Faefrost

I don't have an issue with Digital models so long as they are well thought out, give some basic respect for gravity and physics and are well rendered and presented using a rendering tool and not simply the horrid LDD export functions. Digital presentation in the hands of a skilled user can be fantastic and reflect a compelling project. Of course digital in the hands of a crude or inexperienced user who is just working in the virtual and not designing for the real creates impossible clutter on the site. But so does every six year olds bad phone picture of a "house" made from rainbow colored bricks. Look for the quality of the project, not the medium it's presented in. Actually I find one advantage of digital designs for projects is while they lack gravity, the programs limit some of the advanced MOC'ers more exotic and unproducable tricks. No half connections. No Minifigure hands as structural elements etc. so it's a trade off either way.

The Big Bang Theory had some things working in its favor that made it essentially "cheap advertising" for Lego. It's a modern still in production show, that shows among other things, grown ups playing with Lego. The mere existance of the set pretty much guarantees further product placement on the broadly internationally syndicated show. So it really paid for itself for Lego, before a single set gets sold. Sometimes things that seem similar are actually not, when you peek behind the curtain.

The Tram and or the Diner seem the most viable as Ideas sets. Maybe a long long long shot on Voltron, just because I have heard rumors that WEP loves it. (But still Voltron is not a cheap license right now. It's kind of hot at the moment.)

For any project based on pop culture or media, especially something that appeals to kids, you will likely see your best success, and your best chance of production if you can take a distinct specific element and refine it such that you end up with a set in the $20-$50 price point. So figure 250-500 pieces 2-4 minifigs. Yeah they will go bigger at times, but honestly that will depend heavily on a lot of data. The safest surest path for anything that might skew younger on the age spectrum will be that price range. "How much would a parent be willing to spend to get the kid something from their show?" Scale your set to match that and you greatly enhance your chances at review.

Four of the women proposed for the set each had important and unique personal contributions that moved NASA and the history of manned space flight forward in distinct ways. The had clear cut and unquestioned individual contributions. The fifth was a passenger, and otherwise unremarkable for purposes of this list save for accident of birth. When you see it it will be obvious. For contrast when playing the "First XXXX Woman in space" game. This is who they didn't play that game with; Judith Resnick, two Shuttle Missions. First American Jew in space. Second woman in space. Died aboard Challenger. Shannon Lucid, flew 5 shuttle missions and Mir. First Chinese born American in space. Long held American records for time in space. Roberta Bondar, one shuttle mission. First Canadian woman in space. Ellen Ochoa, 4 Shuttle Missions. Long time lead CAPCOM including for Columbia. Current Director of JOHNSON Space Center. First Hispanic Woman in Space. Chiaki Mukai, 2 shuttle flights. First Japanese woman in space. Helena Kondakova, 1 Shuttle 1 Soyuz flight. First Russian Woman to "fly American" if you will. Kalpana Chawla, 2 shuttle flights, First Indian Woman in space. Died aboard Columbia. Julie Payette, 2 shuttle missions. First French Canadian Peggy Whitson, 2 shuttle flights, 2 Soyuz flights. Oldest woman in space. Currently record holder for woman with most time in space. Most EVA's. First female ISS Commander. And is still up there extending the records every day. Sunita Williams, 1 shuttle mission, 1 Soyuz missions, ISS missions. Holds record for EVA time. Second Indian American woman. Currently one of the lead Astronauts with Space X likely to command one of the first private manned space flights. A rather impressive list of accomplishments is it not? And yet the "women of NASA" project includes one who's actual NASA resume is so brief and so shallow that "appeared on episode of Star Trek" is about its high point. Yeah, one of these things is not like the others...

There have been three "Women of NASA" to actually command vessels in space. Among them is Eileen Collins, NASA's first female pilot. First female Shuttle Commander (flew three missions, twice as the boss), one of their best ever pilots with three of the most perfect landings NASA has ever recorded, and was the Commander to bring the program back after Columbia. Of those three actual Spacecraft and mission Commanders mysteriously none or represented here. They would appear to be the wrong color. Publicly hold the wrong politics, and publicly profess a Christian faith to be included in such a project. Sorry the "they can't include everyone" argument doesn't pass the smell test in this case.

Sometimes compression works wonders. Many of the model kits of the various flight teams from the 70's and 80's achieved the desired look just using 3 or 4 planes well posed.

