Redisplay Messages: Compact | Brief | All | Full Show Messages: All | Without Replies Author: | SylvainLS | Posted: | May 5, 2019 12:54 | Subject: | Re: nb of 45677 red pieces in 4883 creator set | Viewed: | 35 times | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, stephannie writes:
| "gear grinders" creator set, 4 red pieces ref 45677 are needed on
the paper instruction (see my photo). And 5 are needed on the Bricklink Inventory.
As it is a creator, with different building options, the exact needed number
is not easy to know. All i know is that 4 of these red pieces are enough to build
each of the suggested buiding options in the instruction. But separately, one
after the other. I don't know if TLG designed this set as being able to build
several "gear grinders" at the same time ? ... Another member owns this set ?
Good sunday to all of you !!
|
Brickset (= more or less LEGO) agrees with BrickLink to reach 273 pieces in total,
so, unless another part is wrong, it looks correct.
Note that the 5th part was changed to extra on February, 16th 2012, and changed
back to regular on the 19th.
Unfortunately, we can’t see the messages accompanying the changes anymore
https://www.bricklink.com/catalogInvChangeItem.asp?itemType=S&itemNo=4883-1&viewDate=Y&viewStatus=1
|
|
Author: | SylvainLS | Posted: | May 4, 2019 19:00 | Subject: | Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 157-1 | Viewed: | 17 times | Topic: | Inventories Requests | |
|
| In Inventories Requests, taxan writes:
| […]
If 3229 = 3229a and 3230 = 3230a.
Then they should merge into 3229 and 3230.
There are no reason to leave them with the "a" version.
If we in the future discovery a different version of the Blue Curved Rail, then
we have a reason to have the "a" and a "b" version again.
|
‘b’ doesn’t exist in Blue but it exists in Light Gray.
That’s the reason why ‘a’ and ‘b’ versions exist.
‘not-a-not-b’ should have been ‘u’ndetermined, and then deleted.
|
|
Author: | SylvainLS | Posted: | May 3, 2019 16:40 | Subject: | Re: Change NPB Timeline | Viewed: | 52 times | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, tonnic writes:
| […]
If I look at your large amount of feedback you generate I almost suspect you
of having a Lego business too but on a different sellingpoint... 😅
|
Almost 1 order a day, I suspect them of being in love with their post(wo)man
|
|
Author: | SylvainLS | Posted: | May 2, 2019 07:20 | Subject: | Re: Coral | Viewed: | 44 times | Topic: | Colors | |
|
| In Colors, Teup writes:
| […]
I'd go for salmon or something like that.
|
Are you talking about the colour of the fresh flesh, the cooked flesh, or the
smoked flesh? At what time of the year the salmon was killed? What did the
salmon eat? Were there artificial colorants added? Or are you talking about
the colour of its scales? And are they the scales on the belly, the head, the
tail? And which of the 8 species of fish that we name “salmon”?
|
|
Author: | SylvainLS | Posted: | May 1, 2019 13:59 | Subject: | Re: Shipping adress Belgium | Viewed: | 39 times | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, reci writes:
| Thank you for your answer
I tried but the system wont let me save my adress with the last field un-answered...
|
We had the same problem with French addresses (compounded with the use of wrong
names for the régions ). It only took 2 years of nagging to be fixed.
In the mean time, add a remark/note at checkout and hope the seller will read
and heed it.
|
|
Author: | SylvainLS | Posted: | Apr 27, 2019 19:30 | Subject: | Inventory Change Request for Set 41347-1 | Viewed: | 30 times | Topic: | Inventories Requests (Entry) | Status: | Open | |
|
| Please make changes to the following inventory:
* Delete 1 Part 20482 Trans-Clear Tile, Round 1 x 1 with Bar and Pin Holder (Extra)
* Add 2 Part 20482 Trans-Clear Tile, Round 1 x 1 with Bar and Pin Holder (Extra)
* Delete 2 Part 4073 Trans-Yellow Plate, Round 1 x 1 Straight Side (Extra)
* Add 4 Part 4073 Trans-Yellow Plate, Round 1 x 1 Straight Side (Extra)
Comments from Submitter:
Sealed box.
|
|
Author: | SylvainLS | Posted: | Apr 27, 2019 15:55 | Subject: | Inventory Change Request for Set 75199-1 | Viewed: | 27 times | Topic: | Inventories Requests (Entry) | Status: | Open | |
|
| Please make changes to the following inventory:
* Delete 1 Part 64567 Metallic Silver Minifigure, Weapon Lightsaber Hilt Straight (Extra)
* Add 2 Part 64567 Metallic Silver Minifigure, Weapon Lightsaber Hilt Straight (Extra)
Comments from Submitter:
Hmm, change still doesn’t work?
