anothergol

Oh I am on Rebrickable too, but define "many". It's not about views, I have thousands of views there too, just like on my Flickr. Making MOCs isn't pointless, they're definitely seen. It really is about instructions. I have 2 MOCs featured in the "top selling premium" for a couple of months now. So it's safe to say that the numbers I'm gonna give will be what most people can expect at best, because 1) anything that's not on that top-selling page will obviously do much worse, 2) they're both Star-Wars related, thus get viewed/searched. Ok let me check: First MOC: 12k views, 57 downloads Second MOC: 7k views, 21 downloads & I have 2 other cheap MOCs that did respectively 4 & 3 downloads, because not SW-related. I also have a free one (the only one for which I bothered to make proper instructions, ironically) for which I can't easily track the downloads, I'll have to check that. So, to any MOCer here who wanna start sharing instructions, think again. Unless you're a big Youtuber & you can promote your stuff (a couple do), you will be spending hours on something that won't be viewed by thousands like your pictures are, but by a few, possibly less than 10. If you found fun in making instructions, why not.. but you probably won't have fun doing it over & over only for your own eyes. And to prove my point that people don't wanna download instructions because gathering all the parts is painful & costly: the long-time top bought MOCs on Rebrickable are.. alternate builds for existing sets. For this niche of a niche, yeah, instructions do make more sense. And again, nothing here surprised me, as I never have downloaded instructions myself. I watch people's MOCs every day, I would totally buy sets for many of them, but I wouldn't gather the parts myself. Instead, I buy sub-par official sets, because it's easier & cheaper. Like everyone does. But again, this might change in the future, with China. Lego hardly (& rightly so) cares for adults, that's a niche to take for clone brands. The best "Lego" sets I've bought.. were by Xingbao. Lego wouldn't have produced them, because based on old & adult IPs, and because MOC-like built, but that's totally what I'm looking for.

I would have preferred it vertical, with studs hole at the bottom, though (OR flat, but cut & with no studs on top). Here it's new studs to cover. But hey, still good to have. no it's really a new part

It doesn't matter, and Stud.io is free, so I'm not complaining. I'm saying that instruction-making, in general (except for Lego & clones), is mostly pointless. There is a big difference between making instructions for thousands of people, and for just 3 people. Even though there is actually a reason not to do it: the time they have to invest in the app would be better spent on the rest of the app. This Lego/Stud.io collab is a hint that the last LDD update might really have been its final one. If that's true that Lego is ok with Stud.io taking over, I want to LOVE Stud.io, I'd like it to work as well as the LDD, in its core workflow rather than side features. At the moment it just doesn't, but in places that haven't changed since its first release. For me, Stud.io so far has been a great rendering tool (and that has just improved), but I would like to enjoy using it to build. And I agree with you that ALL other tools are horrible to use. If the LDD didn't exist, Stud.io would be the best editor, by far. But LDD does exist, there are things I take for granted that I'm not finding in Stud.io. Most of my clicks in the LDD are right-clicks, to set the origin & move around. The same thing in Stud.io is tedious, rotating the cam is too sensitive, and no more direct right click because there is a popup menu. The whole app has what I call "that Linux feel", it's clunky in places, like, you right-click to rotate a part in the part browser, it stops rotating as your cursor goes outside the cell. And why? Because it hasn't been polished yet. Polishing is something you do last, and adding new features pushes back that polishing phase. Finally you have tube bending & semi-physics. Frankly, I've been a programmer and I would have found physics in a Lego modelling tool way overkill. But hey, the LDD did it, and it's pretty impressive, even if it doesn't always work. That too is something Stud.io will have to do, but first IMHO its auto-snapping needs a polish as well, it doesn't work as well as in the LDD (& in some cases it's due to the part database, here it would be nice for Lego to give Stud.io official, accurate part models, which are also needed for rendering anyway). So I've used Stud.io more than ever during the last few weeks, and it's not the case of "I don't know what key to press, I'm not used to it yet", it's a case of "grrr whyyyyy doesn't that part wanna snap there, whyyyyyy?". You know when you curse at the LDD because it doesn't allow you to fine-position a part & you have to cheat it? Or when it doesn't allow a part to be placed because of false collision detection? These are 2 things that Stud.io fixed, and that's great. BUT, there are more things making me curse at Stud.io, than things making me curse at the LDD.

