Studs: Yay, or Nay?

[Berry Syedow]

Studs are one of the quintessential aspects of the LEGO Product, and yet I

[Starwars4J]

Honestly, I think both sides have their place. Like most of life, this issue isn't black or white (or in this case studdy or studless).

Castle MOCs in general look better with studs, as they also tend to be simpler builds while maintaining an elegance. Space on the other hand tends to look better studless. This is not to say however that these are absolutes. tiling floors is becoming a common practice in castles these days, as is a new method in space building where the entire thing is covered in studs (to give greater detail). I have seen many creations in space that are all studs and amazing me, while the reverse is true in castles. But more importantly I have seen MOCs that to both and blend to great effect.

I think that any creation can look good with studs, or totally studless. It depends on the ingenuity and talent of the builder, to determine the worthiness of the MOC. Ultimately studless vs. studdy is pointless to argue, as it just comes down to personal taste anyway :-P

[blueandwhite]

I'm indifferent.

Most builders who impress me seem to have a good grasp of a variety of building techniques. The choice to go with studs or go studless alone doesn't make a MOC good or bad. Its the end result that has to be measured. Obviously, the ability to go studless presents a number of advantages, however that isn't to say a stud-covered MOC is somehow less impressive. Its all a matter of circumstance.

[captaintau]

What 4J said.

There's no "better", just what the designer or building or MOCer feel is right.

[alex54]

What 4J said.

There's no "better", just what the designer or building or MOCer feel is right.

Yep!

For my city mocs, it's with stund, because stundless need a lot of tiles that I don't have, so... :-D

[Kikuichimonji]

I can only agree with what's said above.

As someone who builds mainly space MOCs, I'd say studs is a 'nay'. However, for city/castle MOCs, it can certainly be a 'yay'. At the moment, I'm building a (space) MOC for which I'm seriously considering showing tons of studs. I have no clue why, I just thinks it looks great, and it's good to break tradition every now and then.

[xenologer]

I say keep studs

because without them, we'd have Z'Nap, and we all know how that turned out.

eheheh, but thats not what you were asking...

Well, I am finding that when I use large slopes in my spaceships, (like that 12*3*1 giant triple wedge), the smoothness of those bricks tend to force me to try and smooth out the rest of the ship. For consistency.

Of course, I dont try to hide every last one, just try to make sure theres no shocking disparity in the surface texture.

So, I don't really have a preference, its just about what works well for the particular project.

One thing I absolutely do hate though, is when people hide studs just for it's own sake; make a totally smooth rounded spaceship, then fill in gaps with tons of 'greeblies'.

It's just going to opposite extremes of studless then trying to balance it out with extreme greeblies; when just letting some studs show through in the first place would have provided adequate 'detail' and texture at much less cost...

[KMOI]

Hmm, this is pretty interesting! I got to admit, I have seen alot of studless spaceships on Brickshelf. However, I think the objective the builder is trying to achieve isn't so much to deviate away from the way the brick is built, but rather, to do something special. Afterall, LEGO is based on studs, so to make something that looks like something we'd see in real life is truly icing on the cake.

Aside from sheer kicks-value, I don't see a evolution towards non-stud builds. It's kinda like a fad, doing it once in a while, then getting tired of it and going back to tradition. In terms of theme, I think the Space ones look the way they do because most of science fiction these days have these amazingly sleek looking designs, rather than the more blocky/grungy types of the pre-80s.

I agree with Starwars! There's always a happy medium, and there no better example than the castle builds and SNOT-estque mechas. Personally, I like to build in both styles. I'm mostly a mini-mecha builder (talking 3-inch robots here), but I like to do it both ways. Sometimes, sloped pieces allow you to have that nice beautiful curve you've always wanted, while the rest are exposed bricks. I'm not a "trend-setter" in mecha by any means, but by looking at the leading designers, the new age of mechs is to completely integrate exposed-stud design and sloped pieces to make a truly harminic piece.

Kinda like the new Transformers movie designs! :-D

*Ducks and covers himself from rabid G1 Transformers fans*

[pianodude2494]

Ooh! What a wonderfully creative topic!

Here's my opinion:

Non-studless and studdy creations both have their place in LEGO MOCS. It totally depends on the look your going for. In my current MOCing project, "A Day at the Pond", the LEGO water is completely studdless, but the surrounding grass and landscape is very studdy to give it a rugged, outdoor feel.

So, like I said, it's entirely dependent on the MOC you're trying to build, and the look you want. Both styles have their own pros and cons, and the choice is up to you! With true art, LEGOs included, there is no "right" or "wrong". ;-)

~pianodude2494~

[captaintau]

Further to my earlier answer, lets not forget the purpose of studs.

A SNOT model may look sleek, but your options for additions and minifig locating become lessened. For example, space builders may like to have their astronaut "upside down" (not there is such a thing in space). For this, we needs studs. Maybe there's a happy medium (a satisfied psychic :-D ) between studs and stud-less.

[highlandcattle]

Yay!

[Athos]

I personally prefer studs, but when they are absent or tiled, the creation looks a lot cleaner and neater. Personally, as a loose rule, at least for my vignettes, I will tile the floors if it is depicting an interior scene and leave the floors studded, if the scene is an outside scene.

