Eurobricks Knights
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About atlas

Spam Prevention

  • What is favorite LEGO theme? (we need this info to prevent spam)

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

1702 profile views
  1. atlas

    Speed Champion Ferrari 312T4 remodel

    Stunning, there isn't really much to say. The back is very well executed and the stickers are very well applied too. That's just a very pretty car well done.
  2. thanks, I don't know why it keeps going down so quickly. I've been asked for the digital files a few times now, curious what people want it for? Is it to build their own or just look at the insides? I haven't seen any pictures of other builds of it yet, so if they are out there then they are welcome to be shared in this thread
  3. atlas

    [MOC] Project: Endor

    I didn't even notice. That makes sense.
  4. atlas

    [MOC] Project: Endor

    Nailed that cockpit like I said. Have you considered putting the 3x3 quarter domes on the back in place of the opaque white canopies? Seems like it wouldn't be too complicated of a change.
  5. Here is the link, everything in the file should be quite straightforward. I am not completely done with the model, but I haven't made any changes to the latest version yet.
  6. atlas

    [MOC LDD] A-Wing (with LDD file)

    Interested to see what you come up with as it is very similar to what I did about two 1/2 years ago. I wasn't happy with 75003, and was still in a stage where I would find MOCs of others and reproduce those myself, and then eventually modify them. I found Jerac's model and krispy's version and started, I believe with krispy's first, and then started again, that time with the goal of matching the exterior details of Jerac's as closely as possible (at the time there were very few places that I could identify possible improvments), but because there is very limited imagery of his model I had to built it from scratch, making all the surface areas match up with new original internals. I have a couple of albums on my flickr page and posts here of the process. About a year after that I made some other small changes and swapped blue for red but the A-wing I have on the shelf is still in large part Jerac's on the outside. It is out of scale with the rest of my models however, and I can now see some more flaws in it that I would like to improve by building an entirely new model to 1:32. Jerac's was incredible for its time and is still amazing but it's almost 10 years old and now there is room to build on it, even if it's only in small ways.
  7. atlas