Yeah that's exactly what I'm saying. "everyone" wanna do it for fun once, but doing it regularly would become work & it's boring, especially when only 3 people bothered to view their work. But as I wrote in the other thread, perhaps in the future there will be a market for MOC *sets* (with the help of China), & that would totally change the deal. Very few people know how to Bricklink, & those who know, know how boring & expensive it can be to buy 1000 parts from 10 different shops that only have 1 of the rare ones required, while a lot more are ready to pay for full sets. I myself have bought Xingbao sets that were originally Lego MOCs (while I have placed hundreds of Bricklink orders, but only for my own MOCs), while I would never have bought their instructions alone (even though the Arvo bros have made quality prints).

Not really, as I reported when I tried it it wouldn't work, as there seemed to be a limit in the # of steps, it was creating a few dozen small steps & then the rest as a big chunk. Seems to be working since yesterday's version (either it was improved, or that was a bug when I initially tried it), but it's still far from ideal. Groups in the LDD are also used by LDD's instruction maker btw, as hints. The benefits of groups in Stud.io being real submodels are outweighted by the drawbacks IMHO, until it gets a mode that lets you fully edit, bypassing all groups. Right now Stud.io's groups are ideal to group minifigs/multipart stuff, but not really limbs of a character or parts of a vehicle. For me the #1 use of groups, in the LDD, has been to quickly hide stuff I'm not working on, and that works great in both apps. But editing through groups is way better in the LDD. Also I was nagging, in another thread, about instructions makers being kinda pointless for the mass, in general. There I was talking about Blueprint, & thus it's much worse for this one which is much slower to use. The market for instructions is so tiny that spending hours to craft instructions for less than 100 people is pointless, other than for the fun of it (which doesn't last). It will make a lot of sense for Bricklink's own AFOL Program where a few thousands people will be following instructions, but other than that, I don't know.

It's not really magic, Blueprint & the LDD itself do a good job at it, and it's then very easy (in Blueprint) to reorder stuff. But if we really need to create steps, it should be made easy in Stud.io, adding a new step should move the selected parts to it. Ah, that's better than nothing

I have just tried creating the steps in the editor, as I assume that the instruction maker was made easy when steps already exist. I really don't get it. I thought that I was missing something, & I went to check tutorials, but no, it seems to be dumb & horrible by design. Groups are nice in Stud.io, not as good as in the LDD (moving parts between groups sucks, thus you have to get your group right from the start), but it's nice to have groups treated as one large part, something we can't do in the LDD. Steps, however.. It looks like something made for those who already have their model built with real parts, and want to translate it to 3D. I thought that you could create steps afterwards, and I even read that in a beginner's guide that said "You do not have to create steps right away, you can rearrange parts later on.". But NO! You can't, it totally blows! I was expecting selecting a few parts, then "add new step", and voilà, a new step created with the selected parts in it. But nope, the new step is created empty. Can you MOVE parts to the selected step? Apparently not (or I couldn't find it). You have to CUT parts, and PASTE them to the selected step. While tedious, this would still be ok if Stud.io's auto-snap was perfect, but it is far from perfect. When you have multiple attach points like bars into holes, studs, etc, pasting back your selected parts can be very fiddly. LDD's auto-snap isn't perfect, but Stud.io's one is even worse, & I can't imagine cutting/pasting hundreds of parts into steps. Thus I guess it's really better to create the steps in the instructions maker, which IMHO sucks too. I still like the app though, it's still the second best after the LDD, but it's still not ready yet IMHO.