Two new sealed boxes. 1 regular + 1 extra in bag 1 with Mace Windu, 4 regular + 1 extra in bag 2 for G. Grievous.
|
|
Author: | SylvainLS | Posted: | Apr 22, 2019 07:51 | Subject: | Re: Brand filter not working | Viewed: | 29 times | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, yorbrick writes:
| The brand filter is not working correctly. I have LEGO only turned on, yet I
am shown adverts for non-LEGO items during my searches. Is it possible to turn
off non-LEGO products?
|
Oh, that’s a good one
|
|
Author: | SylvainLS | Posted: | Apr 17, 2019 08:59 | Subject: | Re: Lengths in “L” and 18654 | Viewed: | 19 times | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, yorbrick writes:
| […]
Yeah, so why call this a pin 1/2 ... […]
|
Because there’s no constistence to the catalogue?
| Personally, I'd go with a naming convention of the form:
Pin 2L (with friction ridges) and Stop Bush 1L.
So a normal pin would be a pin 2L, a half pin would be a pin 1L, and so on. Anything
with four half pins would be "with 4 pins 1L" and so on.
|
Okay… provided we agree on what a “L” is and out-of-system dimensions like “2/3
L” are verified before being accepted in the catalogue
|
|
Author: | SylvainLS | Posted: | Apr 17, 2019 08:32 | Subject: | Re: Lengths in “L” and 18654 | Viewed: | 24 times | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, randyf writes:
| […]
My point was that if you categorize it as a bushing, you don't need to worry
about the length of it at all. You don't see the axle bushing above listed
as a "Technic Bush 1L". It is just "Technic Bush". So change that one to "Technic
Axle Bush" and
to "Technic Pin Bush" and problem solved. No need to worry about the length at
all. Like I said, it doesn't and can't connect pins or axles at all,
so it is definitely *not* a "Technic, Pin Connector". And that's a fact.
|
Simple solution indeed.
No wonder you’re, er, should be, paid the big bucks
|
|
Author: | SylvainLS | Posted: | Apr 17, 2019 08:30 | Subject: | Re: Lengths in “L” and 18654 | Viewed: | 22 times | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, yorbrick writes:
| | No. A "pin" is the standard Technic pin. Basically, half of
|
Why half of it? And if it was half of it, shouldn't that one be named a "double
pin". […]
|
But
has only one pin, or is the other half considered hidden inside the brick?
And
and the like are “pin”s, not “half-pin”s and there’s no room for a hidden second
half.
|
|
Author: | SylvainLS | Posted: | Apr 17, 2019 07:25 | Subject: | Re: Lengths in “L” and 18654 | Viewed: | 27 times | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, randyf writes:
| In Catalog, dkillgore writes:
| So is a "pin" the same as a "stud"?
|
No. A "pin" is the standard Technic pin. Basically, half of
A "stud" is the standard connection point on the top of LEGO bricks and plates.
|
Yes, and wes say “stud” for the distance between the centers of two studs / the
width of 1-stud-wide brick or plate.
| | Example, part 2817 is a modified plate, 2 x 2 with pin holder
and it is possible to attach a stud of say a 1x4 in the pin holder to do a perpendicular
build. Is the cuff for attachment too shallow on the 18654 to, say, do a reversal?
Just asking or future buying and building
|
You can do a stud reversal with
just like with any other thick Technic liftarm since they are the same thickness.
Part 18654 is pretty much just a thick 1L Technic liftarm.
|
Exactly, “BEAM 1X1” is its LEGO name.
And about puting studs in technic holes, note that a technic hole is slightly
smaller than a stud (the actual round peg), and if you attach more than one stud
to technic holes, the force needed to remove them once inserted is too strong
for a 7-year-old child. That’s why LEGO say it’s “illegal” to connect more than
one stud to technic holes.
Also, note that a technic hole is also slightly higher than a side-stud on the
modified bricks. So you shan’t mix bricks with side studs and technic bricks
with half-pins (though some official builds do).
