinge for play would be prefered.

Also most 3-in-1 buildings (the ones I have most of), don't have stairs or ladders, and many Castles, or City/Town buildings didn't have them either for all floors, the details are nice to have but if it's complex or takes a lot of room (like a full staircase) , I don't have issues with them left out. Some other sets are just a simple wall ,or single side of a building with no interior (Chinese New Year Temple , or Story of Nian for example), those sets still have much detail in other areas.

For "Alien Space", I think you can get away with a lot of imagination as well, rules could be a bit more complicated if its strictly based on some existing work (movie/game/book etc), generally Sci-Fi tends to get away with "force field" or some tech to keep radiation out and oxygen in, but even LEGO Star Wars sets of like Death Star Duel or something aren't fully enclosed but have 1 side with a window of that particular scene to depict the "outside" space.

 

Edited September 13, 2021 by TeriXeri

[Faefrost]

Don’t feel bad. Actual Scale Modellers and Model Railroaders are worse for what you describe than AFOL’s. They glue stuff shut so their wonderful detailing can never be seen. Because they know it’s there. I think the most spectacular for this was Eji Tsubaraya, the main model maker and special effects guy for the Toho monster movies, such as Godzilla. He would get insanely obsessively detailed. His true Masterpiece was the movie Rodan, where he recreated an actual department store and shopping district in Tokyo, perfectly replicating reality down to posters, and clothing on racks, and designed everything to crumble and collapse as a real building would. The buildings even had bath fixtures. Rodan is worth watching just for those scenes. Even though you never see 99.9% of his actual detail work. But the strange thing is, it does somehow make the scenes much more believable. You compare Tsubaraya’s detailed work with the cheap work on a Gamera movie and you instantly know the difference. Even though you can technically only see the same amount of visible detail in each movie. Your brain extrapolates and maps it out. 
 

In the case of you doing this with Lego you can at least design in some access panels so you can show off the details when you choose to. 

[Lyichir]

Logical thinking can be good but it's important to keep in mind other priorities besides the ultimately impossible to truly achieve goal of realism. Is it creative? Is it fun? Those things can sometimes be more important than whether something would make perfect sense in the real world. Making a spacecraft cockpit airtight can add realism, but does your solution for filling that space have a positive or negative impact on the overall look you're going for? Adding a crane to the back of a rover might make the rover function better independently in theory, but if all your rovers have that feature, does it make it feel redundant—and if so, could it be replaced with something fresher and more interesting? Having a toilet stowed away somewhere in your moonbase is arguably essential, but unless you can both make that accessible to view from outside and use it to tell an interesting story or further develop the world you're creating, maybe it shouldn't be obligatory.

Coming from the perspective of a former Bionicle fan, I've learned the hard way that just because something is realistic doesn't mean it's the best or only way to do things. Making an articulated figure with a fully "realistic" range of motion means very little if it compromises the overall aesthetic, can't support its own weight with so many joints, or just isn't fun to pose or play with. Sometimes using shortcuts, cheats, or just omitting features you don't plan to utilize for display may be less "realistic" but still better suits the practical needs of a model.

[thebrickhamster]

I have the exact same issue - I guess just take a step back and think if it would look good in a Lego catalog or as part of a cartoon where imagination is needed to fill in the gaps.