Yeah I can imagine, with so many alternate ID's & stuff. I'd suggest using Rebrickable's own inventory (on the MOC's page) instead, it even has Bricklink integration to buy. And if you have doubts about some parts, they will be in there. Of course if you customized some things, you'll then have to manually add those parts. I'm thinking of updating the inventory now that the cut slope part exists in LBG, & thus the alternate version can be built.

Those candles go in & out all the time, as other parts. It's kinda hard to place one order with everything you want, as they're generally not all in stock at the same time. 2 other new parts now in stock: I found those magic wants rather disappointing btw. I mean they're perfect for what they are for: magic wands in minifig hands. But using it for other purposes, well they pin well into stud holes, but there they don't pivot in any way. And the cylinder that should be another point of attach is kinda shrunk & clips don't hold very well on it. Still makes ok antennas & guns, though. & Talking about missed opportunities, the candlesticks.. :( They're VERY SLIGHTLY larger than a stud. They could have played well in the system (like one end of Nexo bot bodies), but nope.. and the worst is that it was probably done on purpose, for kids not to lose candlesticks inside bricks, where they would have hard to remove.

Yeah that I figured out, but when you have a medium model of a new hundred parts, you have to select the whole lot minus a few, then move them to the next step, then unselect, etc, it doesn't make sense IMHO. The tool to generate a step for each part in the selection is definitely there and that would be very useful if it wasn't limited in count. That way you'd "explode" all of the parts, and then decide to merge steps, that would be easier. Or maybe not, because when toying with it & merging stuff, I ended up with so many empty steps, it was a big mess. But really, it's because I was taking for granted the way it works in Blueprint, I thought that there was no contest that it was THE best way to do it, it's a pity not to have used the same method.

I've toyed with Stud.io's instruction maker for a few minutes, frankly I didn't understand how it works. I found Blueprint pretty straightforward, and I thought that was THE best way to generate instructions, and that Stud.io would follow the same scheme, but isn't it working backwards? I opened one of my models, opened the generator, I was expecting something already kinda pre-generated & waiting for manual fixes, instead I got one gigantic step with everything in it, and any attempt at cutting it in parts failed. Even the tool that generates steps for selected parts, is only forking for a small amount of parts. I assume it has to do with the fact that it's based on the "steps" in the editor itself, & thus it requires using these in the first place.. which of course my models, coming from the LDD, don't. And I don't understand the purpose of those editing steps in the first place. But hey, I'd love to love Stud.io, especially if the LDD is bound to die, I don't love Stud.io yet but it's still the best second choice I have left, other editors are just hell.

I don't care for that set, but it'll bring us in LBG, can't complain!

They were already available, & actually they're (in all colors) available again (I just checked)

I'm sure it will have too many, because Rebrick contests were getting a ton of entries, while being less attractive. About the limited palette btw, I've just noticed this one, I hope it's not a mistake in the palette: ..but in LBG!!! It's unlisted, it's exclusive to the very limited tractor set, Lego refuses to sell it by phone (I tried) and the only ones on Bricklink are 30 bucks each. Meaning: unless it's gonna appear in a future set, I'd buy a set that uses many of these, regardless of the set :)

Yeah but this will pass through a pre-selection, and the 3 bricks stacked by a 6 year-old and submitted by the father, will be filtered out, so it won't be littered with crap like Ideas is.

No, none of the straight ones is. The long one is rare & only in one obscure mining set, the short one in 2 sets, including a Friends one

Ah, pretty cool. Aren't these supposed to be hand-packed like some limited sets?