And you shan’t have overhanging bricks on top of the technic brick. Like on
the picture below, the red plate shan’t be placed over the tan plates. (Yes,
some official builds do that too.)
And while we are talking about SNOT building, be careful with logos, they really
push the bricks that want to lay on them (second picture, if the blue brick had
studs, the red brick wouldn’t be able to attach correctly to the tan headlight
brick, and would be pushed upward by the stud).
|
|
|
Author: | SylvainLS | Posted: | Apr 16, 2019 19:49 | Subject: | Lengths in “L” and 18654 | Viewed: | 120 times | Topic: | Catalog | Status: | Open | |
|
| I’m wondering what’s the rationale for having changed the name (and dimensions)
of
from “1 L” to “2/3 L”.
I can’t see where it’s 0.67L.
Especially if I compare it to
and their variants, or with
and other liftarms/beams, or all the connectors with “# L” in their descriptions.
In the same way, its new dimensions are 1 x 1 x 0.67. As it’s a cylinder, it
means the 0.67 is supposed to apply to its height. But its height is exactly
1 stud, which is 5/6th = 0.83 brick, not 2/3rd = 0.67, and, anyway, “L” means
stud, not brick, so 1 = 1.
Therefore, I strongly believe its name should have stayed “Technic, Pin Connector
Round 1 L” and its dimensions should be 1 x 1 x 0.83.
(Actually, its diameter is a shy less than 1 stud, so its dimensions should be
0.9something x 0.9something x 0.83 but all the liftarms have the same width and
are said to be 1 stud wide.)
Not filing a proper catalogue change request because I really would want to know
the reasoning here, not play ping-pong.
|
|
Author: | SylvainLS | Posted: | Apr 14, 2019 12:35 | Subject: | Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 70620-1 | Viewed: | 12 times | Topic: | Inventories Requests | |
|
| In Inventories Requests, 1977_mauro writes:
| Please make changes to the following inventory:
* Add 1 Part 61184 Light Bluish Gray Technic, Pin 1/2 with 2L Bar Extension (Flick Missile) (Extra)
Comments from Submitter:
I assume, someone has inventorized 4 x 87994 additional light bluish bars (1 to much by mistake) instead of adding one additional light bluish flick missile. Both are looking similar to each other.
(I think that the 4 bars should be reduced to 3 as well)
|
It’s not a mistake, I also got 9 (5+4) 87994 and 8 (8+0) 61184.
Extras are just that, extras, you are not assured to get them, and they can change
with production runs.
So, to be clear, your extra 61184 can be added but the 87994 you didn’t get should
stay.
|
|
Author: | SylvainLS | Posted: | Apr 13, 2019 12:12 | Subject: | Re: Grays & Browns | Viewed: | 28 times | Topic: | Colors | |
|
| In Colors, uticabrix writes:
| I am having trouble with brown vs Reddish brown, and also light grey vs light
bluesish gray. Does anyone have any suggestions how to identify which is what?
Are these current colors with Lego?
|
There was a “Great Colour Shift” around 2004.
The main colours that were replaced were Light and Dark Grays, and Brown, but
the other colours were also slightly modified.
LBG, DBG, and Reddish Brown are the current colours since then.
As for the difference, you need to look at your parts in daylight or with a daylight
tinted lightbulb. The old greys are yellowish/kaki (hence the newer ones looking
bluish in comparison whereas they are actually nearer “true” grey).
The best way is to keep at hand parts of which you are certain of the colours.
|
|
Author: | SylvainLS | Posted: | Apr 9, 2019 19:26 | Subject: | Re: inconsistencies | Viewed: | 38 times | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, dkillgore writes:
| […]
| Against.
I don’t know why “jumper” was chosen. The similarity with electrical jumpers
(little wires that “jump” over the main circuits, or little thingies to connect
two plots) is tenuous: yes it’s a connector but everything connects in LEGO.
But I believe “jumper” can be taken to mean that the connection “jumps” half
a stud.
Anyway, “jumper” is well engraved as meaning “offset stud” which the missing-studs
plates and having-studs tiles don’t have.
|
Sylvain, your previous thread-joint reply was appreciated! A Programmer-based
deficiency for sure...
