Rendezvous With Geisel

Digital Dreams  is a veteran builder from the UK who has flown largely under the radar (at least my radar), unrecognized by the warm and embracing communitay, but the big blog’s loss is definitely our gain here at the Manifesto.  For today’s spotlight offering we’re going to examine a Digital gem from 2014.  Recently I was feeling inexplicably and inexcusably maudlin for a simpler time in my misspent youth and I started googling images of the main library at the University of San Diego, nicknamed “The Spaceship”.  No, I didn’t quite have the grades or motivation to actually attend the well regarded school but I dated someone who did and I’d meet her for lunch every Thursday between her rigorous class schedule.  Our designated rendezvous point was always the magnificently futuristic Geisel library, of Dr. Seuss fame.  The place made me feel like I’d stepped onto the set of Logan’s Run or Conquest of the Planet of the Apes, indeed as if I’d stepped into the dystopian future.  Some people have their spirits moved by cathedrals or skyscrapers but for me it was Brutalism, always Brutalism and in sunny San Diego the pickings were pretty slim in when it came to that architectural style.   When you apply that style to a library, it really doesn’t get much better for me.  I’ve been to the famous main branch of the New York public library and it can’t hold a candle to the Geisel, in part because you can’t actually walk the stacks, the books are all inaccessible in a downstairs vault and you have to wait in a lobby for your selected tomes to be brought to you.

I’d always make it a point to arrive a little early and enjoy a bit o’ the halfling’s leaf before wandering around the building and grounds.  As I strolled I would imagine all sorts of  bizarre and unlikely scenarios, some of which would turn up in my pitiful attempts at writing science fiction.  I wasn’t into Lego at that point but if I had been I would no doubt have tried at least a micro-scale version of the imposing edifice.   So you can imagine my delight when my google search revealed that not only was there a Lego version of the building out there, but it was a spectacular, perhaps definitive example of my beloved library.

15906537846_7ecb9108d4_o

Strangely it was actually this next photo of the footbridge that I encountered first and it might as well have been a time machine because it immediately transported me back to 1987, when I rocked an epic mullet and drove my beloved ’79 RX-7.  I always appreciate it when town builders who favor large structures take the time and care to include at least a little of the surrounding grounds.  It’s fine to show a car or a spaceship out of context, but buildings really suffer from that treatment.  Everything is where it should be at the digital Geisel, the bike racks the staircase entry the planters, it’s all there in meticulous, sometimes understated detail.  This was the exact lunchtime rendezvous point, right where the red-shirted minifig is standing. You can hear the distant echoes of this concrete palace in my Logan’s Run diorama from a few years ago.  It’s not too often that I find such a personal connection with a model, much less a digital one, so hopefully you’ll excuse my nostalgic musings.

The only way to really appreciate the model is to check it out at MOCpages, where Digital Dreams has made the most of the otherwise dodgy site’s one great advantage: story telling.  You’ll find, among other things, a much better backstory on both the building and the model than I could hope to provide here, and more importantly you’ll see the fully detailed interiors, comparison shots galore and schematics.  He’s also included a few thoughts on the building process which are a pretty insightful look into the daunting process of creating the digital Geisel.  I’m pretty sure there are larger and more intricate digital models out there but at 117000 pieces this one has got to be towards the top of the list.  You’ll also find some cool animated GIFs as well.  The presentation amplifies the model in the best possible way.

If you have a nagging feeling you’ve seen the Geisel before, it was used in the frequently overrated but popular film Inception, where it co-starred as an evil arctic base.  for my money it was the best part of the movie.  Was it a dream?…Was it real?…I couldn’t tell you constant reader because I feel asleep 3/4 of the way through.  Such a deep film…so very deep. Everyone remembers the hallway fight but I submit that the only thing worth remembering were the brief seconds my beloved library graced the screen.  Inception…the film that found a way to make dreams boring.

XBlJR77.jpg

If you dig the Geisel you should check out the rest of Digital Dream’s photostream, he’s got some crazy cool shit to get lost in.

33 thoughts on “Rendezvous With Geisel

  1. We Brits are much better served for quality Brutalism – so long as we stop knocking it down. This library is a fantastic building and I was familiar with it mostly because I’m familiar with Digital Dreams’ work. There’s a builder who really should get his day in the sun. Thanks for sharing the way this building connects with you so very personally.

