Blakbird

Thanks! I've marked you down for the next model. I've put your name against it. Thanks.

An update has already happened and these files are allowing further updates. If you are asking specifically about 1996, yes it is in sight. I'm trying to get my photo setup to work properly.

Part of the problem of existing outside of time is that sometimes others perceive that I get things done really quickly, but other times it appears to take epochs. It's all the same to me.

No, the maximum effective angle of a u-joint is about 45 degrees, but you couldn't use a u-joint anyway. The actuator pivots around a set of set screws at the lower edge which means that whatever axle is coming out of the end will actually swing through space, not just pivot. That's why I said it would be hard to implement. Those actuators are really designed to have a motor hard mounted to them, and there's no way that would fit.

Thanks! I grabbed it and updated the list.

I only fixed your video. All I had to do was change https: to http:

Interesting idea! Too bad it can't be mounted using the regular LA brackets. Figuring out how to mount it would be the hard part.

Because it is part of 1996 which is what I am currently working on.

Thanks. It worked OK for the log loader which is black and red, but not so good for the white Space Shuttle. I was able to get the exposure right to make the model itself look very good indeed, but the background has so much shadow and is so dark that it is very distracting. I can see how a gray background like you are using would be a great benefit because it wouldn't show the shadows so much and also wouldn't affect the exposure so much.

I've created a topic over in the Technic forum to track what I need and who is working on it. Any help would be much appreciated (and credited).

Over in the Technicopedia topic we've been discussing my need to have an LDraw file for each official Technic set (A-model only) to assist with creation of the site. EB members have volunteered to help create the files I am missing, so i'm creating this topic to keep track of what I need, who is working on what, and what has been completed. I'll try to keep this first topic up to date. 1977-1995: Complete 1996: Complete 1997: Complete 1998: Complete 2854/8202 (complete by Owen) 3038/8266 (complete by marco9999) 3054 (complete by Owen) 8204 (complete by Owen) 8213 (complete by Owen) 8219 (complete by Richie) 8233/8239 (complete by Owen) 8245 (complete by Philo) 8248/8463 (complete by marco9999) 8257 (complete by Philo) 8462 (complete by Owen) [*]1999: Complete 1258/3001 (complete by TotalyWicked) 8268 (complete by marco9999) 8269 (complete by gerger) 8444 (complete by TotalyWicked) 8446 (complete by marco9999) [*]2000: Complete 8238 (complete by gerger) 8279 (complete by marco9999) 8305 (complete by Owen) 8307 (complete by Owen) 8457 (complete by Owen) [*]2001: Complete 8240 (complete by marco9999) 8241 (complete by marco9999) 8465 (complete by marco9999) [*]2002: Complete [*]2003: Complete 8441 (complete by Splat) 8453 (complete by MagFors) [*]2004: Complete 8434 (complete D3K) [*]2005: Complete [*]2006: Complete 8282 (complete by TotalyWicked) [*]2007: Complete [*]2008: Complete [*]2009: Complete 8063 (complete by Blakbird) [*]2010: Complete [*]2011: Complete 8068 (complete by Blakbird) [*]2012: Complete 9393 (complete by juraj3579) 9397 (complete by Blakbird) 9398 (complete by Blakbird) [*]2013: Complete 42001 (complete by TotalyWicked) 42004 (complete by MagFors) 42006 (complete by KWON) 42008 (complete by freakwave) 42009 (complete by lego2lego) [*]2014: Complete 42020 (complete by erelender) 42021 (complete by gerger) 42022 (complete by juraj3579) 42023 (complete by MagFors) 42024 (complete by erelender) 42025 (complete by marco9999) 42026 (complete by juraj3579) 42027 (complete by erelender) 42028 (complete by Splat) 42029 (complete by marco9999) 42030 (complete by Blakbird) I recommend that anyone planning to create one of these files announce their intention in this topic so that effort is not duplicated. I'd also request that you only "check out" a model if you actually have time to work on it otherwise it will just prevent it from getting done. I suspect that many of these models may already exist in LDD, especially the recent ones, so it is up to the person doing the work if they would rather try to convert it and fill in the errors or just create it from scratch. It is also up to the person whether they make a multi-part MPD file or a single LDR file. SR3D is fine and will result in a single file. Flexible parts are not required, but are appreciated. Please remember to include your name inside any file you create so that I can credit you.

68 files. Don't worry about any alternate models for now. I don't have files for almost any of the alternate models. I'll do that some day in the future. I'll create a new thread and keep the first topic up to date as long as EB doesn't mind us doing it. I do it all manually. The trick is to pick the right rotation center and then set MLCAD to use angles in convenient increments. This does require your brain to figure out which parts move together though. Or else you could just use SR3D which does it all for you.

It would certainly be interesting (though expensive) to try. There's no doubt that a longer travel actuator would be of great benefit, but it would also have to be very strong.

