I’m really looking forward to seeing these in the Big in Japan display at BrickCon 2010. Maybe we should put together an entire brick built weapon museum?

Via The Living Brick

And, yes, this is the type of thing we would love to see in the Big In Japan layout at BrickCon this year.

Thanks to Bruce for pointing this out to me.

Andrew argues, with merit, that demands for credit are excessive and potentially “stifling (of) others’ creativity”. While I don’t disagree with his major points I do feel that his post has risky consequences which I do disagree with: discouraging credit when it can and should be given.

As a medium with a finite parts pallette, building technique is not just a means of aiding the design process but an integral part of the design process. Technique is not just a tool but can be an inseparable part of a creation. This is, for me at least, one the most interesting aspects of building with LEGO (and/or other construction toys).

The LEGO fan community has developed in an environment of sharing, cooperation and mingling of ideas. From the earliest days of rec.toys.lego through to the diaspora of today one of the key elements of the online community has been the active sharing of the techniques that go into a model in addition to the sharing of the model itself.

However, this sharing is encouraged, at least in part, by the giving of credit where credit is due. If someone knows that a clever trick they’ve spent hours developing will be used by others without so much as a thank you they may not feel so compelled to spend the time to show a cutaway version.

Likewise if someone sees a neat idea they’d agonised over being used and lauded without acknowledgement a week later by a more experienced builder they may feel justifiably aggrieved. Credit isn’t just polite, it is a driver of the shared creativity that drives the hobby.

So no, it is not your technique. If you got it from someone else then give them the credit they deserve for their creativity so that they’ll feel happy sharing other techniques. Credit is a currency and if you don’t pay for the service you may find it goes away.

to steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one’s own : [to] use (another’s production) without crediting the source.

Unfortunately, plagiarism is something we LEGO fans witness all too often online. “Hey, some kid on LEGO.com stole my photo and entered it in a contest. And he won!” or “There’s this scumbag on eBay selling copies of a MOC that I designed!”

I think we can all agree that stealing photos or selling someone else’s design for profit are both damaging to the legitimacy of LEGO as an artform and to LEGO builders as a community.

(Some good news is that the Brick-Busters are doing a good job of dealing with the kids on LEGO.com, though the problem is much broader than their scope.)

However, accusations of plagiarism seem just as common between LEGO builders. “Dude, aren’t you going to credit me for combining these three pieces in this particular way?” or “Here’s a photo of an awesome technique I just thought up. I call it SNOT. Please credit me if you use it.”

I believe that claiming ownership or requesting credit for building techniques can have a stifling effect on the creativity we all value so much, and therefore doing so can be just as damaging — in different ways — as real plagiarism. I’m proposing that we embrace a more open approach to building techniques by abandoning the possessive attitude too many of us have about the way we’ve put a few LEGO bricks together.

Of course, what I’m suggesting as it applies to LEGO isn’t unique either. Open source software has proved competitive with traditional boxed products. An increasing number of writers are embracing “copyleft” and open content philosophies as alternatives to traditional copyright.

Boing Boing contributor and science fiction author Cory Doctorow releases his work under a Creative Commons license — specifically, the same license under which The Brothers Brick releases our original content. (All of my own LEGO photos on Flickr are also posted with the same CC license.)

What I love about LEGO builders as a community is how collaborative we are. In most cases, someone who finds what they consider a new type of connection or an innovative use for a part shares it with their LEGO friends expecting nothing in return. It might be easy to dismiss my earlier examples as coming only from the sticky typing fingers of the pre-teens and early teens crawling all over Flickr these days, but I read those kinds of comments from adults all too frequently too.

This attitude is self-congratulatory at best, and has the danger of stifling others’ creativity. Before I had my “open LEGO” epiphany, there was more than one occasion when I paused while building to think whether I wanted to bother listing in my photo description later all the potential places where I might have first seen the technique I was using.

In a creative medium that values collaboration and innovation, I don’t believe claims of ownership for building techniques have any place.

What do you think? Are these claims just annoying, or worse? Sound off in the comments.

I love the train tunnel cutting through the rocky mountain on which the castle is firmly planted. The use of bley and old gray on the castle walls is a classic technique to add texture.

Next, Moritz Nolting (nolnet) depicts a vicious hunting vessel chasing a mersquid (the fusion of a mermaid and a squidman). I’m happy to see that we both agree on the use of certain plant life for the seabed, but Moritz’s view of the flora and fauna is obvious more fertile than mine.

It’s taken me a while but I’ve finally managed to get the review up for Ryan McNaught’s excellent A380 model as debuted at Brickvention last weekend. While the sculpting and other building techniques are highly impressive they are only the wrapping on this excellent model.

Firstly it also includes a fully detailed interior featuring scenes from five different movies. It also had some other features that may be visible in closeups. Try to spot them all.

Secondly it includes a large a large range of powered features including retractable landing gear and working engines which are all controlled by an A380 control panel on a touchscreen computer. Great mindstorms fun even on a regular model but on the A380 truly spectacular.

And finally Ryan is also selling a mini version of the A380. A got my girlfriend to build the kit to provide a ‘lay’ perspective. She said it was easy enough to build from the included instructions although she found some aspects of them strange and a little confusing. I can’t find the pictures and details right now but rather than make you wait for the main meal I’ll edit some in tomorrow.

Overall it was a very deserving best-of-show at the convention and sets the bar high for future minifig-scale plane building efforts. Truly an impressive model.

And for our American readers Ryan will be taking it to Brickworld in Chicago in June. If you’re in the neighbourhood I highly recommend checking it out in real life. Pictures honestly cannot do it justice.

In his Urtiva Yacht nnenn shows off a highly-effective yet ever-so-simple technique for microspace windows using nothing more than white and black plates. It really demonstrates scale in this space yacht. Hopefully we’ll see more of it.

As much as I appreciate the plane, I also really like Ralph’s presentation, complete with wheel chocks and the textured surface of an aircraft carrier (hmmm, sounds like another potential collaboration with Ed Diment).

Even more impressive at minifig scale, Ralph’s fighter has fully functional folding wings and retractable landing gear:

What makes Moritz’s Unimog extra-cool is the extra ground clearance he achieved by building the chassis studs-down.