How much accuracy do you demand in a SW MOC?

[KimT]

While I'm all for discussing the accuracy, I am NOT for personal insults in my forum.

I think we can all agree that at some point some comments were out of line and as for fallenagnel's accuracy need, I'm sure he understands by now that not everyone agree.

So let's "Stay on Target" here and discuss "How much accuracy do you demand in a SW MOC?"

Plus I'd like people to try and sweap their boards clean and give each other a chance at giving good feedback on each other's MOCs.

Can we agree on that?

"You cannot control the actions of others, only your own.

So do that and be the better rolemodel."

[Commander_Rob]

So, accuracy in MOCs...

I'd judge by "If it looks right, it is right". What looks "right" is highly subjective of course. Generally I can accept anything that doesn't contain any glaring errors. A MOC has to look good as a finished product and if that means changing a detail from more accurate to looking better, I'm all for it. To me, having part of a model inaccurate (to a certain limit at least) is preferable to an accurate detail that disturbs the overall feel.

[Kaitan]

Okay, gotta crawl out of hibernation for this one :)

Accuracy is an odd thing, because as many posts above have pointed out, we are trying to create a universe of recognisable objects using a relatively limited collection of bricks. My opinion is make it the best you can with the bricks you have - No MOC is EVER going to be perfect, it's impossible! And not everyone has the money to buy all the bricks they need.

Certainly with my own MOCs, where I am attempting to recreate a scene be it Cloud City or the Tantive IV I sacrificed accuracy for ease of access for photography, or just practical reasons "I don't have a brick that shape, and Lego don't make one!"

Following on from that, asking for criticism of your 'not perfect' MOC is always going to be a bit of a minefield! I think the important question to ask before giving criticism is "so it's not right, but what would I do to make it right?" - i.e. constructive criticism!

Okay just my opinion, back in my box now :)

Kaitan

[Deathtino]

It really depends but as long as the finished product looks fine it doesn't matter imo (unless the intended goal was to make a near replica). For example the Death Star 10188 is an awesome model that focuses on fun proportions inherent in Legos and its a theme you'll find in other franchises like Blizzard's Starcraft/Warcraft and Games-Workshop's Warhammer series.

Personally I want my own MOC's to be somewhat playable and usable for minifigs like the Republic Frigate 7964 but thats if I ever get around to making any. I'm rediscovering this hobby and have always wanted to make the Outrider from Shadows of the Empire however it will not rival the UCS-caliber MOCs out there which isn't a bad thing if its not a goal. Currently I want to make sets that look like they're a part of the regular lineup but if I had a lot more money to spend I can see myself considering otherwise ;)

When it comes to critiquing other MOC's it should be constructive unless the creator specifies otherwise, and if they don't even want any they should make it clear in the original post. There's also factors like building experience, the intent of the MOC, etc. to take into account. Its generally courteous and respectful to start or include positives in a critique as well.

Edited April 1, 2011 by Deathtino

[MetroiD]

I've been checking out this thread regularly over the last few days, and despite the negative tone at times (let's admit it, sparks have flied, so what, we're all grown men, even if we fight over plastic models!), I must say that I find it a most interesting read. Also, I think it is one which can spur many other discussions including but not limited to:

* How do you actually define good, proper, well-founded criticism?

* Are comments in the line of "Awesome, keep up the good work!" encouraging, helpful, ego-stimulating or useless in an AFOL community?

* Should strong personal views come first when rating / commenting / criticising MOCs or should one follow the "nice", albeit stereotypical fashion of responding?

* Do builders actually want real criticism when they post their MOCs?

* Can a person's tone when they present their MOC suggest how far one could go with criticism before it ticks the other person off?

All of that, and a bunch of rather enjoyable witty responses. In a thread which started off with the sole purpose of discussing MOC accuracy. Not bad, I'd say! I'm all for proper, adult discussion and I think that each and every one of the AFOLs who've posted in this thread so far have revealed some very valuable aspect pertaining to one or all of the above questions. Keep it up, honest and straightforward discussion is the driving force of this whole place!

And sorry for being off-topic...

[lefty]

Well, as you can infer I was certainly not one of those people... we're all pretty special here. It may just be that people here, being AFOLs, are more familiar with or have a greater affinity for the sets than with the actual ships (as opposed to myself, who became more acquainted with the ships through a careful look at the sets). 7658 Y-wing and 7665 Republic Cruiser are undoubtedly the best examples of this.

By this I assume you mean people prefer the look of the set rather than the look of the "actual" ship? That's fine with me, I was just pointing out how the mindset of people seems to have changed. But it's not like I know every person's opinion on SW lego.