If I recall Dr. Who was the fastest at roughly 2 1/2 days, wasn't it?

If you know anyone in the medical fields a pair of rubber tips hemostats are a dream for that sort of thing.

Without seeing a picture I suspect it is the Lego Juniors figure. Which has a bit of torso sculpting to it.

It weirdly might not be against the rule. RuPaul's stuff falls more in that domain of camp then it does any real world gender issues. Granted I can't see it being a good fit for Lego. (Do they know who RuPaul is in Denmark? Are they looking at the suggestion doing a Google search and going 'What the Holy Hell! Them Americans is insane!!!")

Don't actually go too much by that. There are some ship limitations in the PotC movies, in that many of them are the same physical ship, simply redressed differently. For example The Black Pearl and Queen Anne's Revenge are the same physical real world ship. Just with different paint and decorations. If you compare them the front rear and overall shape are the same. This might be the same thing with the Imperial ship vs the Silent Mary, or they may be the same ship story wise.

If you do a lot of Hobby work than get something like an Ottlite. They are desktop or freestanding Hobby lamps that give good natural daylight coloring. They are designed for sewing or fine Hobby work such as modeling. They really really help. You can find them or similar at most craft stores like Michaels, Joanns or Hobby Lobby. If you get yourself a 40 or 50% off any one item coupon they become very reasonable in price.

The women of NASA carries a hidden political component to it. One which the American Right is watching carefully. There is a strong feeling that it is "Women of NASA who we think are the right color and the correct politics". The subtle exclusion of Eileen Collins has been noted. (The most accomplished female Astronaut. The only female Shuttle Comander and the woman with the most trips to space. Also publicly a Republican and a Christian... hmmmm?) The project as is would trigger a lot of bad press for Lego out in flyover country. I think the Little House set has the most potential to be scaled down to a viable set, without losing the core feel or features to it. Plus it is a family friendly property that is cross generational, and is a non violent Western set. I think more than size Adams Family weirdly fails due to monochrome color scheme. If you remember the changes to the Exo-suit. Part of that was because of Lego rules mandating certain color varieties to make parts and instruction easier to tell apart. It's one of the major differences between Lego and Megabloks (or whatever they are called this week?) Mega does solid color sets with a lot of finicky and hard to tell apart part selections. Lego insists on clean clear differentiation using colors. I don't think they could pull off a set of that size, trying to simulate Black and White tv, and still stay within Lego's color use guidelines. Lovelace and Babages seems way too obscure. Most people would look at it and go "who?" Followed by "wasn't that an old video game store?".

Hmmm? Nothing that intuitively says "this will pass". I lean towards the Observatory and Little House on the Prarie being strong possibilities. Being a robot/Chogokin Collector as well I would kill for that Voltron. (I also don't rule it out completely. I have heard through the grapevine that WEP, the licensor is impressed with it. The only thing worrying is the size.)

I've lost track. Which projects are in this review?

I'm just gonna leave this here... http://brickset.com/sets/79008-1/Pirate-Ship-Ambush

That's the Stinger from the Insectoids line. It appeared in 3 sets 6969 Celestial Stinger, 6907 Sonic Stinger and the flagship 6977 Arachnoid Star Base

The two grey dishes are from the Clone Wars version AT TE 7675, the offset shoulder armor is likely from that set, but came in a number of TCW sets including battle packs. The grey prick with the modified plate in the upper right is a Magnet. It was from the old magnet sets. When they first came out, the minifigs weren't glued on. Hasbro pitched a fit, so Lego first glued them, then changed the design entirely and finally stopped them. The large grey tile with the detailing and the Republic sticker is from the 8039 Venator. The white tile with black markings is from an ARC-170, not sure which, although the rest of the stuff looks to be circa 2010 so probably 8088. The Palpatine head and torso are from the Venator as well. The Black multi sloped piece is from the LotR Shelob I think? Some brick built spider at least. The slope with the AT-ST I believe is from 7879 Echo base, although I don't think it is unique to it. The other slope with the sticker might also be Echo base (can't see it well.)

That's a Kre-O part. It was unique to their licensed "Cityville" theme. It was a motion gimmick. You stand a minifig on it, and the set has a motor unit that vibrates the baseplate, causing the minifig standing on this piece to randomly wander around the set. Back in the 70's there were tons of tabletop electric football games that used a similar trick. A vibrating surface with figures standing on a similar platform that would move around. You could somewhat control which way they moved based on how you flexed of styled the plastic fur on the bottom.

