Eurobricks Counts
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by ___

  1. I surely will, but how is it your cannot understand I DO NOT WANT MY NICKNAME PARTICIPATING IN HERE? even if I got banned my nick will be here - there is no other bublible anywhere, so it is me - I am 100% sure if I would be that rigorous and actualy contact my lawyer it would be considered as "ulawful" (but i won't - lost of time).

    It is not about me forgetting this placee exist - absolutely no problem, actually that is what will happened - it is that when you go to web search my nickname will be shown participating in here which is exactly the thing I do not want, i do not agree with it.


    We don't delete accounts here. You simply leave the forum and your profile. If there is information on your profile that you do not want searchable, then you can edit that out as you see fit before you go. Otherwise you are free to leave or return as the whim takes you.


    I already did that, problem is I cannot change my nicname so it would not appearing in conneciton with EB anymore! That is my concern, nothing else.

  2. That is actually extremely lame, ridiculous and unbelievable: I do not want participate in here anymore (at least until ONE pseudo-moderator - Superkalle - is removed from moderating this forum...and as I know this will never happen I am leaving myself alone, i do not need this, why should I? Just one of trillions webforums around the web) but my profile can be still found in here? I do not want to have anything with this forum and would be really glad if some NORMAL moderator would reply or at least some administrator of this forum remove me from here!

  3. I haven't looked in detail, but I'd say all entries so far are OK.

    Now I am not sure if I can even say - if I am even allowed to - post my opinion (actually a fact), Suprkalle, without "fear" of receiving another message from you, but I will try: how you can say all entries are OK when at least 2 are not (@gercrow -> only 2 models/sets, more than 5 allowed "new brick/color combos", @BrickMark-I -> more than 5000 pcs allowed, using Photoshoped backdrop)??? I really lost in all of this by now, rules are there to be followed, they are not followed by some (gee, why we are not allowed to say it / point to it when it is quite visible thinking moderators also must see it for sure only to understand that moderator(s) actually saying it is OK? How can someone like you be moderator after all? This is really too much - it is quite pity that other users just "shut up" do not demanding the same right for all and it seems like I am the only one who is actually punished for speaking out - why?

    I think there is a topic where one can report moderators that seems to be abusing their privilegues (why i do not feel the same about @legoljintje? his reactions are so different from yours, yours are inconsistent, many times dealing the same thing quite differently according to specific user you are dealing with...it'd be nice if more users have actually "guts" and also speak out cos I know some think the ssame about you and it is they are just quite fearing possible consequences - I am not and I told you many times over PM!

    If it will lead to me ban from the forum I can take it but i surely can not take your absurd maneurism anymore, sorry (and i really thought it is just some misunderstanding between us, but clearly it is not).

    This being said I most probably quit being user of this forum because it is functioning childish way, not adult at all...bye!

    P.S.: you most probably delete this post - as you use to if the message being presented is not what you like, but at least it will be here for a few seconds, maybe others would see it and thosse I know think the same as me will actually speak out against you finally!

  4. These two question were actually partly answered here before, but I don't mind answering them again:

    1) Yes, you can have a logo for you theme, like CM4Sci had in the picture he showed, which was like a "logo" picture for his theme. And sure, you can put a logo/watermark in the other pictures too if you want. What I told CM4Sci was to remove the text that just said the name of the set and the piece count etc.

    2) Yes, you can have an aircraft flying if you want and you don't need a support.

    OK, thanx for your clarification - now is all clear... :wink:

  5. You can position them in the air. That's fine.

    Thank you for your answer - I appreciate it but you/we are actually not allowed to interpret the rules (as I was told, not even if you know the right answer!), so I really have to wait for moderators answer...so still waiting.

    Just with we could make transparent images w/ shadows!! :tongue:

    Hey, but we have that - I made it possible with my MOD (ehm, are you aware of the MOD, arren't you? :grin: )


  6. The backgrounds were part of Bluerender anyway, I don't understand why they're different colors when they're the same when I input them.

    Ehm: do you know there are actually 2 separate parameters for background and baseplane, right? :wink: In case you did not know: you have to set the same color to both, BUT as the background is using Constant Shader you would need to set constant shader also for the baseplane cos else shading of the baseplane would not make seamless transition into the background (actually sky) tho in that case you will loose all shadows on the baseplane (simply because of the Constant Shader = just a color without any shading whatsoever) - hope it'd help you a bit.

  7. @All - Please do NOT comment or debate if other peoples entries break the rules or not. ONLY ask questions about your own entry. Thanks.

    Fine, so I am asking:

    • do I understand it right that I can have logo on my participating render entries in form of another picture/font (that is how I understood what you wrote for CM4Sci)?
    • can I make some machines in my renders that actually fly in the air/space or do I need to have them "sitting" on some kind of stand/support simulating them being in the air (I would rather go without those stands/supports)?

