___

Well, as for me, that is exactly how I understood the rule about bricks being "not just hanging in the air" part but as it is not quite clear I asked the question and now waiting for exact explanation from mods. I guess we have to think about it like "How I would do it with real bricks when Photoshoping is not allowed", like for example as a model(s) being displayed on some expo where you need to put those on some kind of stands/supports ( I have used trans for mine) or with strings (not applicable in this case and contest). And it looks even more like that when considering the other rule saying we should not trying to present our entries as box covers etc. On the other hand I agree with you that it is much cooler looking...and that is also the reason I am feeling a bit "cheated" by that now unclear rule when I see others...ehm, you in this case, are presenting their stuff that "better/more pleasant/better looking" way (but hey, I can live with that anyway, just saying).

Calabar, I understand that it is just your oppinion on that matter, no problem. Sure, I am waiting for clarification from them but as it is weekend I think they are not here for this moment. You see, it is actually not that important to me at this point cos I (most probably, but not definitely sure) won't go changing my setup - it is just some other not quite clear rule that I would like to be clarified, maybe for some other new participants that might be in wrong impression of what is being written thus making their contest inputs (possibly) disqualified or in need to overdoing them for that matter (which would be avoidable if the rule was clear enough)...tho as I said earlier if it was clear enough right from the start (you see I thought it is clear but maybe I was wrong, so it is not that clear) I would definitely go with the "flying" option and not stand/support as I have now.

I am not talking about TLG images, I am talking about not quite clear rules in this contest (just this specific rule)...it is not us making some sense of unclear rules by exploring some TLG official imagery, rather stick to the rule(s) itself, cos in that way I can also find some TLG imagery that is showing loose bricks hanging in the air just like that - does it means that this rule becomes absolete because of that? All I am saying is that if it was meant to be WHAT WE COULD REALLY ASSEMBLE WITH LEGO BRICKS AND WHAT WE WOULD BE ABLE TO ARRANGE WITH THEM OURSELVES then it does not matter what has TLG ever produced in the sense of their own images/boxes/movies etc., so if one want to have some flying objects he needs to put them on some kind of stand. And as I remember previous debate: all of this should really be taken as REAL LEGO BRICKS BUILD, so the only way around one would be able to do it like that (flying in the air) would be by using things like Photoshop which is not allowed (or at least this is exactly how I interpret rules of this contest - if I am somewhat wrong, please, do correct me).

Well, Calabar, to me it was not clear at all like that as there was really strong accent on "possible with real bricks" and "flying in the air (just like that)" is, of course, not possible with real bricks without some sort of support/stand, that is the reason I am asking cos I was "pushed" by this unclear statement to use trans stands instead of much pleasant scene with really flying "objects" in the air, if you understand me. That being said: I am not against it - rather the other way around, BUT I am just saying I am quite surprised, that is all.

I understood this rule like that we cannot make our renders with THINGS THAT FLY (that is something that would not be possible with real bricks) only if we find some way around that would be also possible with real bricks, like lets say, put our "flying" models on some stand - do I understand this right, or is it really meant just for some loose bricks hanging in the air? Cos I see some participants are using flying machines in the air hanging "just like that"

Yea, in fact I agree with you on this: I too think it is not quite OK for those of us who had to live with those previous "harder" rules (although me personally had no probs with that, rather other way around: I was suggesting even tougher rules like only real participant's own ideas would be allowed and considered as new theme, not LEGO brick interpretations of already existing stuff...but I soon realize in such case there would be only like 2-3 participants, most probably, haha - I simply took it much more serious than it actually is ) + also agree on the point that range 3-10 was absolutely fine - it is just that as for myself (my entries) it does not mean anything as I post mine almost immediately like a few hours after the contest started and since then let them as they were (I only updated their rendering quality during next 2 days + as I play more with the rendering script I may update them once more a bit as now they do look to me a bit "dark")...

