When is a custom not a custom...

[nine09nueve]

Dear beautiful brickers of the euro persuasion and otherwise...

(First post on the big boys and girls forum of the MCW so be gentle!)

I was in conversation with Wardancer recently and the following thought struck me. I was of the persuasion that customising meant physically modifying the elements in some way (ie: slice dice hack slash slosh stick and print!)

But I've noticed that customising also seems to include using 3rd party elements on "normal unmixed" minifigs - the brilliant brickwarriors stuff for example springs to mind.

But also I've seen pure lego creations which seem to have been called customised due to the fact that different torsos have been mixy-mixy'd (as my son used to say) with different legs / arms / heads etc...

I know that I don't have the talent to do customising of the first type - or at least will need to devote more hours than I have to spare at the moment to get anywhere near the level of quality of customs we see on the forums on a regular basis... But creatively speaking anyone can have great ideas (still waiting for them though!) and the second and third options are good enough for me - and often sometimes is it harder to get that great idea than it is to actually make it happen? (To those that are abundantly skilled in the first type of customs)

I'm not trying to say one is better than the other but I am wondering if there's a community consensus on what actually constitutes a custom or not? (be it minifig or model or whatever)

Much love

D

[Risgrynsgrot]

Custom is either non-LEGO pieces or modified pieces. That's it.

Hence the term Purist, referring to using non-modifed and only LEGO pieces.

[nine09nueve]

Custom is either non-LEGO pieces or modified pieces. That's it.

Hence the term Purist, referring to using non-modifed and only LEGO pieces.

Hmm - then what about AmperZand's recent Mind Flayer (looks wholly purist to me) as does some of the DnD class minifigs..?

By your definition Risgynsgrot they aren't classed as customs? But then they're posted in this forum?

Yours intriguied, curious and slightly confused! :D

D

[Borador]

Hmm - then what about AmperZand's recent Mind Flayer (looks wholly purist to me) as does some of the DnD class minifigs..?

By your definition Risgynsgrot they aren't classed as customs? But then they're posted in this forum?

Yours intriguied, curious and slightly confused! :D

D

I believe this is a general forum for all minfigure creations. I think it works like this (but bear in mind I am not an expert):

"A custom minifigure" refers to any figure that has been consciously modified to look a specific way that differs from how LEGO made it.

Then, it gets more specific:

A purist custom is one that, while it has been changed, has not actually been painted, etc. It refers to one that uses LEGO parts, but is not how LEGO intended for it to be.

While a straight up custom figure (not the technical term, or even accepted slang, that's just what I say) is one that has undergone some (usually irreversible) modification, like paint or decals. It uses parts that were either made by the customizer, or were bought from someone else. A purist may be all LEGO partst, but they are still technically "custom" in that they are not LEGO's original design.

I hope I've been of some help.

[Wardancer]

IMHO Purist custom figs are a gray area. If that logic were applied to all LEGO, then every MOC would be a custom because it deviates from the original design. This would very much weaken the term customization. Figs however whose arms were taken off, might be seen as customs, because the weakening of the arm holes indicates that this was not a procedure initially intended by TLG. Also legs.

[MAB]

^ If you created something original, then it is a creation, so a MOC. If you build an official set then make a few modifications, then it is probably better called a custom version of the set rather than a MOC.

[Krikkit]

There are also some figures that have been specifically molded from someones clay work.... Like the decool rhino and juggernaut.

Not Lego, but custom and impressive looking.

I do agree with the purist and non purest custom definitions mentioned above.

Adding 3rd party parts to an existing figure or modding with some very simple hand or hair swaps, I would class as enhancing the figure.

Edited January 13, 2015 by Krikkit

[AmperZand]

Hmm - then what about AmperZand's recent Mind Flayer (looks wholly purist to me) as does some of the DnD class minifigs..?

By your definition Risgynsgrot they aren't classed as customs? But then they're posted in this forum?

Yours intriguied, curious and slightly confused! :D

D

Hello, nine09nueve,

It's important to distinguish between Eurobricks' (EB) rules and the prevailing view of the worldwide AFOL community. With the greatest respect to EB, the two aren't always the same.

According to EB rules, a thread that is only about minifigures should be here regardless of whether the minifigures are purist or not. The only official exceptions are Collectible Minifigures (CMFs) where the minifigures haven't even had their parts mixed.

My own view is that purist minifigures should be permitted in the subject matter forum to which they relate, so in the case of my mind flayer, the history forum (which encompasses fantasy too). But I don't make the rules.

Customisation, to my mind, involves an artistic talent that goes beyond combining parts. So cutting, sculpting, painting or erasing are all customisation techniques. Recolouring the ears of the elves below is customisation.

I don't think of the use of third party parts such as the two-handed sword and the spear in the picture as customisation, though I appreciate that many (perhaps most) AFOLs do.

A grey zone for some - though not for me - is the use of so-called illegal techniques, viz. reconstructing torso or leg assemblies. In the picture, I turned the torso of the elf on the right back-to-front by swapping around his arms (what you see in the picture was originally his back). Some people think of this as customisations. Personally, I don't.

In short, different people have different definitions of "purism" and "customisation" and even whether or not they are poles of the same dimension.

AmperZand

Edited January 12, 2015 by AmperZand

[Masta' Blasta']

I consider anything that deviates from the original product (all three of the forms you mentioned) "custom." After all, it's merely a shortened version of "customized," which can include any form of modification.

[Silent Nomad]

I recently constructed a "custom" minifigure that completely copies the one seen in this image in every way but the facial expression:

I, personally, don't call this minifigure custom because it was "released" in LB3 first, and the way I see it I simply made a physical form of it where there wasn't one before. Some might call that customizing, though, since I used parts from a Sinestro minifigure and a Batman minifigure to make a new figure that isn't officially available.