    Like

    1. Cheers Nick, it is a shame to see the almost complete rejection of Brutalism but I keep hoping that like all styles, it’s time will come again. I’m not really digging the Frank Gehry style postmodernist deconstrutivism. Not enough concrete, not enough majesty. I saw your comment on the Geisel model on MOCpages, you were definitely on the bandwagon long before I was. Glad you like the personal interest angle, I wasn’t sure if it would come off as excessively nostalgic and unrelatable. I’m thinking about writing an Omnibus post on Brutalism and Lego, if you can think of any examples, please let me know.

      Like

      1. Brutalism will have it’s day. Already dozens of the best examples are being Listed (protected) in the UK and we’re realising that we’re making the same mistake as we did early in the 20th Century when we couldn’t knock down those Gothic Revival ‘monstrosities’ fast enough. Now we fully appreciate the buildings of the 1860s, and before it’s too late we’ll appreciate the 1960s.

        Brutalism in Lego is surprisingly rare – I hope to add to the thin catalogue myself soon but in the meantime there’s this http://www.moc-pages.com/moc.php/388233

        Like

      2. Thanks for the link Nick, I missed that one when it was originally posted.

        The only example I could think of off the top of my head was Jason Allemann’s UW Mathematics and Computer Building.
        UW Mathematics and Computer Building

        It’s good to know the UK will preserve it’s best examples, I read somewhere that Russia is doing the opposite and many of their Brutalist structures are either decaying or have been demolished.

        Liked by 1 person

  2. Brutalism for the goddamn win. Architecture was so very much on the right path, now it’s just very rare glimpses into pushing structure to the limits. Never understood why they called the Geisel “the Spaceship”, I always figured it was a landing pad for the Mormon temple if anything.

    Love Digital’s stuff and can safely say that he is one of the main reasons I would allow digital in any contest. Looking through his latest creation a week or two ago, which is ironically called “The Spaceship” but it’s a giant shopping mall, he not only shows all the outwardly visible details but also the invisible structure. And they are magnificently simple and elegant solutions. Granted, all rely on the full extent of clutch power without gravity; however, just seeing a deconstructed connection work gets my own imagination working on improving and bolstering it to be a real plastic object. And that is where builders like Digital shine. I’m not sure at what point digital Lego received its sour reputation, but when I see those in the realm posting otherwise impossible constructs, physical and financial, I have to respect it for the sole reason of presenting the slightest bit of possibility. Even if it is just in a simplified connection hidden from normal view relying on the pure, un-corrupted physics of the Lego itself.

    Great spotlight, and definitely a loss for the comminitay for no recognition or love of digital.

    C’mon, Joseph Gordon-Levitt kicking ass in the hallway was stellar. However, if they were dreams, why couldn’t they have more imagination. I liked the flick but I do see your point.

    Like

    1. I think allowing digital builds into contests is kind of a double edged sword. Correct me if I’m wrong on anything I state here. I have dabbled very lightly in LDD and it was many years ago. The first issue is not taking into account any real physics. The second is the whole unlimited parts in any color issue. I think there is also the issue that very few are good at producing high quality rendering. Most of them make the space scenes from 1984’s The Last Starfighter look like a modern rendering marvel. They are like all those awesome MOCs that never had a proper photo session that are floating around MOCpages and Flickr. Of course, allowing them into a contest opens the doors for builders without the money or space or commitment to sorting bricks to own hundreds of thousands of LEGO’s to really open up their imaginations and build whatever they like, in whatever color they like, in any shape that they can configure the blocks. It allows for some pretty awesome builds. But I generally think not allowing them is the more right decision. It can be argued though.

      Not thinking about contests at all though, some builders make some pretty remarkable things with the digital block, like the Library highlighted here. The size and amount of details is amazing. I didn’t know Inception used it for the dream-inside-a-dream-inside-a-dream-inside-a-dream blowing things up sequence. I’m admittedly a Nolan fan-boy, but this movie is kind of a snoozer.