Actually, if it were me, now as the number of participants is growing and having overview of all entries becomes harder and harder, I would even make the rule like: you are allowed to post only one picture that would contain as many models/sets of your own theme as you like! Reasons would be: "orientation" in respective "themes" would be much more better (one should look only at one picture per theme) there would be no fight about "too little models/sets allowed" or "too much models/sets allowed" normal logic would prevent participants having too many models/sets on such picture cos the more he puts inside the less it would be "readable"

Somehow I don't understand this a bit vague statement (absolute exactness would be rather expected so one will not do anything wrong): what directory/ies? There are actually 2 folders inside LGEO directory: "lg" (logic tells me you probably wanted to write "put lg_xxxx.inc files into lg folder inside LGEO directory", but as nothing is as it may seem it'd be really nice having it written like that) "ar" (having no clue what is this one about) So where should one put those "xxxx.inc" (STL) files - should we create new folder (cos that is as I understood it at first), or use some other already existing folder ("ar")? See, many of us can be really not aware of LDRAW exact structure so it'd be much more helpful if this part (sentence) was written/described in more detail than that... I found your brick models looking really extra HQ compared to anything else I saw - mainly when it comes to rounded parts, like dishes etc., great - I would really like to use them as I am making new script that would actually replace all LowRes "curved" meshes/bricks of original LDD in BlueRender (SunFlow script) with your HQ ones (being almost there! First idea was completely replace LDD bricks with your ones but then I realized two other things which prevented me from doing it: 1. you did not make all bricks yet, 2. there is not any known option how to translate LDD flexes to LDRAW ones, therefore I decided to go with replacing only those rounded parts) - but this uncertainity about placing your files make things really hard to "get going", if you understand me. Waiting for your soon answer, Darats!

Can I ask you: are your set numbers (740...) just some made up digits without any meaning/merit or are they hiding some "deeper sense" not revealed to us all (hope you understand me what I meant)? BTW from my point of view there are actually only 2 participants that come up with their own unique stuff and not some LEGO brick interpretation of some sort of already existing things (although I know it does not matter as of this contest, just saying )...and you are definitely the 2nd one - that being said: I REALLY LIKE YOUR IDEA of ice frozen kingdom with a scifi mixture to it, super! Or, gee, am I mistaken and it actually is also just some kind of LEGO bricks interpretation of some film/movie/magazine I am not aware of? I hope not cos it really looks unique to me a lot!!!

Thank you

This is design cooperation between me (bublible) & Yules Click images for FullHD resolution (except that last animated gif, of course )... ...and 3D "overall look": Find out story plot behind this model and even more on set's official webpage: http://lego.queryen....691603.php?j=en You can see it also at MOC Pages here: http://www.moc-pages.com/moc.php/427859 LEGO Ideas direct link for those interested:

Or - if I could add my "bit" to this debate trying to help here (this is how I understand it): one can think about this rule as "I can make any dimensions I want BUT its width may not be bigger than 1024px, and at the same time its height may not be bigger than 768px" = for example you can make picture of 400x768, or 1000x650, or 1024x200, or 300x300 or...this way on and on (you do not need to stick to W/H ratio), simply stay in the brims of dimension rules, that's it.

Thanx for the info. In fact I was looking at Mecabricks yesterday and I have realized that it is actually rendered by Blender, not by itself, right? That being said: long time ago - before BlueRender (SunFlow) and POV-Ray - I was playing with its renderer (Cycle) with LDRAW LEGO exports and when it comes to rendering realness it was perfect, probably the best from all of those 3 apps , BUT there was 2 things that really make me angry everytime (and that was the reason I abandoned Blender for rendering my LEGO completelly and never turned back): * fireflies - those nasty little dots from light reflections everywhere that I was unable to get rid off tho I used every possible (known) solution to it, no way...they were always there annoying as @#%$^!@& ...tho I have to admit I never used HDR lighting so maybe by pure usage of them there would be no fireflies at all, I don't know (they are seen also with some latest chat on Mecabricks when some of you are talking about light behind trans parts - fireflies "Here, there and everywhere" ) * problems with exact importing of LEGO models into Blender - quantum of problems with decors, glass interpretations, bricks geometries + not all shapes were supported etc. I understood exporting from Mecabricks is probably perfect BUT when I just tried to load my rather simple model into Mecabricks complete mess of bricks came out with many bricks missing so I didn't even go on after that... On the other hand I noticed when LDD model is imported into Mecabrics it is using some high definition brick objects (= all rounded dishes are really rounded, no visible "polygonation" etc.) so I guess the easiest way for that is that they probably substituted them for highres LDRAW brick objects internally in Mecabricks + additionally adjusting their micro positioning, scale and tiny shape changes (something similar to what I did with crater baseplate...later on I can and most probably will try to replicate this behavior with my BR MOD) That was in fact the reason for my question about the time, well, 3+ hours for 1440px wide image is way too far for my way of work, I'm afraid, when 1920 one in BR takes like 45 minutes with quite comparable output (tho not anywhere close to such realness as from Blender, I have to admit). Anyway your renders look still unbelievably realistic but I will stay with BR and my MOD cos it is extremely quick, output is really good (and still better and better overtime with new improvements...or I hope so at least ), much less fiddling around needed (compared to Mecabricks/Blender combo) although there is still many many improvements needed to be made (and I am working on them constantly overtime, for example my actual internal version of the MOD is doing things like real neon material, real metallic anisotropic ward shader - yes, finally I have repaired original malfunction version, material simulating plastic surface - like shiny with blurred reflections, glass shadows not shining as lamps in dark anymore etc.). BTW if you could would you render some glasses model (just for a test) to see how it would come out and how long would it take, Sunder? I am really curious...