The spam issue is also something that really bothers me; that's one reason I moved away from sites like MOCpages and Flickr. What initially attracted me to sites like Eurobricks was the amount of MOCing talent as well as a concern for good quality. I admit I was rather disappointed by the number of regular spammers on these boards once I had spent spent some time here.

This comment wasn't directed towards me, but I definitely agree. It's disappointing how often you see someone throw together a pile of bricks with no thought put in it (or even if the builder just isn't inclined towards making ncie looking MOCs) and have pages of "great job, looks nice" when it simply doesn't. On this site or anywhere, really. People are just afraid of insulting others, I guess.

The reason people don't like my criticism is that I'm apparently being "condescending and unpleasant" and "knocking into others for failing to achieve perfection", to quote blueandwhite, though I honestly don't know why anyone would even bring up perfection on a LEGO forum. People here don't like being compared to other MOCers and held to high standards for aesthetic appeal, nor do they like others being told that they failed to include certain details in an MOC that someone else could (in a way that was both accurate and aesthetically pleasing, I might add) despite the fact that in hearing this they gain potential to improve their build. You may even go so far as to say some MOCers here aren't willing to have people have a thoughtful opinion of their MOC and thus view criticism, constructive or otherwise, as demeaning and offensive.

While I would agree that my criticism was rather brutal, I maintain that in spite of the fact that I've repeated myself on this matter at least a hundred times my stance on how much accuracy is to be expected (or whether any accuracy should be expected, for that matter) has been misrepresented in this topic as being more extremist than it actually is, partly because people here keep mashing my words (def's insistence that whenever I use the word "resemble" I actually mean "replicate" is only one instance of this) and partly because of a recent thread involving three Fellows and more instances of misinterpretation and MOC bashing than anyone was willing to tolerate, myself included.

There's any number of ways you can word criticism, an equal number can be interpreted as helpful or insulting. And given the fact that we're communicating through text on a forum, that increases the ways it can be interpreted.

Oh, and by the way, lefty, this was made only a few months ago:

The practice of making MOCs of ships is alive and well, so I'm afraid I don't see what you mean. Maybe it has something to do with the fact that superfluously detailed minifigures have been all the rage since the introduction of battle packs in '07 and the debut of THE Clone Wars in '08.

I follow lego sites and MOCs very loosely (if you can guess from my what, 30 posts in the last year and a half)and I'm just saying the number of movie based MOCs not including vignettes and dioramas seems to be decreasing. I used to frequent FBTB.net years ago and I got the impression that most MOCs were things like x-wings and snowspeeders, and looking at it now the numbers have dwindled. Obviously it's not dead yet, and maybe I'm just missing out. I always accept the possibility I'm wrong.

lefty... if you look at brickartist's own minifigure scale BARC, you can see that the handlebars have in fact been done quite correctly and done well at that. I think you may be underestimating just how much people can do with LEGO in a small scale, and in doing so you've offended countless MOCers here, myself included. Referring me to plastic bricks of an even lower quality doesn't do much to help your argument either.

I only saw his UCS model linked to in that thread, I was referencing DobbyClone's criticisms of KielDaMan's speeder. Some were helpful, some I thought were ridiculous to consider, whatever people's capabilities with greeblies. Either way, I didn't mention you or your creations, so there's no need to take it so personally.

trimmed that up a bit, hope you don't mind.

* How do you actually define good, proper, well-founded criticism?

* Are comments in the line of "Awesome, keep up the good work!" encouraging, helpful, ego-stimulating or useless in an AFOL community?

* Should strong personal views come first when rating / commenting / criticising MOCs or should one follow the "nice", albeit stereotypical fashion of responding?

* Do builders actually want real criticism when they post their MOCs?

maybe answering this will help clear things up around here, I think it's on topic. Good criticism can always lead to more accuracy, if that's what you want.

* Be honest. If something looks off to you, or you have a suggestion that could improve someone's model, voice those opinions. If they're wanted, at least (see below). Comparing someone's creation to a similar model is fine, if it's to say "try what this person did, I think it'd work well with yours".

* It depends on the situation. Not everybody posts to receive criticism. But not everybody posts to receive praise! The builder may get encouragement from it and continue building, but it's up to them to get better. Whether that's doing research on techniques or taking advice from other builders.

* You don't want to be the person's mom, but you don't want to insult them either. Neither helps, in my opinion. If it's crap, there is almost always a way to say it without using those words. If not, it's just as easy to not post.