    Updating Your Minifigs

    I used a pencil eraser and put clear tape over the lines I wanted to protect.
  8. That would be useful. I might upload all of my reference (which I am fairly confident is accurate i.e it is photos of the real thing) to brickshelf when I am finished with my moc. As I said the whole affair is a mess and it takes a lot of time to sift through the history of it and become familiar with things. The Blue 12 was definitely a studio model on the first movie but to my knowledge did not appear in the final cut. And the blue thing is a little weird at first, yeah. I do have quite a few photos saved of the main X-wings and I also recently got the great star wars Chronicles japanese book which is a treasure trove of images of miniatures from the original trilogy, some of which were first published in it. Has almost all you could ask for short of ortho views of the studio models but not cheap. The second link you posted has mostly images of the Red 2 mini from the first movie, and a different, considerably bigger "Red 3" model that I believe was made for Return of the Jedi. I'm not sure if it ended up in the movie but they seem to cart that one out for a lot of the exhibitions. There is also one photo of a fan model in there. The first link has photos of the same red 3 model that was made after the first production.
  9. Thanks for sharing those photos especially the model shop one. I didn't make my post to criticise you directly, I just wanted to make a point about that for others reading because it's a mistake I made early on and overcoming it has improved my work many aspects, accuracy first of all. I spent a lot of time reading about this so I'm able to ramble about it for a lot, I'm sure you could do the same for tie fighters. That last photo you posted is of the "Blue 12" studio model from ANH. Originally red squadron was blue but this was changed because of bluescreen problems. The first X-wing that was built i believe was Blue Leader and was later repainted to Red 2. I believe there are only two photos of blue 12 that are openly available, the other is below. Notable for the split squadron markings on the wings.
  10. That's very interesting I would appreciate if you were able to share I don't think it's possible to get a fully clear picture by only looking at movie stills. Of course for different scenes there are "1:1" lifesize mockups made for actors to interact with, and there were miniatures for effects shots as I'm sure you know. I think it's fair to discard reference of the on-set mockups for questions of scaling for a few reasons. First, when we try to replicate the ships in our medium we are ultimately referring to the miniatures that were constructed first and foremost. That's where everything flowed from. Second, there are unavoidable incongruences between the lifesize mockups and the miniatures even though they are supposed to depict the same thing. For example the seam between the top and bottom of the X-wing front fuselage in the miniatures is very subtle and only develops a lip at the front, gradually. In the hangar mockup version the lip doesn't graduate in or out and is much more pronounced. Then you have size differences and so on. For example the falcon on the Echo base set is smaller than 1:1 so it could fit. I believe that there are only 2 model types for the X-wing minis. 'Hero' version and 'pyro' version (made to blow up). The fuselage seam on the pyros was vertical rather than horizontal so they could get a better explosion. The only major thing I noticed between the pyros and the Hero models is that the bottom of the fuselage directly under the cockpit has an extra angle. On the Hero models, the bottom has a very gradual single slope from the edge of the "cargo bay" section to the nosecone. On the pyros the bottom is perfectly flat under the cockpit and only starts to slope toward the nosecone near the front of the cockpit. It's basically the same otherwise other than the fact that the wings can't move. See below. Interestingly some of the differences in online 'blueprints' are visible here, even from that sourcebook I think you mentioned, one blueprint has this flat fuselage bottom under the cockpit and other reproductions don't have it. Even the UCS "Red 5" features markings of the Red 5 CGI model from the special edition which are completely different to the miniature built 20 years beforehand for whatever reason. The whole thing is a mess. So again, in this situation I discarded using the pyro red 5 model as a reference in favour of the hero red 5 model when i was working on my moc, as the Hero model is the most "true" version of the X-wing as it was conceived and finally produced by ILM. Without all of this knowledge I would have a much less clear picture of the work I was referencing in my moc and potentially could have made (inadvertent) mistakes - if I couldn't tell the difference between a pyro and a hero in different movie stills there could be inconsistencies in my lego work. In short my point is that it's best to research every aspect to get a complete overview of the work being referenced so it can be reproduced as faithfully as possible. If I only used movie stills I would have no idea how the right side of the red 5 fuselage is coloured and weathered, but I do thanks to other sources and media. Obviously with CGI models it's a different problem because there is no physical reference, the origin point is digital. For example in your comparison of the stormtrooper to the FO TIE fighter, we're looking at a chopped up image of a movie still of a movie featuring digitial models, and it's made more difficult by camera angles and the fact that it seems that the guy appears to be a good 10-15 metres and lower than the other object being referenced. Basically a lot of things muddying the waters, hence the requirement for a variety of sources to get the highest possible clarity. In an ideal world we would have access to the 3D scans of the old miniatures that have been made as well as the original CGI assets used in the new movies from Lucasfilm so that no detective work is required. But unfortunately that isn't the case so we have to make do. I think I have a decent collection of reference of studio models which helped me iron out a lot of inconsistences and establish some basic guidelines for the X-wing. (there are also other people who have done far more research than me on this who seem to have been able to pretty much nail it down) I'm curious what you found that you thought was inconsistent?
  11. atlas

    [MOC] First Order Elite TIE Interceptor

    Wings are quite nice. I like the idea for the cockpit shape but it would be improved a lot if it was a bit smoother.
  12. atlas

    [WIP][MOC] T-70 X-wing starfighter

    thanks. I don't think so for a digital build or step by step instructions. As it stands i am still not completely happy with the front, but it's complete for now. Some breakdown or interior images might be easier.
  13. atlas

    [WIP][MOC] T-70 X-wing starfighter

    more photos in the pipeline!
  14. atlas

    [MOC] 1400mm X-wing

    Man, wow. I can't really see a single thing that's out of place. Keep doing what you're doing, because it's working, regardless of the time it's taking. Like I said, can't wait for it to be completed, it'll be a real sight.
  15. atlas

    [MOC] 1400mm X-wing

    Amazing. The top part looks just like the miniatures. I think you have even included the angled-down seam of the top sides of the fuselage behind the cockpit. Never seen anyone try that before - granted this thing is huge, but it's incredibly impressive nonetheless, especially with mostly technic parts. It's going to be beautiful when completed, I'm sure