Steve

[Zaktan of the Shadows]

Studless is pretty cool, but I prefer studs. Its what makes LEGO so cool.

-ZotS

[JINZONINGEN73]

For the most part, I love studless more.

Grass being studded is just logical, but beyond that, I stand in awe of those who can pull off near-studless creations. I think if Lego were to make green tiles decorated with grass painted on, it'd be a disaster among stud and studless fans.

I think the main problem with LARGE mocs being studless is the cost of that many tiles. It'd be a pretty penny to tile up a giant castle, as well as turn the look into a modern business office... which would be silly, save for a ball room.

I dunno.. mecha are my thing. You have absolute works of art on Brickshelf, perfect replicas of Gundams and other robots... but when you zoom in beyond the thumbnail, they look everything short of asstastic. THOSE need to be primarily studless. Studs on mecha are just really depressing, no matter how amazing the creation.

I'm glad to see Lego going crazy with drastic slope production lately.

My favorite is the 1x1 slopes. They "complete" so many mocs from the past that I don't know how people got along before them. Took a long time for them to get around to it, but they're revolutionary in making mocs look gorgeous.

So yeah, studded for grass or to emulate detail or roughness on something huge, but the rest is all pretty much tiles for me.

[exo attack]

I agree, especially with EXO-FORCE, because of all the sloped pieces hich don't have many studs on them.

I do not have many tiles either, well not of any specific colour. Although tiles are good for features and traps, included in nearly every set. My favourite type of sets are studless (or near that anyway), beause in real life, there isnt large bumps on everything , making studless sets more life like.

[Norro]

I actually like what you can do by contrasting the two techniques. There is a lot of both on display in this shameless plug...

God Bless,

Nathan

[Berry Syedow]

Thank you for adding to the discussion everyone. So far the consensus largely seems to be that there is a "harmonic balance" between the two. Others agree that spacey/mecha creations should be studless while landscaping and more rugged themes such as castle should have studs.

I too have noticed that many castle MOCs are using tiles in the interiors. Another interesting substitute for tiles is to lay a wall of bricks flat to form a smooth surface. This is a very cost effective solution to those low on tiles. The technique has been most prominent in MOCs containing large bodies of water.

Norro's MOC is an intriguing exception. He believes that water can be effectively conveyed using both studs and tiles. The madness! I actually like this technique, since it has a certain busyness about it that most moving bodies of water also tends to have...

[lone_buffalo]

Tiles are the one thing keeping me from doing any good vigs and it makes me sad. All I can do is make them outside, but no hallways or floors, because they need to be completely flat! Grrrr.

[Norrington]

YAY! ALLWAYS, get used to it. Without studs it's more MegaBloks then Lego. Because the Megabloks are so <insert that tiresome argument> that there are hardly any studs on them...

[blueandwhite]

YAY! ALLWAYS, get used to it. Without studs it's more MegaBloks then Lego. Because the Megabloks are so <insert that tiresome argument> that there are hardly any studs on them...

Hardly.

Making a MOC studless doesn't in of itself make the design simple or <insert that tiresome argument>. In fact, most studless MOCs that I've seen tend to be wellbuilt and thought out. If anything, building a studless MOC can prove more challenging than building with studs. To say that building studless amounts to juniorization is simply not correct.

Having a preference for one techinique is fine, but to knock a builder for building in a style that you don't like is hardly fair. Megabloks :-X ? Can you be more offensive?!

[larry marak]

Hardly.

Making a MOC studless doesn't in of itself make the design simple or <insert that tiresome argument>. In fact, most studless MOCs that I've seen tend to be wellbuilt and thought out. If anything, building a studless MOC can prove more challenging than building with studs. To say that building studless amounts to juniorization is simply not correct.

Having a preference for one techinique is fine, but to knock a builder for building in a style that you don't like is hardly fair. Megabloks :-X ? Can you be more offensive?!

You're right on target there Norrington. Megablocks is an excellent source for tiles, not only in standard Lego sizes, but also in 4x4 , 8x12 (black only, excellent for aircraft carrier builds) and wing tiles in two sizes, 4x3 and 8x4. A last additional option is the 2x4, available from both Mega Bloks and Cobi/Best Lock, which company also produces the standard public domain Lego tile sizes.

[El Bucanero]

You're right on target there Norrington. Megablocks is an excellent source for tiles, not only in standard Lego sizes, but also in 4x4 , 8x12 (black only, excellent for aircraft carrier builds) and wing tiles in two sizes, 4x3 and 8x4. A last additional option is the 2x4, available from both Mega Bloks and Cobi/Best Lock, which company also produces the standard public domain Lego tile sizes.

Your not quite a purist are you :-P

Although those bigger tiles could be very useful...*must-resist- myself! may-not-get-tempted-by-megabloks!*

back on topic. Well, although LEGO has tiles, studs are like a symbol from LEGO to me. No studs , No LEGO. IHMO anyways.

However, some studless MOCs are reaaally cool!

Mr Tiber

[Starwars4J]

No LEGO. IHMO anyways.

The studs are still there, they're just hiding under the tiles :-P

[Chuck]

It depends. I like to mix studless and studs. The studs add a texture to it that can't be achieved with studless.

-l2k-

[casewindu]

yay: because they are classic and original

nay: because with out studs lt looks more stylish to me. Like smoother