So, truly, what we all need to consider is this:
Is BrickLink, as the premier site for those who have, maybe for the first time,
visited Lego.com to complete sets or begin their life-long passion as a creator
of MOC, or to find long sought after sets from days they remember, to base our
catalogue on Lego.com nomenclature and numbering system to be:
"Buyer Focused" so that they can jump-start their search based on item classifications
and numbers they found off of a set they own or want to recreate...Or, maybe,
just maybe, even more Intuitive! Now that would be something.
Or, wanting to determine the number of categories and number/images to make it
easy to store and access for those selling to pick from to be:
"Seller Focused"
My guess is that there are a lot more first-time potential buyers registering
on here and trying to make sense of what we are doing than long-term hobbyists.
I am always aware of what we may be losing in customer base. Just have a heart
for the ones that you never hear from on the Forum who just can't make sense
of it all...
|
Indeed. But what I’m against, and I wasn’t clear, is the use of the term “jumper”
for a tile with studs + plate without studs category.
For me, “jumper” is specific to 3794 (and its variants) and then to 87580 and
then to 34103. That’s only 3 (or 5) parts.
All tiles and plates could well be in a unique category (like they mostly are
in LDraw or LDD) but I don’t want it called “jumper”
The problem verily lies within the strict category system, the lack of a parallel
tag system or at least the possibility for a part to appear in more than one
category.
With such a system, either you have a system that plans for anything and everything,
and you end up with the Dewey Decimal Classification for books, that no one understands
but specialists, or you have a system that needs to change with new elements
or better knowledge on the elements, like Linné’s taxonomy of living beings,
and, well, that no one understands but specialists either
Either way, there’s still a need for a simple way, both for the hoi polloi and
the elite actually, to find a part, or a group of similar parts (whatever “similar”
might mean), in a few clicks.
In a library, the Dewey DC (or another similar system) is used for numbering
the books and the shelves but a patron just needs to talk to a librarian or use
a search tool to find the book they want, they don’t need to know the DDC. And
if a patron browses an alley, they will see similar books, but they won’t see,
for instance, all the books written by the same author if these fall under different
domains.
In a virtual system, like BL, the “patron” can be presented with an “alley” containing
all the plates, or all the parts with pins, or all the 2x2 parts….
In short, what I’m trying to say is you can twist a category system in all the
ways you want, you will still need knowledge to use it, it will still be for
the specialists. To allow newbies to use it, you need a librarian, and this
website should be one.
|
|
Author: | SylvainLS | Posted: | Apr 9, 2019 17:21 | Subject: | Re: inconsistencies | Viewed: | 34 times | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, randyf writes:
| In Catalog, WoutR writes:
| In Catalog, Hygrotus writes:
| In other words there is a mess which will be hard to clarify
|
Keep it simple. A tile does not have studs. So if it has studs, then it is a
plate.
|
That's how I see things, also, but we will have to hold off on this debate
for a bit until Marek and I can get our plates cleared off to focus on catalog
projects again.[…]
|
Well done
|
|
Author: | SylvainLS | Posted: | Apr 9, 2019 16:06 | Subject: | Re: inconsistencies | Viewed: | 37 times | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, dkillgore writes:
| […]
Just going to put this out there and wait for the bashing,
Why not put them in both categories?
|
The database won’t allow it.
A part can only be in one category.
Because they are “categories,” not “tags.”
A tag system was asked for, many times.
|
|
Author: | SylvainLS | Posted: | Apr 9, 2019 15:19 | Subject: | Re: inconsistencies | Viewed: | 36 times | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, axaday writes:
| In Catalog, RecycledBrick writes:
| I would like to see the Tile Modified ones that have studs moved to Plate Modified.
I vote yes.
|
I am torn. I feel like having studs is characteristic of the plate and not having
studs is characteristic of the tile. Is it possible to have a new category specifically
for tiles that have some studs and plates that have some flat space? The most
obvious (to me) name for the category would be Jumpers, but I don't really
know how that word came to be used the way Lego uses it.
|
Against.
I don’t know why “jumper” was chosen. The similarity with electrical jumpers
(little wires that “jump” over the main circuits, or little thingies to connect
two plots) is tenuous: yes it’s a connector but everything connects in LEGO.
But I believe “jumper” can be taken to mean that the connection “jumps” half
a stud.