I always thought the CMF Yeti/Bigfoot mold makes for an acceptable Itchy. Lumpy in theory would be a Wookie fig with short legs. Malala is counterintuitively the hardest as the Wookie headpiece covers the torso, where they would need to print the apron. Blasphemy! Our Star Wars collections will remain incomplete until they give us a Bea Arthur minifig. (Bonus points for a minifig of Art Carney selling Wookie Porn! I do so wish I was making that up!)

There is no reason not to jump into the Modulars. And yeah the completionist in you (and me) may have to accept that a few of the earlier ones may be out of reach, short of bricklinking parts and building it yourself. That mainly applies to Cafe Corner, Market Street and Green Grocer. Anything after that was produced in high enough numbers that you will eventually find one at a price you can live with. There are also some wonderful third party plans out there so your city doesn't have to look like everybody else's.

Yes, since Pet Shop is still available in the marketplace and the price hasn't skyrocketed yet.

Your buildings have some nice touches. Really there are a few subtle things you can do to improve them. And they aren't so much LEGO techniques as art and design tricks that you can apply to LEGO. The first involves color. Or more importantly color theory. You ideally want two contrasting colors and a complimentary accent color. That third color is important as it adds depth and three dimensionality. Without it your eye perceives the structure as very flat and cartoony. Looking at your two buildings, the black and yellow one has no accent color. Whereas the green has some nice accent in the gray, the olive wedges do not contrast with the sand green, they rather flow together instead of providing the needed visual pop. Read up a little on the color wheel and art color theory. Just a web page or two will make a world of difference. The other thing you can work on a bit is what is known as texture. Real buildings are not generally flat. The flat spaces tend to be broken up a bit. Learning how to spot this and recreate it in LEGO form is one of the more fun advanced LEGO techniques. You can talk about how to do this, and learn a lot just from looking at other builds. But the best single source I have seen is Bryan and Jason Lyles LEGO Neighborhood Book. They have a ton of great how to guides for looking at actual structural details around you, and rendering them simply with common pieces. https://www.amazon.com/LEGO-Neighborhood-Book-Build-Your/dp/1593275714/ref=sr_1_37?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1484508177&sr=1-37&keywords=LEGO You do have a good eye for details. That cheese wedge mosaic is great and I love the stained glass window. The big secret is learning to add a bit more front to back topography. Look at the Creator building. Notice how the windows protrude? How the door frames are set back. There is a lot of front to back variation in where things sit. Subtle ridges such as window trim. That inwards flow to the door, both vertically and front to back as the stairs lead up to it. These all trick the eye. The final trick is a bit more subtle, and I am not sure I can adequately describe it in a forum post. But it is composition. It's an artists and photographers trick. You want to compose your photograph or picture such that you are drawing the viewers eye into a subtle triangle. In the case of a LEGO building you do this with details. Not simply the shape of the building. Look at the Parisian restaurant. Notice how that central top floor window is slightly above its framing side details? Notice how the next floor down has those two side windows framing the more subdued door? This forms a triangle in the building and draws your eyes from the base upwards to the pinnacle. And that is what tricks your eye and your brain into thinking it is more real. This same visual trick is largely going on on all of the Modulars. Just view each dead on facing the main door. So some corners such as the Grand Emporium and Palace Cinema are viewed at an angle on the corner, whereas the Brick Bank is viewed from the main bank facing. Market Street is the weakest of these as it was a fan design and not something from Jamie or Astrid. Who have Art and Architecture backgrounds. Astrids town hall is a rather stunning example of this as you can see the triangles within triangles drawing your eyes upward in what is otherwise a very square building.

Keep in mind that Pirate's had some external influences on it. We are fairly certain that Lego had/has a non compete clause in effect surrounding PotC. So they could not release an in house Pirates line while the PotC license was active. I think we got the newer Pirates line largely because the expected PotC 5 movie got pushed back so far that it left a gap they could use. Which might be why that Pirate's wave felt like such a redo/retread/ They may have thrown it together fast to make use of the gap in the contracts. But somewhat surprisingly, Star wars would appear to never have a hard firm non compete of the same type with Lego? Which is strange seeing as Lucasfilms was long notorious for them (Why you never used to see Star Wars and Star Trek products from the same makers.)