      Like

      1. Digital or real brick, there is some retina burning shit out there.

        I’ve run contests where I have allowed digital with limitations. Namely in the real brick. If it don’t exist in a specific color, it ain’t allowed. There are other handicaps for digital builders that those in the real plastic take for granted. We can make “illegal” connections (god, I hate that damn term) and we have the benefit/hindrance of gravity. But they MUST deal with the purity of the brick, zero variance. Admirable, but screwy. Plus we can add stickers, Lego or other, and butcher paper. 😉 Both have pros and cons, but the intensity of creativity is a complete wash of equal proportions. And not allowing contestants like Matt Bace into any contest because he doesn’t have actual bricks is a goddamn travesty in my opinion. And as VAk pointed out below, builders like Misa do more with the Enterprise than I have seen in real life. cough-Melby-cough.

        I don’t consider it a double-edged sword at all, in fact the only issue is usually with the other contestants whining about THEM having unlimited pieces. To which the only reply is so-the-fuck-what? If anyone had the option, they would purchase all the real Lego pieces they would need. Can’t blame THEM for one’s own inadequacies or pathetic bank account. Can’t ever fault them for having more brains than me to save money for important items in life like whisky instead of tiny bits of plastic. I find it actually upsetting and bigoted to deny them into contests, it ends up being divisive and illogically retarding. I think we all have much to learn from the digital designers.

        Additionally, quantity is not quality. Unlimited part counts does not mean a better build. They can do shit work in digital just as we can with real bricks no matter how many of them either of us have. Can’t shine shit, no matter how big it is.

        And no dissing The Last Starfighter, we all have to defend the Frontier against Xur and the Ko-Dan Armada.

        Like

      2. I”m actually right there with you Jake, whenever I run a contest or a challenge I’m always conflicted about whether or not to include digital offerings. On the one hand you want to be inclusive and digital builders are capable of some truly spectacular results that certainly elevate the competition….but on the other hand I think it’s an unfair fight when, as you said, every part in every color is readily available and it constitutes a HUGE advantage over another competitor with even a largish collection of brick. I strive to make the playing field as even as possible and while I know there will always be an imbalance in collection size between entrants, it seems like it’s easier to cheat with the digital format and my own lack of familiarity with the product makes it much tougher to judge.

        As for Nolan, on the whole I’m a big fan of his work and I haven’t missed any of his films, but Inception just fell flat for me. And although it’s irrational to dislike a movie because of it’s most ardent fans, I got really sick and tired of hearing how complex that movie was. To me the narrative crutch of “its it real, is it a dream” is bullshit and lazy writing. I really enjoyed Memento, Interstellar and Insomnia…but enough with the spinning top already it’s annoying and it’s not that deep.

        Like

    2. Yeah I never got the Spaceship nickname either, I always thought of it as “the overwatch”. Not sure if I can picture it as a landing pad for a Mormon temple, maybe some kind of fucked up post nuke synagogue.

      I saw that shopping mall, what a trip that thing is…I think there is a healthy dose of madness there walking hand in hand with the genius. He really manages to create his own immersive brightly colored worlds. I’d love to see an animation in that style. To be honest I never once considered the gravitic reality or unreality of the build, I get too caught up in the esthetics to worry about whether or not it would work in real life. I think I consider them two separate endeavors that have a little overlap like a venn diagram.

      The hallway scene was okay, but just okay…I’m not a huge fan of super choreographed violence, I like it dirtier than bullet ballet. I do git JGL though, he was great in Looper.

      Like

    3. I’m with rowntRee. Contests with physical bricks are inherently unfair because of collection/income inequalities. The only way to really be fair is to make it digital only. But no one would go for that because they like physical bricks more because-Hey!-those have their advantages too. Also saying that digital builders have an “advantage” when everyone is able and welcome to use digital is a tad ridiculous. I don’t have access to all the physical bricks Tyler Clites has! And unlike not having a free program installed on my computer, there’s nothing I can do about that! Why can’t judges just take into account the limitations of both mediums? I’ve never been wow’d by a digital build just because it was built entirely in Fabuland brown. There’s gotta be more to it than that.

      Like

      1. We can argue about collection size and it’s unfairness all day long. I think having a larger collection can actually create some disadvantages, but let’s talk about what is my biggest hangup with digital, physics. I’m an engineer so making something functional is as important, or more important, than making something cool. I’m not sure a lot of the cool digital builds I see would hold up against a little thing we call gravity, let alone a fun swoosh. I’m not entirely convinced the library highlighted in this post wouldn’t collapse or significantly bend. If we are just trying to make stuff that looks good on a screen then digital is great, but the engineering side of making it actually work and making tradeoffs in coolness to make something more stable is an integral part of LEGO building in my opinion. Maybe they’ll add physics to LDD at some point. That’d be cool.