Anyway, “jumper” is well engraved as meaning “offset stud” which the missing-studs
plates and having-studs tiles don’t have.
|
|
Author: | SylvainLS | Posted: | Apr 9, 2019 14:27 | Subject: | Re: inconsistencies | Viewed: | 26 times | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Hygrotus writes:
| In Catalog, Teup writes:
| Either
way, if you don't have principal characteristics of what constitutes a tile
or plate (for example groove = tile), any classification is going to be inconsistent
and a matter of opinion.
|
I like this sentence.
|
Me too.
Well, except for the example, as there are plates with grooves
and tiles/plates variants with and without groove
(And the jumpers too….)
|
|
Author: | SylvainLS | Posted: | Apr 8, 2019 12:37 | Subject: | Re: Keffiyeh vs Turban | Viewed: | 22 times | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, bje writes:
| […]
Wish
I could read Proust, Balzac, Littel and few others in original French.
|
Me too
(I lack the courage.)
| | Bicorne = two horns
There are tricorne hats too (three horns).
|
Horny hats will be even more difficult to remember, it is not a concept I usually
associate with hats or caps.
|
Well, I’m sure there’s peacockery somewhere (bad, bad pun) but “corne” is a common
term in French for angled/folded —wait for it— corners!
Yes the English “corner” is about horns too
|
|
Author: | SylvainLS | Posted: | Apr 8, 2019 11:56 | Subject: | Re: Keffiyeh vs Turban | Viewed: | 27 times | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, bje writes:
| You want to try and remember bicorne - usually I have to search through pirates
minifigs to get that %^^$%@ name.
|
I’ll excuse your French as it so happens that “%^^$%@” could indeed be replaced
by “French”.
Bicorne = two horns
There are tricorne hats too (three horns).
| You might want to bookmark this page. It at
least gives the starting point names of some hat/headdress styles with images,
since I can never remember any of them.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hat
|
You’ll note that on that page, keffiyeh is spelled keffiyah.
(While the wiktionary lists kaffiyah, kufiya, and kufiyah as alternative spellings,
but not keffiyah.)
Finding it through Prince of Persia minifigures might be quicker than searching
the wikipedia page then trying all the possible spellings
|
|
Author: | SylvainLS | Posted: | Apr 8, 2019 10:11 | Subject: | Re: inconsistencies | Viewed: | 38 times | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, edk writes:
| why is a plate modified when is a tile modified?
|
I’d have said it’s the number of studs (or ratio). Something like 50%+1 of studs
missing means it’s a tile, but some “tiles” have 50% of their studs and some
“plates” have less than 50% of their studs.
Plates:
(and variants)
(and variant)
Tiles:
|
|
Author: | SylvainLS | Posted: | Apr 5, 2019 07:14 | Subject: | Re: Grouping Parts | Viewed: | 31 times | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, JusTiCe8 writes:
| Studio already include submodels.
Select parts, create submodel, that's it.
You can alway break one to update it, then recreate the submodel back again.
|
You can edit submodels without “breaking” them (“release” in Studio’s terms).
You can nest submodels (make a hierarchy of them), copy/paste them as if they
were just big parts, and many other things.
|
|
Author: | SylvainLS | Posted: | Apr 2, 2019 13:18 | Subject: | Re: Old (classic) light gray | Viewed: | 28 times | Topic: | Colors | |
|
| In Colors, legoman_74 writes:
| Fully discolored as in uniform all around including underneath? I wondered if
pieces become discolored from other reasons other than direct sunlight. Any ideas
what causes this? From your scenario, it almost sounds like "batch" issues as
some in storage discolored while others did not.
|
There’s one reason for discolaration: degradation.
(And plastics degrade differently depending on their compositions, as we all
know because we all heard about the pre-2004 fire retardants that are often incriminated.)
But there are several reasons for degradation: UV, humidity, temperature, and
undoubtedly others.
The UV to which LEGO pieces are exposed generally come from the sunlight. And
as they are light, by definition they don’t hit in the shadow. So their effects,
besides being strong on some plastics, are easily noticed.
As for your parts, they may be from different batches. But their difference
in colour might not have been noticeable when they were brand new. They might
also have aged differently because of their composition. Or they may be like
other bricks in composition but still have aged differently because they weren’t
stored like others.
|
|
Next Page: 5 More | 10 More | 25 More | 50 More | 100 More
|