  8. Thanks

    Yeah it's all original, even though one shares the "structure" design of these 2 others of mine: https://www.flickr.c...157660482542918

    This year brought us a DBG Scala dish, I had to make a DBG one.

    Ah, and btw I allowed myself "floating parts" but only because the T-bar that holds the 2 bike helmets at the back Irena's mech, can't be placed in the LDD for bug reasons. It's built and fits perfectly with real parts.

    Super then. :thumbup:

    As for the "hanging" brick: I guess we should really let mods decide and wait for their conclusion and stop any further discussion about this matter at least until then (although if you ask me in your particular case it is absolutely fine, I would say - one small brick that actually do work in RL).

  9. I will - as long as you can be my LDD Bluerenderer *cheer*

    Haha, OK, we may have a deal then! :laugh:

    BTW just a side note: when you talk about BR: my own internal MOD version grown up considerably - quantum of new features and improvements actually - from the last time I updated it officially here on EB cos I think I already drifted too far from official BR now so I will most probably not updating it nevermore, as I am working on something new (kind-of Mecabricks approach in JAVA app format) so when I have it working and going I will most probably post it here on EB for everyone for free... :blush::devil:

  10. Yeah, as far as I can tell, the rules about box art are pretty much just "don't add extra visual elements like a background with distinct parts or similar into it." So it seems rather strange to prohibit pictures of models posed in ways they would be in real life. I mean, I asked whether photoshopping in an arrow to demonstrate a function was allowed, and apparently it is, so I doubt posing the model normally is disallowed.

    But he did exactly that "add extra visual elements like a background with distinct parts or similar into it." and that is the reason why I am objecting it although it has nothing to do with this theme which looks fantastic + I guess adding some tiny arrows showing what the model can do is quite different thing compared to poster like presentation (as @nine09nueve pointed out before), right?

    Except that where/why did you left out the 2nd part to it which is even more important in this particular case: "Don't create box-art or similar to present the theme - just the models themselves"?

  11. I think it is your definition of "floating" - I don't think that your models won't hold together if you built them IRL (or at least it doesn't look like there's any elements suspended in mid air or not connected to anything) BUT... Your polar drill team minifigure and drill plane pursuit vehicle are both "floating".... I suppose you would say they are "flying" but they can't really fly... they are lumps of plastic... and although they both look eminently swooshable, the picture you've created has them hovering in mid-air... as it were.

    That I think is the issue Bublible is talking about. Interestingly enough there is nothing in the original rules that speaks about being connected to the floor... But if those models don't hover in real life then floating them in a render (although looking pretty) isn't a real representation of what they would "do" if they were built in real life.

    Don't create box-art or similar to present the theme - A swooshing ship is probably similar to box art... as is your big advert picture...

    As an aside - looking back through ALL the rules entries... more than anyone it seems that you've particularly wanted to push the rules / change the rules to suit your ideas and builds... the 5 custom colours parts rule... the 10 sets rule... any reason why you don't seem to just want to accept the rules as they are and work with them? That's the challenge isn't it? :D

    :thumbup: Exactly as I meant it, thanx.

    Gee, only if I would have this kind of knowledge of english language I guess there would be much less misunderstanding of my "thoughts"...wouldn't you mind being my official english-speaking speaker? :laugh::grin:

  12. For the 'floating bricks' thing, you're wrong. My models are all 100% physically buildable. Nothing is floating.

    No, no, it is not about that: model hanging in the air is what? Bubbles? :classic: Those are too bricks in the air, and as it should be real models, you have to use some kind of stand, or at least that is how I did understand that rule and perpetual pointing out the fact of "real bricks builds". :wink:

  13. I've tried to follow the last days posts, but I'm not sure if there is still any question in there or if everything has been straightened out.

    Basically we discussed it amongst us ourselves coming to some kind of "internal conclusion" what is OK and what is not but I guess it'd be really good and helpful if you - as moderator - would just additionally clarify if what we think is right is realy right (gee, I know I sound complicated once again but I do not know how to say it "easy way" - fingers crossed you do understand what I am saying here :laugh: ).