I did some experimenting. Same setup except I changed the way exposure is calculated. By default, the camera light meter looks at the whole field of view to determine exposure (in this case, shutter speed). Because the whole background was white, the light meter thought the image was already pretty bright which ended up making the subject dark. I changed the meter mode to only use the 8 degree circle I specify to determine exposure, and I chose the darkest part of the model. This resulted in a shutter speed about 3 times slower than before, and therefore a much better image. I also used f16 since I am really not that close to the image. The following is the result (no editing). Looks good enough to see how dusty it is!

Those do look like they would probably work. However, having already bought something that was too cheap I am hesitant to do it again. PBL is a real photography lighting company. "Fancierstudio" sounds like they are trying too hard. Just the name of the company "fancier" is suspicious. Then they use the words "high quality" and "deluxe" a lot. You usually don't need to bother using these words when they are true. Then they misspell "perfessional" (sic). I'll have to think about this..... The good news is that this is Amazon so if I decide it is crap they'll take it back. And no matter how bad they might be, they have 4x more light than what I am using now.

My set cost about 40 euro, which is probably too little to expect much of anything. I think the key difference is the lack of reflective soft boxes, so most of the light gets wasted in useless directions.

Where possible, yes. However, I don't have a solution for everything and this is not my model so I don't want to just start making arbitrary changes. The model will be what Gerger (and others) designed. I never rest.

Mine are 45W each, 5500 Kelvin, compact fluorescent. However, my umbrellas are not reflective so there is no directed light. Only diffuse. What I'd really like is this! http://www.amazon.com/dp/B002BWWST6/ref=wl_it_dp_o_pC_nS_ttl?_encoding=UTF8&colid=2J6UZ62X2FGSB&coliid=I135MO4S68XCKB

OK, I've scrubbed my list of Technic models to come up with a consolidated list of what I still need. Out of the full range of Technic models 1977-2014 I found that I still needed files for 68 of them. That's not too bad given the hundreds of models in total. Of those 68, I was able to find 18 in the EB list of official models in LDraw, so that leaves 50 I need. They are listed below. 1977-1995: Complete 1996: Complete 1997: Complete 1998 2854/8202 (Same model, different color) 3038/8266 3054 8204 8213 8219 8233/8239 8245 8248/8463 8257 8462 [*]1999 1258/3001 8268 8269 8444 8446 I've excluded Slizers/Throwbots because I assume many of their parts are not in LDraw [*]2000 8238 8279 8300 8305 8307 8457 I've excluded Roboriders because I assume many of their parts are not in LDraw [*]2001 8240 8241 8465 [*]2002: Complete [*]2003 8441 8453 [*]2004 8434 [*]2005: Complete [*]2006 8282 [*]2007: Complete [*]2008: Complete [*]2009 8063 (tractor could be converted from 8284 and then just build the trailer) [*]2010: Complete [*]2011 8068 [*]2012 9393 9397 9398 [*]2013 42001 42004 42006 42008 42009 [*]2014 42020 42021 42022 42023 42024 42025 42026 42027 42028 42029 42030 I recommend that anyone planning to create one of these files announce their intention in this topic so that effort is not duplicated. I'd also request that you only "check out" a model if you actually have time to work on it otherwise it will just prevent it from getting done. I suspect that many of these models may already exist in LDD, especially the recent ones, so it is up to the person doing the work if they would rather try to convert it and fill in the errors or just create it from scratch. It is also up to the person whether they make a multi-part MPD file or a single LDR file. SR3D is fine and will result in a single file. Flexible parts are not required, but are appreciated. Thanks in advance for any help! Edit: Please remember to include your name inside any file you create so that I can credit you.

How many Watts are your lights?

Thanks for all the feedback. Of course Jim is perfectly right that the shutter speed is calculated by the on-board light meter in Aperture Priority mode, so the brightness should be the same no matter what f-stop you use (and it is). Very small apertures can require very large shutter open times, but that's OK with a tripod. I will say that the light meter did it's job and did compensate for the aperture, but I think there is just so little light that nothing can be done. Going back and reading a review of the cheap lights I am using, many other people are saying that they are so dim as to be useless for anything other than filling in details of an already lit scene. I did check all my settings and I'm not making any in-camera exposure changes. My lens is a Nikkor 18-70mm zoom, f4.8 so much slower than Jim's. I can actually stop it all the way down to f29. I can do some experiments stopping it toward f11, but if the light meter is doing its job the brightness won't change. Jim, do you bounce all the light off the ceiling or do you point those reflector shields at your subject?

