Ralph_S

No idea where the tutorial is, but the way to do it is to click 'share' above the picture, then go to 'grab the html/bbcode' , set the tick box to BBCode (if it's not already set) and copy and paste the code from the window on flickr to the editing window here on EB. You don't need to use the 'insert image bar' here. That only works if the link has a valid extension (i.e. .jpg). You can get that link from flickr as well, but the way I described is the proper way to do it, in that clicking the picture will bring you to the flickr page where the picture is housed. Cheers, Ralph edit: didn't realise that the question had already been answered when I submitted my post, but since I went to the trouble of typing the damn thing and can't delete a post, I'll leave it as is.

I'm not as enthusiastic as some of the other posters in this thread. For instance, the real vehicle does have more of a rear overhang than your model does. In other words, the rear wheel could be mounted one or two studs further forward. I also don't like the bit between the wheels very much -in particular the 8-stud long hole above the yellow plate. I'd suggest putting a brick in there to give it that slab-sided look that the real vehicle has. As for B and C-pillars: indeed there are many different versions of Land Rovers, but the set-up you have, with two side windows, really only fits versions with a shorter wheelbase. Putting one more pillar in there, made with 1x1 bricks for instance, and moving the one that's already there further forward would improve the looks. Beyond that, I agree that have the body waist, as on the real vehicle, would make things better, but this requires half-stud offsets all over the place. It probably means not using that windscreen or building the body of the vehicle 11 studs wide: in other words, a complete rebuild. My own 10-wide Land Rover model (which represents an older Land Rover 109) is ten studs wide with a roof that is nine studs wide. I'm not sure you want to go there. Despite the things I don't like, you have succeeded in building a vehicle that is recognizably a Defender, so kudos to you for that. Cheers, Ralph

I don't think that whether or not your interests are relevant is a separate thread. I agree that if the interests may be relevant for the job at hand, LEGO could possibly be among them -although there is a risk involved- but, as I wrote before, I think professional qualifications are far more important. I've never listed my personal interests on a resume and that hasn't stopped me from getting the jobs I wanted. Cheers, Ralph

The livery looks really good and I like the level of detail, but there's something off with the proportions. I think it is much too tall, perhaps by as much as three bricks. Here's a reference picture I found on flickr. Dublin Bus Volvo B7TL A497.06-D-30497 - Dublin by dwb photos, on Flickr In the reference picture you can see that the bit between the upper and lower rows of windows is approximately the same height as the windows themselves. On the model the windows are three bricks tall and the bit between them is around five. I suggest making that two bricks lower. You could also relatively easily loose a plate's height at the bottom (by making the yellow stripe under the windows two plates thick as opposed to three) and make the roof thinner by two plates. It will mean redoing a lot of the SNOT work, but I think the end result will look much better proportioned. Normally I much prefer 7 wide over 8-wide, but for the overall proportions of this vehicle, with the current height of the windows and whatnot, 8 wide might look more realistic. Cheers, Ralph

KEvron is right in that an interview works both ways, but I look at what that implies a bit differently. You might not want to work for an employer that has recruiters who think that LEGO is weird, but if my professional qualifications by themselves aren't enough to get an employer to notice me, they're not the employer I am looking for. I'm not at all ashamed of my hobby, but I don't consider it relevant in a job application. Cheers, Ralph

Indeed, the resume really depends on the type of position. I'm an assistant professor (in the UK the equivalent position would be Lecturer). The CV that I submitted for this job describes research projects I've worked on, my education and specialised courses I've followed and lists my scientific publications and courses I've taught myself. It's two pages long. Cheers, Ralph