* It can be difficult to determine if a person wants criticism or not. If criticism is posted, and the person gets offended, that may be an indicator that the person isn't in the mood for it but it also depends on the nature of that criticism.

Edited April 2, 2011 by lefty

[Fallenangel]

By this I assume you mean people prefer the look of the set rather than the look of the "actual" ship? That's fine with me, I was just pointing out how the mindset of people seems to have changed. But it's not like I know every person's opinion on SW lego.

Yes, that's exactly what I meant, and to be honest it's really not an issue with me either. If you're looking for the change in mindset though, it really is the minifigures.

This comment wasn't directed towards me, but I definitely agree. It's disappointing how often you see someone throw together a pile of bricks with no thought put in it (or even if the builder just isn't inclined towards making ncie looking MOCs) and have pages of "great job, looks nice" when it simply doesn't. On this site or anywhere, really. People are just afraid of insulting others, I guess.

Finally, someone gets it!

I only saw his UCS model linked to in that thread, I was referencing DobbyClone's criticisms of KielDaMan's speeder. Some were helpful, some I thought were ridiculous to consider, whatever people's capabilities with greeblies. Either way, I didn't mention you or your creations, so there's no need to take it so personally.

I'm glad you took the time to clarify your statement, and in defense of brickartist he knows his stuff when it comes to the BARC speeder and was just offering help to KielDaMan in the way he felt would best benefit his MOC (which, I suppose, would be for the MOC to be more accurate). They really were quite easy points that doesn't take a whole lot of complicated brick magic to fix. It's not tedious, not a chore, not nitpicking, just a couple points he felt could be improved.

[KimT]

I'm glad this topic is turning around.

At some point it felt like the world came tumbling down on fallenangel

As much as we appreciate all our members, we do not tolerate insults or flaming and I'd hate to have to ask any of you guys to stop or take a break.

It's best when we all "get along" and share our mutual hobby.

This has been a valuable lesson to many, including me.

I've always looked for the coolness of a MOC rather than the actual accuracy.

I'd still take a non-accurate but asskicking X-wing fighter MOC over a boring poorly built one that's accurate when it comes to dimensions.

That said, I still think MOCs ought to aim for being as accuarate as possible - i.e as close to studio models in scaling as our beloved brick allows.

[we need a hug-emoticon ]

[MetroiD]

maybe answering this will help clear things up around here, I think it's on topic.

*snip*

Thanks for that lefty, that's also what I was driving at. Guys who are too open / frank often tend to be perceived as being rude; and I just see that as a difference of character and opinions, same as the whole accuracy discussion we've got going on here. I understand that I might also have come across a bit rude when voicing my opinions on fallenangel's X-Wing but I actually think he didn't take it too hard and instead focused on continuing his work in order to give us a complete MOC, which was my main criticism anyway.

It's not tedious, not a chore, not nitpicking, just a couple points he felt could be improved.

I don't think it was the fact that anyone was nitpicking mate, it was perhaps rather the tone - but, once again, as has been pointed out on multiple occasions recently - you can't judge a person by their 'tone' on the Internet, so the best solution is for all of us to take everything with a pinch of salt. I'm not taking sides here, merely observing and trying to draw valid conclusions for the entire community, and I think the above applies to us all

It's best when we all "get along" and share our mutual hobby.

Amen to that. But we really need that hug emoticon. Perhaps that care bear connection wouldn't be a bad thing to consider?

[Capn Frank]

With MOCing in general, I like to be accurate as possible maintaining an acceptable degree of stability.

If a MOC is as accurate as possible with Lego, but falls apart very easily, I consider it to be a poor MOC.

I also am not going to make a special bricklink purchase for every little MOC I work on so that I can be as accurate as possible. Portions of my MOCs will therefore not use the best pieces or have the entire MOC in the correct color. I am very open to comments & critism. Others may provide suggestions that I have not thought of where I have the bricks suggested.

[simonjedi]

Out of interest what would people describe as constructive criticism and where does it cross the line into spergy nitpicking?

[BrickArtist]

Out of interest what would people describe as constructive criticism and where does it cross the line into spergy nitpicking?

Nitpicking is when your just looking for flaws within a model so that you can write that there is a flaw. Constructive criticism is when your giving advice for the MOCer to improve their design. If nobody criticizes a bad model, then all comments would be pointless. You don't really know peoples opinions. For example, if Mr. Man posted his X-wing in all seriousness, and somebody say "AWESOME Work!!!", then how can the administer of that comment leave something meaningful on a good X-wing?

[Mr Man]

and somebody say "AWESOME Work!!!"