To be fair, I found it a bit wider than I expected. They said they're the parts that Lego keeps producing, and I'm finding all of the parts that I'd find in recent sets (minus a couple of really new ones). Which is pretty much what a Lego designer would have to deal with, minus new recolors, prints & stickers, I guess. Here I'm just making a small MOC because of the time limit, and the pricing that's a big unknown. I can't imagine anyone willing to get a 1000 parts MOC for 200 bucks, while 50eur for a 250 parts set is still ok, "just to get something from an exclusive event". I was hoping for the very new , which obviously Lego is still producing, but it's not there. That said, Lego asks nearly 2eur for that (while I've bought like 30 for 25 cents on BL), so that would already be a good reason to exclude it.

Not anytime soon. The 2.5 plans already included "near future" parts (which are all available by now). I've only been able to think of a few places for very recent parts, nothing major. For ex, this could be replacing the 1x2 plate + slope at the front/top.

I believe I had already reported broken JPG export in Stud.io's forum, but as already suggested, render to PNG. I had also requested 16bit PNG export, and they kindly added it, so that's totally what you should render to: 16bit PNG, and then you can do all kind of post-processing without any noticable loss.

v2.5 is there to stay for a while, though. Be glad you already got LBG scala dishes because apparently these have become rare :)

It's second best after the LDD. It's certainly not there yet in terms of usability, but there's nothing better except the LDD IMHO. It's mainly the mouse panning/zooming that's not as fast as in the LDD, and I believe that moving around the model is what we do the most, in these editors.

Yeah, but this has improved a lot. Way less things to fix after importing in the latest version. I wish it was all perfect, though. Sure, it's not for everyone. All I'm saying is that there will be good entries (among the crap), judging from the entries in most Lego contests. Personally, I do have the time, but I don't enjoy being under pressure.

oops :) Well even 2 months is ok, it's generally the time for Lego contests out there. Also safe to assume that it's gonna get the same 95% of "6 year-old designed it & dad put it online" crap as in Lego contests. Trust me, for having been in & having monitored several Rebrick contests, people have managed to put up great stuff in no time. I don't agree with your analysis that it's too short because it requires figuring out Stud.io, btw. If I make an entry, there is no way I'm gonna use Stud.io, not in its current state. I'll do it in the LDD & import it in Stud.io, it's pretty easy. It definitely is an advantage that it has to be digital, as I wrote, it cuts off several weeks of ordering & waiting for parts. With Bricks&Pieces, not even a full month ahead is safe. Sure, it's not suitable for those building straight with real parts, but we're still A LOT using digital tools. I also think that 2500 parts is quite a sane limit. Crowdfunding, why not, it all depends what avg price per part will be applied, and I'm suspecting it's gonna be high. I'm more disappointed because of what this news could have meant btw. I was expecting a real collab with TLG, like TLG opening a BL store, or a "Lego Ideas of parts", with Lego producing parts in often requested colors, which BL does know about thanks to buyer wishlists. This thing, to me, looks a lot like the previous TLG contest about MOCs to be displayed in their new house. It's a temporary thing for Lego's anniversary.. why not.. but it's not the "big" announcement we were expecting.

Maybe it's just because you oversold it through the teaser, but it came out a bit disappointing for me. It's too restrictive: limited part palette, and most importantly, projects have to be (fully?) new. This is sad because there are a ton of MOCs out there that would count as "new", as not many even have seen them. I hope you will reconsider this btw, or at least, allow past projects to be improved & updated for today's palette & count as "new". So as a MOCer I'm not that much interested. As a buyer, you also don't tell about costs. If we can expect the usual 10cent/part, that's ok, but if it's the double, I don't see myself buying either. Especially if it's shipped from foreign places (you don't tell about that either). This is also a bit of news that may be hiding something very bad, as TLG partnering with Stud.io might also mean that the LDD is dead for good. You know what would be great, an "LDD emulation" mode that would fully emulate LDD's workflow (especially mouse control), because right now Stud.io is usable, but still nowhere near the LDD. 3 months is a lot, especially when the projects can be 3D-only, you can fully use those 3 months & not reserve 3 weeks for BL seller (or worse, a month for normal B&P delays) problems.