    Simply answer these question for us, please - YES or NOT: :sweet:

    - does CM4Sci, bbqqq and anothergol broke some of contest rules? Our conclusion: YES, IT IS QUITE CLEARLY A BREAK OF RULE(S), spcificaly these ones:

    • You may not add photoshop backdrops or other "non"-LEGO items into the images - the themes should be possible to judge based on their design quality and theme originality by themselves.
    • Don't create box-art or similar to present the theme - just the models themselves

    - does using "flying object in the air just like that" (that is: without any support/stand) breaks rules? There are different opinions, some "pro" some "con" - I personally think it is break of rule, as we discussed earlier together - you and me, if you remember - where you were putting a lot of weight to the fact that it should really be taken as real brick models, so by that statement there is no option how to have "flying objects" (= bricks hanging in the air "just like that") except using stand/support or photoshoping (which is not allowed), this is the specific rule:

    • The models have to be physically buildable, so no floating bricks and such

    I am pretty sure that entry #12 contains >5 new color combos

    When it comes to that specific entry it was already discussed by MODs and they basically said that if he do not change it he will be disqualified and he simply replayed he does not care and that it can be deleted, I guess.

    Uh basically is this image allowed? Or not? Can I have the models in my image look like they're in action?

    I am affraid that not only this one "poster", but actually all of your lately updated entries are breaking that specific rule...but hey, let's wait and see what MODs will say (tho I have actually no doubt about it if you'd ask me, sorry). :wink:

  14. Since it's 1 entry per member only, I assume it's ok to change an already posted entry to something else before the deadline?

    Yes, it is absolutely OK as mods already said that before, tho you have to really wait for MODs reaction anyway (as I was told it sometimes seem as I am moderating it here myself which I am not, of course :grin: ).

  15. .. what about the Hover Racers one? That's got a title image with SOME of the models.

    I'm inclined to agree with you... although its less in your face than your advertising campaign! :P *hehe*

    Well, I am really not MOD, so only they can tell for sure, but I think yes it breaks that specific rule + also @bbqqq's one entry too (the first one having that special "font logo" Thomb Rider).

    I understood it like that when the words are just some kind of normal informative-like ones and not eye catching "advertising campaign" (I've used your phrase, @nine09nueve :laugh: ) then it is OK...

  16. ...perhaps you are stretching your submission with that info panel on the RHS?

    Sorry, my english is not that great, so please can you explain me what do you mean (could you say it in some other way so that I would get it :laugh: )? :look:

    Now that the rules have changed all those extra shots of the model are fine :D but how does all that writing and explanation of what the model does come into "just the models themselves"? Maybe that should be part of the commentary thread and placed separately? Or at least out from the actual model images/render?

    No, you are wrong. If you read this topic thru (OK, I know it is a lot of reading) you would sse this specific part was already discussed and allowed as it is just "functional description", that is explaining in small pictures inside the main one what it can do - it is not any kind of promotion like a poster or box cover. :wink:

  17. Oh, now I look all participants and I found 2 other rule breaking stuff, like:


    This is from CONTEST RULES, read:

    • You may not add photoshop backdrops or other "non"-LEGO items into the images - the themes should be possible to judge based on their design quality and theme originality by themselves.
    • Don't create box-art or similar to present the theme - just the models themselves

    Your addition is really a great one, no doubt about it at all from my side, BUT are you sure it is allowed to present the entry the way you updated it so that now it looks like kind of box cover or poster? Wasn't it prohibited in rules???

    Now I would be really interesting what mods would say about that cos it completely change the game here: as you look at all the other participants, we only posted our models as they are as it was in the rules i guess, but you come up with the thing that is going really against it (+ please, do not take it as personal attack cos it is not, I really like your models, but there should be the same rule for all cos else the other ones are discriminated)


    This is from CONTEST RULES, read:

    The only limitation is that you use max 5000 bricks total for all models...

    I am afraid that your entry will be disqualified by mods just because of the fact your models using far more bricks than those 5000 allowed - you should rearrange it in some way so it'd be accepted.

  18. Then redo your pictures. You have like a week left.

    It is not problem of redoing, it is rather matter of principle for me: so is it allowed or not allowed?

    Besides: so I will redoing it like working on it for several hours just to find out I was right after all that it is not allowed?

    That is the reason I would like to hear it from the mods how it actually is, if you understand my point.

    BTW what if it is you who will have to redoing his entries? :laugh::tongue:

  19. Hm, what? We can't pose our models to look how they would on a box? Or what? I did it because I thought it'd look cooler, better presentation and all. A lot better than nothing going on, everything on the ground and neatly organized.

    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). :wink:

    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).

  20. Again, the one above is my interpretation of the rule. That mean what I think the rule is meant for.

    If you want an official answer, you have to wait Superkalle's and legolijintie's intervention.

    The image of the official LEGO set was only an example aimed to help to point out the difference between an artistic license for the presentation of the model and a build technique that is not applicable to real bricks. Both contemplate something "flying", but there is a huge difference.

    Calabar, I understand that it is just your oppinion on that matter, no problem. :wink:

    Sure, I am waiting for clarification from them but as it is weekend I think they are not here for this moment. :sceptic:

    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.