        Like

      2. I think we all have that engineering bug inherent in all of us to some extent. I’ve found some of the greatest experiences in my own building have been the whole notion of cantilevering a damn brick. And then doing it out two feet without any deflection! The physics involved alters everything I build before I even know it. I think what digital does in that respect is not only negate much of it but by doing so it allows more freedom to experiment while within the constraints of the pure brick. Misa’s Enterprise could never exist in gravity, but then neither could the actual Enterprise.

        As far as collection size, I don’t see an advantage if the builder doesn’t have the imagination to use less. Throwing more on a giant turd won’t make it shine, it’ll just make it a bigger turd. I’m sure there was a fine, possibly white, example of this at BW this year, but I wouldn’t presume.

        LDD “reality” button would be entertaining at least. XD

        Like

      3. JJ Abrams’ Enterprise not only holds up to gravity, it can hold up under the pressure of the ocean deeps… just saying. And the Millennium Falcon can scape across the ground and through trees with no damage.

        Like

      4. In a just and sane world, JJ Abrams would be driven from the land with torches and pitchforks, forbidden to ever direct again. I honestly think he hates Star Trek and did his best to wreck the franchise.

        Like

  3. An architectural icon if I ever saw one. Like the Space Needle in Seattle, and that odd building at LAX that looks like a four legged star fish.

    Digital Dreams really nailed this beast! Those interior shots (especially that one with the book shelves) are simply over the top. The effort, focus, and time required to complete the entire effort… Really, I find the entire effort to be quite humbling. I wonder what the total time requirement was?

    Good pick for spotlight… except for the part where exploit the MOC as an excuse to subject us to you reminiscing about a time long past… when the world was warmer, and you still had game… Although, I will publically vouch for the fact that you are guilty of mulletry in the 3rd degree sir! A mullet, and a white sports coat… A simpler time…

    “Before the dark times… before the Empire.”

    Like

    1. Humbling is the right word for it. You should check out his MOCpages, I’m sure he mentions the time requirement, his presentation is pretty exhaustive without being exhausting.

      Better a mullet than that hideous Skip Stephenson haircut you refused to let go of.

      It was indeed a “simpler time”.

      Like

  4. Man, what a building, and a fantastic model to boot! I love everything about both the actual place and the model, and I can definitely see how one could feel transported into the future if you were actually there. Also, Brutalism. Such a unique and interesting architectural philosophy, and it’s rare to see it done so well in the Lego medium. Thanks for the showcase.

    Also, pay no heed to Rutherford’s qualms about reminiscing. After all, what the point of making good memories if we can’t relive them? Or…talk about them on an online blog, I suppose 🙂

    Like

    1. Cheers Werewolff, I’m glad my nostalgic ramblings didn’t put you off the article or more importantly the model. And not to worry, I pay no heed to any of Rutherford’s moronic ramblings. I treat him like a well meaning mental patient, or a developmentally disabled person. He’s just jealous that he didn’t have the stones to rock a mullet, he’s got no room to throw down on the fashion either, considering he rocked a bowl-cut, 5 different colored versions of the same polo shirt, sad jeans and drab running shoes ever day of his pathetic, no girlfriend having existence. Never pay heed to Rutherford, he’s not heed-worthy.

      Like

      1. Look what I found in one of our old yearbooks! Its a picture of you and all your be-mulleted buddies! I guess you guys are standing in line for tickets to see Ratt or was it Twisted Sister?

        Ah… good times.

        Like

      2. If memory serves I’m pretty sure it was Styper, you know I could never get enough of their heady mix of Jesus, bumblebee stripes and tasty licks.

        Like

  5. To me, Digital Dreams is just as much a titan of the hobby as Siercon and Coral. Too bad his work has not seen the light of day, but only the drippings that leak into the cavern that is MOCpages… I hadn’t browsed this work before, so thank you for bringing it to my attention. Quite a remarkable structure, and good on him to put it in a complete environment. It deserves that much. I am familiar with intense and detailed LDD working, but the extent of his projects is rivalled by few. Matt Bace made similar titanic creations and Misa Nikolic http://www.moc-pages.com/home.php/60025 , who continues to perfect the ultimate minifig-scale LDD Starship Enterprise.