I'll tell you a story of my own. When I applied for the job I have now (I'm a physicist) I didn't mention LEGO in my CV. However, it did come up in my first interview. Some members of the panel interviewing me had googled my name. My scientific publications do show up if you do that, but most of what pops up is LEGO-related. The professor who ended up hiring me later told me that he didn't know I built LEGO models before the interview and his first reaction when he found about it was negative. He thought it was childish. However, the interview went well overall. He got curious, searched the web after the interview, and found that what I do is far removed from child's play. It showed him that I'm creative, have an eye for detail and am innovative. Those are his words, not mine :-) His perception changed and it ended up helping me rather than being used against me. There is no telling how building with LEGO will be perceived. It depends on what you do and who happens to be on the other side of the table. I wouldn't take the risk. Your professional qualifications should get you a foot in the door and if the personal interests do come up in an interview, just be prepared to discuss them then. Good luck with the job hunt. Cheers, Ralph

There is some superficial resemblance to a P-51, but it reminds me far more of an aerobatics aircraft than of any particular WW-II fighter. I'd also suggest replacing the dual wheels on the undercarriage with single ones. I can't think of any single-seat WW-II fighter that had dual wheels on each bogie. Cheers, Ralph

Welcome to Eurobricks flofler. It's a nice car and very faithful to the original. However, there are a few things that I don't like. Loose the minifigs. They're completely out of scale with the car. The fenders. I know they stick out of the sides somewhat on the real car, but not nearly as much as they do on your model and that makes them look awkward. Finally, it may be a good idea to make the roof a bit narrower than the body of the car -at most nine studs wide. I built a different Mercedes several years ago in a similar style and perhaps. I think it shows what I mean for the roof. Mercedes W123 (2) by Mad physicist, on Flickr Other than that, it's just about perfect. Cheers, Ralph

Excellent van. Nicely proportioned, nicely scaled and detailed and I love the way you made the sliding door. It's a simple technique, but the best ones often are. Cheers, Ralph

I can see where the association between modulars and the level of detail comes from. The modular buildings that LEGO themselves have released are very detailed buildings -perhaps even a bit overly so. I personally don't think a building has to be all that elaborately decorated to be considered a modular building though. There are plenty of modular buildings here on EB that are a bit simpler and I prefer my own to be a bit less fussy-looking too, in part because they're inspired by everyday British buildings. Cheers, Ralph

It is a very neat-looking bus indeed. I prefer my minifig scale vehicles a tad smaller (my own bus, mentioned by BrickBox, is 7 studs wide), but this is very nicely proportioned and detailed. The bike rack at the front looks a bit unusual to me too and I don't think I've ever seen one in Europe, but it's a common feature of buses in the US. Cheers, Ralph

I think we shouldn't get too hung up on definitions, but I'm pretty sure that when AFOLs talk about a modular building they mostly mean buildings compatible with the standard used for LEGO's Cafe Corner and matching sets. This means that they follow a set of rules such that they can be linked together to form a street. Cheers, Ralph

As you may know, I've built a fair few 1/22 scale cars and have posted quite a few of them on EB as well in both the twon and the technic/model team forum. I think that technically they are supposed to go in the latter, although I am not aware of any rule of things in the town forum having to be minifig scale. Somehow they just don't fit there though. If you ask most people, they'll tell you to put them in with the special themes, where just about nobody sees them. I think that people in the ttown forum appreciate this sort of MOC the most. It might not be in the same scale, but definitely fits the genre. I'd post them here if I were you, if you choose to post them on Eurobricks at all. I haven't bothered posting most of my recent MOCs on EB anymore. Cheers, Ralph

It has some neat features, but it does not look much like a business jet nor does it look particularly stealthy. Why would you want your business jet to be stealthy anyway? Are you going to penetrate your competitors' air defence network with it? What it reminds me of are concepts of future space planes from the 'seventies and 'eighties, and IMO that's not a bad thing. Cheers, Ralph

Obviously, if you break one, you're not doing it right. However, sometimes they are so tight that giving them a little wiggle from side-to-side seems the only way. That said, over the years I must have done it dozens of times and I can only remember breaking two. So, you can take them apart, but it's not risk free. Cheers, Ralph

I normally leave them together, but there are times when I do want the two halves to have different colours and do take them apart. I have broken a few, unfortunately Cheers, Ralph

Some of the hinges used in, for instance, creator sets have them, but there are all kinds of other things attached to the other sides of the bricks. Perhaps that's what you remember? http://www.bricklink.com/catalogItem.asp?P=47452 Cheers, Ralph Edit: Never mind. I should have clicked the link in paul delahaye's post before writing mine...

