Comments on: Lego is communication: design and build

By: V1

V1 — Wed, 21 May 2008 21:40:32 +0000

Bohman and Bruce - I think that You both are right. There may exist a need for what You are doing, Bohman. So this is not pointless. And the simple explanation You wrote, Bruce, convinced me that this is not senseless. I was wrong.
I just really dont like / hate any kind of ‘framework’ people try to put every aspect of life into.

By: LEGO Blog: The Brothers Brick » Blog Archive » Case study #2: does techniques always come last?

Wed, 21 May 2008 20:37:19 +0000

[...] in the previous case study, I made the point that techniques always come late in the design process. When you build models to [...]

By: Bruce n h

Bruce n h — Tue, 20 May 2008 19:55:49 +0000

On V1’s comment above, I think the issue you may have is that Linus is trying to make explicit what you are already doing subconsciously. When I took an introductory computer programming course, those of us who were already fairly adept were really annoyed at some of the things we had to do, like create these IPO charts - a little table that described Input, Processing and Output for each program or subroutine. The thing is, we were already doing this implicitly, but at a level that we never really had to think about, so it was a real pain to stop and do some of these things. Knowing your building style, you’re already incorporating all of this, whether you spell it out or not.

By: Tim David

Tim David — Tue, 20 May 2008 16:13:37 +0000

I think the brown one is more evil…

By: Nannan

Nannan — Tue, 20 May 2008 11:34:55 +0000

First, I’m honored to have you feature my works as so, with regards to concepts like color and shape (which are also the two things I abide by when building), you should reference nnenn in a case study in the upcoming week, he’s explicitly stated the importance of color and shape and shown it well throughout his works.

Keep up the good work Linus, this is unprecedented material.

By: Bohman

Bohman — Tue, 20 May 2008 05:06:16 +0000

Paul Lee: I haven’t read that book, but it sounds very interesting. I’m very interested in making a small article with different views on LEGO as art (this thread on Classic-Space is filled with good people to interview for that, for instance). There are a lot of books on art theory that can be applicable here, but I’ll look into your suggestion. Thanks a bunch for the tip!

Mainman & Memory: I think you’re right. And actually, I think that’s also the case with many other mediums - a lot of photographers just stumbled upon “this cool technique” too. I suspect it’s the same with sculptors and painters as well, and there’s nothing wrong with that. From a communicational point of view, however, one should at least give thought to the contextual relations and adjust some things afterwards in order to make it all fit. In reality the process is hardly as streamlined as I lined up above

V1: I am actually trying to put our toys into a framework. Some feel it takes away the fun, and that’s alright. I believe that in order to further our medium, and in the end getting it taken more seriously by the general public, we must think about these things. Even though what I write today may be considered simplistic or narrow-minded in the future, at least it’s a start to get those of us who’re interested thinking. But that will never take away from what LEGO is for you individually

By: Memory

Memory — Tue, 20 May 2008 02:51:41 +0000

lol @ V1

You type some interesting thoughts, Linus. The concept of techniques being the last priority reminds me of the idea of LEGO as a medium, a means to an end (i.e. nnenn). I agree with Mainman, though. LEGO is, by nature, a solution-based medium. While the overall vision of a model is very important, I think that the techniques used will carry more weight than in other mediums.

By: Gambort

Gambort — Tue, 20 May 2008 02:23:25 +0000

Paul Lee> I suspect that reverse engineering a model teaches you a lot more than reading its instructions. A building technique resource would be handy but is a pain to maintain and update. Some of us do have folders on that sort of thing.

My ideas folder

By: Paul Lee

Paul Lee — Tue, 20 May 2008 00:16:18 +0000

@V1

Scholarship is never pointless. If there can be advances in the MOC process, that would be great. I would like to see a pooling of knowledge. A resource of building techniques. Can you image a Lego Building Technique wiki? I wish we could find a way to have instructions created for the best, most interesting MOCs and have them available publicly, in like PDF format. So much could be learned quickly, instead of guessing and figuring it all out by ourselves. imagine the advancements that could be made in MOC technique!

And oh yeah, V1, if you find it pointless and senseless… feel free to ignore it. And leave us to our pointlessness and senselessness.

By: V1

V1 — Mon, 19 May 2008 23:58:10 +0000

It seems You are trying hard to put playing with bricks into some framework… It’s pointless and senseless !