Ugh. I just spent all evening trying to shoot photos for Technicopedia. Followed all advice: ISO100, f22, aperture priority, tripod, got the white balance right, etc. Using my trusty Nikon DSLR. Sadly, the photos look simply terrible. They are in good focus with good depth of field, but even with the correct 2 second (!!) exposure everything is so dark that when you adjust it up in Photoshop it looks ridiculous. I can only assume that I just have nowhere near enough light even though I am using a 3 point umbrella light setup. My old photos with a nice big bounce flash seemed to work better. Not sure what I'm doing wrong. Jim, how much light are you using? Edit: You can see how dim my lights are in this unedited picture: By way of comparison, here is a photo taken seconds later but with my big bounce flash added:

Yes! The ability of a dropped part to defy the laws of Conservation of Energy and arrive at a location impossibly far from where it was dropped is truly remarkable. Another good reason not to build on a trampoline.

Now I'll talk about the suspension. This model features 12-wheel independent suspension. Each wheel has at least one stiff shock absorber, and the wheels of axle 1 each have both a stiff and a soft shock. Each suspension is of the double wishbone type. Each steerable axle uses the new 5L suspension arms. The non-steered axle just uses beams. The shocks seem to provide plenty of stiffness to support the weight of the crane without tipping. The only issue the lack of lateral stiffness on the arms. Suspension arms are typically called "A-arms" for a reason. They are "A" shaped to provide a wide spacing between the chassis attach points to react thrust and braking forces. Older Technic suspension arms were all 2 studs wide which is still pretty narrow. The wishbone arms from 42000 provide a much wider support. However, these new arms have only one attach point and are really only suitable for small models. This means that they wobble forward and back considerably under load. With 20 of them to distribute the forces it still works well enough, but the engineer in me is bothered by the lack of stiffness. Of course, using the older, wider arms would cost a (another) fortune. I was surprised to read in the spec sheet for the real Grove GMK6400 that it also features fully independent suspension on each wheel. The final feature of the carrier is PF lights. The cabin of the model is provisioned for up to 3 sets (6 total) of LED lights. The instructions call for 2 sets, but I only put one set in mine. Use however many you like, keeping in mind that you have to stow the wires somewhere. The wires are activated with a PF switch behind the roof.

The changes I have made were to address one of the primary reasons for the lack of recent updates. Those of you who have been following for a long time will remember that there was a good reason for the lack of updates for a while. I had to take apart my entire collection to move (twice) and it took nearly 2 years to put it all back together again. But that excuse has been outdated for at least a couple of years since my collection has been fully assembled for that time. Other than lack of motivation, my more recent problem has been space. Not only is my LEGO room full of models, but I don't have a good place to photograph more than one at a time. In order to show all the models for a given year, I need to get them all off the shelf and arrange them somewhere. This somewhere needs to have enough space for all of them, be free of clutter, and I need to have enough space to stand back and photograph them. Of even greater difficulty are the category pictures. To take a picture of all the dune buggies, for example, I may have to make room for dozens of models of different sizes. Whereas I only need to take the annual history photos once, I may need to take a new category photo every time a new model is added to that category. Beyond the space required to take the photos, this whole process also requires that my entire collection be assembled and accessible at all times so that I can take new photos as required. This was a big problem in my new house since I just don't have anywhere to take this kind of picture, and besides that my collection has grown to the point that it is simply impossible to keep everything assembled and displayed all at the same time. Some models are going to have start being put in storage. But what does that do to the future updates of Technicopedia? I decided that I need to fundamentally rethink how I do these group pictures. The solution was obvious, but comes with its own problems. I need to do all the group pictures with CAD. With CAD I can easily arrange all the models for a given year or in a given type in any way I like without regard to space. I also don't need access to the physical model. I'll still use the physical model for all the photos and animations on the detail pages, but once I've written about a model I can theoretically take it apart. With this in mind, I decided to go back and replace all the annual pictures from 1977 to 1995 with new renders. This is not as easy as it sounds. Firstly, I need an LDraw file of every model, and there were about a dozen in that age range for which I had no file. I went back and created each of those from scratch, also adding a revolving animation to each page. To do the annual images, I couldn't just render each model individually or there would be no way to ensure a common scale. That meant I needed to make a single file which included all the models for the year. The technical challenges I faced in doing that are beyond the scope of this topic, but I figured it all out and have a good process going. If you go to Technicopedia now, you'll see a new computer generated image for each year from 1977 to 1995 as well as a bunch of new revolving animations for those models which did not previously have one. With this new technique under my belt, I am finally at the stage where I can move forward without worrying so much about the logistics of how I am going to create the content. One obstacle remains: I need an LDraw file for every model. I already have a vast collection of files, and there is a database of official sets created in LDraw right here on Eurobricks. Beyond that, it would be really helpful if people would be willing to donate files that are missing so I don't have to do everything myself. I've made such a request before but got very little response. Unfortunately, LDD files don't help me much because the conversion process is still too painful. Feel free to take a look at the new images and let me know what you think. I'm happy to report that this means I'm actively working on 1996 right now.