It is almost impossible to diagnose the problem without the file, but I'll have a go at it. In LDRAW files, the colour is indicated by a number: the second number on the line. The number ML-CAD uses for tan is 19. If LEOCAD uses a different number for tan, MLCAD won't recognise it as such. There's an easy workaround: if you open the LDRAW file in question using a text editor, you should be able to replace the wrong number with 19, either manually or with a suitable replace command. You should be careful with the latter to write the replace command such that it doesn't change other instances of the number in question; just the ones that are preceded by 1, since the first number on a line in which a part is placed is always 1. If the wrong colour number is, say, 42, for instance, you could try replacing "1 42" with "1 19". MLCAD will only cycle through steps if the steps are defined in the LDRAW file, which is done by having lines with "0 STEP" in the file. I hope this helps. Cheers, Ralph

I've got few sets built up -Grand Carousel, Taj Mahal, Sopwith Camel, Red Baron & Lunar Lander-, but I don't even build most of the sets I buy anymore. I did buy multiple copies of the last three of those sets for the parts. I have all of the modular buildings except the Grand Emporium and built all of them, but they didn't last long. I generally enjoy building my own stuff and looking at my own stuff far more than looking at something that I built from instructions. Cheers, Ralph

Thanks for the added info. I'm a happy user of flickr, but this is good to know. Cheers, Ralph

Congratulations guys. My effort went into the model itself, and not into the picture. The winners definitely made the most attractive pictures, and I particularly liked Woolie's. Cheers, Ralph

Here are two more. First: my Mi-24 Hind. Mi-24 Hind updated (2) by Mad physicist, on Flickr Mi-24 Hind updated (5) by Mad physicist, on Flickr One of the reasons why I used non-LEGO canopies on this model in the first place, rather than the canopies a few other builders have used successfully on their Hind models, was because I wanted to have mine open properly and I wanted mine to look similarly heavily framed as the real canopies. Whilst upgrading it with brick-built canopies, that is something I wanted to keep. That's also what made this complicated, the door for the pilot in particular. On my model it first pops out and then hinges aft. Tricky. The second one is my US Marine Corps AH-1W SuperCobra. AH-1W SuperCobra updated (1) by Mad physicist, on Flickr AH-1W SuperCobra updated (2) by Mad physicist, on Flickr The SuperCobra was one of my first models with a completely brick-built canopy, a few years ago, but at the time I couldn't figure out a way to make it open properly. Whilst updating my Hind with a brick-built canopy, I spent a fair bit of time fiddling around with various hinges to get the doors to open properly. I realised that a variant of the solution I came up with might also come in handy for the SuperCobra, and I decided to give it an upgrade. I've already also replaced the canopy on my F-117 Stealth Fighter, but am still waiting for a bricklink order to show up in the mail, so that I can replace a part. I've used a dark grey bracket for part of the canopy and have ordered a black one to replace it. Once that comes in, I'll take pictures. I've also replaced the canopy on my U-2 Dragon Lady. I'll take pictures of that ones I;ve replaced the stickers on the model. They're about three years old and look dilapidated. Cheers, Ralph Comments and faves

You may want to lower the roof by a plate or so, but that looks very good. The new bumpers are a massive improvement and I like how you've also added an interior. Somehow that makes the outside look better too. Thanks for sharing. Ralph

I use dropbox too. I often work on different computers, both at work and at home, and it's an easy way to have access to my files no matter where I am. I had never imagined using it as a way of publishing pictures, though. I'm also not sure I want to. If all it takes to get to my files is a link to them -without requiring a password- I'm a bit worried about security. I've got work stuff on there! Presumably you've set part of your allocated space as publicly accessible? Cheers, Ralph