Thank you + yes, it is a mini-base (lab)...

Nice model

BTW I also wanted to say that only after a while I've realized that hose are actually Mecabricks renders (!!!) AND NOT REAL BRICKS models...gee, their photorealistic quality is really mind blowing, I am speechless, really! I will take your render(s) as a paragon on my path of improving BR MOD to look more like this (or at least make IBL lights work really as they should cos they do not = tho they reflects its image on bricks overall lighting is too dark so without additional lights is useless but once we add additional lights it becomes once again "not that realistic" etc.). All that being said: once again bravo (although this time it goes more to Mecabricks render then model itself, if you pardon me )! Could you tell me how long it takes to render one such model and in what resolution, please? And did you try some glasses too (like trans canopies, windows) - how they look when rendered by Mecabricks, do they look also such extremely realistic as your models do (you know glasses are the most toughest to reproduce)?

Thank you

I like it from the point of originality - that design seems to be quite unique to me, very uncommon which is always pleasure to see there are still people able to come up with fresh never seen before ideas (unless it is just some kind of interpretation from film, cartoon etc. I am not aware of...you know, I am really not that film/video maniac that would know all actual stuff, not even the older/old ones, in fact )

Thanx. And yes, they are trans-light blue because I've decided that with Techtroners - starting with this particular rmodel onward (ehm, better said already even with my 5 additions to Eurobricks 2016 Digital Models Contest some while ago) - all my new models from this specific "brand" will consist strictly from real life brick/color combos only (tho I would and will - from time to time - use also bricks that exist but are normally not available like those rare ones trans-dark blue panels that were made only for prototypes or TLG presentations)...so when I find there is no trans-dark blue combo I go with trans-light blue which looks quite fine to me (considering how many interesting bricks are in that color, even my beloved hoses! ) + I also added some metallic colors to the concept (so it looks more "machinerystic").

Eh. so this is very nice design - very "fluid", minimalistic (which is super) and sleek, I like it a lot! BTW can you tell me where from - what set - are two front black "plows/rectangular radars" (in case you know, of course)?

Nice...actually now it looks to me kind-of submarines in space

Although to me it looks like some kind of hybrid between Aliens dropship and US military VTOL plane V-22 Osprey (BTW called "Black widow" for very good reason) I really like it: looks authentic (that is I can easily imagine it being real life plane) + also colorization is good too (and yes: those stickers make it look even more real)...good job!.

Well, that circle "frame" is used by TLG in their Nexo Knights model "70316-1 Jestro’s Evil Mobile" (both big trans-neon orange wheels are "wrapped" with it - individual bricks may be different but the concept is the same...I personally own that set so I can tell ): so now the question is who was "inspired" by whom, right?

Nice scene, but as i see you are using my MOD I would suggest lowering the amount of those slope grains a bit as it looks too intensive, or try to change your light setup (but i think the first option is much safer and definitely quicker for you)...

OK, so THIS is my final Techtroners version of your original model that I called 691603 Charon Transport Mech (520 pcs) which I will post here at EB (and also my official website) probably this evening/night or later tomorrow as soon as I make 10 renders - I have to make them up first, of course (that is what scenes it will be shown in, like different angles, different modularities, some pseudo LEGO-box cover mock-up etc.)... P.S.: I hope it is not too big for moderators so they let it here to be shown (but if not it'd be understood, of course) EDIT (2016-04-18) So here it finally is here on Eurobricks: http://www.eurobrick...howtopic=129974