Funny you should say that, I was just looking through MOC pages looking for something, where I came across an X-wing MOC a lot worse than mine (still looking for the link), and the comments must have been from guys in their class, as they where all commenting as if it was the greatest thing in the world.

As for criticism vs nitpicking I think it is the method of delivery that makes the difference (but it can be hard to tell on the Internet ).

[Aeroeza]

As for criticism vs nitpicking I think it is the method of delivery that makes the difference (but it can be hard to tell on the Internet ).

It seems to me this SW forum is having to sincerely reflect on its methodology of critique and 'established rules of the game'. Its good to see this is being taken seriously by members given that the power of the written word can only be further complicated by the anonymity of the net. Criticism needs to be contextualized in order for it to really have any point and this discipline in threads of late hasn't always been employed effectively.

Having an open debate on the concept of 'accuracy' is a refreshing reminder of just how subjective the word is for people. Myself? I like attention to detail and accuracy but also enjoy abstract forms which successfully suggest their subject matter. I'm not about to confuse the two approaches when considering the merits of a particular MOC.

After all there's no point walking into an art gallery and criticizing a Van Gogh because it isn't enough like your favorite Hieronymous Bosh....

[Capn Frank]

Out of interest what would people describe as constructive criticism and where does it cross the line into spergy nitpicking?

My opinion of constructive criticism is to provide the creator with comments and suggestions to improve their MOC in a respectable manner. If I cannot find anything I like about the MOC, I won't reply in the topic because it'll be filled with criticism.

My opinion of nitpicking is to provide the creator with nothing but a lot of criticism in a demeaning manner.

Criticism is everything in between.

[Bricker]

I care squat about accuracy... accually not really Im mostly thinking about the new Geonosian Starfighter while Im wrting this. I cant stand that huge hole in the center no matter how accurate it is so... I guess I cant really blame lego for accuracy so... WHY LUCASFILM WHY! Okay Im done now back to topic, so yeah it sort of depends. I guess accuracy is good on beutiful ships and speeders and such like the scout troopers speeder (Why cant they get it right! Its so obvious that all you need is a Slizer/ Throw bots head peice without the printing in brown to make the front right!) but on other stuff like the geonosian star fighter accuracy should be bent a little like with the last geonosian fighter and pretend like LEGO had no idea about it... I guess LucasFilm got on LEGO's case about it and made them do another one . So really if the ship thing or speeder looks good than accuracy would be nice but overall it really just depends.

[cavegod]

Hmmmmm,

Accuracy it all depends on the scale the MOC is built in, when i build a MOC i first decide on the Scale to build it in to get all the details in the Moc i want it to have.

Sometimes Minifig scale and other times larger scale theres no method it's just what looks best in my eyes.

A few examples:-

AT-AT, i built it big as it is big and i had never seen a very good looking AT-AT in a smaller scale also though when on display it gives the same effect as the models in the movie.

My Tie fighters, are all built to the same scale as the official sets just for continuity reasons plus they are not that big if built in minifig scale.

Slave-1, this i built in a smaller scale as i have yet to find a way to build the cockpit glass in a larger convincing scale.

Sandcrawler, i was thinking of building one but again legos version was terrible and all the other sand crawlers i have seen where big, then i saw MB WIP and that settled it minifig scale it was.

Also when posting my MOC's for veiwing by others on here i am expecting criticism as most of the time i get blinded by the MOC and cannot see the flaws in it's design, take my recent RAS i thought it looked fine until Brickdoctor said that the sides were not sloped steeply enough i didn't agree but upon looking at it again the flaw stood out like a sore thumb and eventually i had to rebuild it correctly. It's also nice to get the well done comments aswell but the criticism is what makes the next MOC better than the last.

[BrickArtist]

Ok, here's what I've come up with. After reading over some comment threads I noticed a couple things. Vaguetopics, the designer doesn't point out the adaptations that he made to model that he likes personally. If the designer hasn't stated his intentions with the model, then how can roll their eyes at criticism? By stating your intentions within the topic everything should be fine.

Another thing is the administration of criticism. I'll admit I may have been somewhat brash when giving out mine. Remember that everybody has the things that they like to see in MOCs. Some might seek dimensional/detail perfection, and state that they like the model better if it were that way. Some might just say that they'd like a different color scheme. If you're the designer then it's always up to you. But things would go a lot smoother if you didn't make a sassy comment back because you don't like that they don't like your model.

And lastly, little clarity when posting. It's the internet, you can't portray tone, or mood. Using emoticons to the best of our ability could help. Also if your not sure what they meant, ask for clarification before jumping to conclusions.