    I’m really hoping to explore digital building a bit with an article before the end of the Manifesto’s contest. It’s something that needs to get some attention, and I know I am a minority here with quite a bit of experience.

    From my lesser experience in other matters, dates where the locale is more memorable than the company were always still worth it. It’s only when the food AND the conversation are terrible that I wish I could forget everything.

    Like

    1. Thanks for the heads-up VA, I’d missed Misa’s Enterprise somehow. What an incredible piece of work. Shows the worth of LDD if we can see stuff like this that would take the sort of collection of real bricks that very few people can have.

      Like

    2. It’s always gratifying to turn someone on to a new builder, especially one who toils in relative obscurity on Flickr. I was actually happy to read that so many people here in the comments were aware of his models. I’m sure some of it is the prejudice many people have against CAD models, but I bet a pick up on TBB would put him on the map. Like Nick I wasn’t ware of Misa Nikolic’s enterprise project and I appreciate you pointing me in that direction. As for Matt Bace, I keep coming across references to him having a pseudonym which seems really weird but not unheard of. I really wish he hadn’t deleted all of his models before he left.

      I hope you find the time for that article, I’m woefully ignorant on the topic but since I started blogging I’ve really developed a taste for the topic. Go for it!

      The right setting can indeed help compensate for lousy company, but for this particular trip down memory lane it was a great combination. I hear you though, you get the wrong place and the wrong person and you’re well and truly screwed.

      Like

    3. “I’m really hoping to explore digital building a bit with an article before the end of the Manifesto’s contest. ”

      Hope is not a method.

      Commit and execute man! It’s a perfect topic for discussion, and as you said, you might have some unique insights! I think our resident Bionical guy has provided us all with an excellent example. By selecting images and words with care, he has basically compelled many of us to look at things we would not choose to look at on our own, and indeed, to think about them more seriously than we would have done otherwise.

      You got this! Go for it man!
      Attack!

      Like

  6. Good job guys, we scared another potential customer away with our ranting, I don’t know how this post devolved into debating the merits of digital building and contests but it always seems to when the topic comes up. Maybe some day we’ll get to the point where we just talk about the build, but I doubt it. I don’t want to stifle any sort of discourse here, of course, and I certainly have a strong opinion on the topic but it bummed me out that the builder stayed away from the converstation.

    So here’s what Digital Dreams had to say about the post. From Flickr.

    “Thanks for the blog Keith. I’ve been contacted over the years in relation to both my SFU and Geisel models by a few staffers and students with kind words to offer. SFU even blogged it on their own site. Having never been in a position to visit these amazing buildings myself it’s always particularly welcoming to receive such praise from those with such a personal connection to those buildings, as it is to receive it from a veteran LEGO builder with a kindred interest in futurist-brutalist architecture. It was a lot of fun to build Geisel, and it probably won’t come as any surprise to you that I have often considered doing my own Logan’s Run build too.

    I was going to respond in greater length on the blog but I’m not in great health and I see it already descending into a digital debate which there’s no point getting involved in. Ironically it was also you that blogged my LEGOBLASTER to TBB, an event probably unlikely to ever be repeated given their stance on the subject, so thanks for that too 🙂

    I’m sure if my models were real-brick they would have achieved more attention. The real-brick stuff I built as a kid was small. I’m doing it digitally now because it’s the only way I’ll ever get to build these large and very cool models. I cannot help but wonder what will happen when the day comes that the renders are so good that you cannot tell the difference. See Bladerunner. There will probably be “experts” or AI running around trying to determine the real models from the digital ones.”

    Like

  7. Digital and non-digital Lego.

    Digital and plastic are different mediums. I offer this assertion up front, and I go so far as to say that this assertion is beyond rational debate. But… don’t freak. All I am saying right now, is that digital building and plastic building are NOT the same thing… and while they are different, they are also… both Lego.

    A differences in medium matters. And refusing to equate them for purposes of comparison does not subordinate one to the other. It’ only recognizes that they are different. In that they are obviously different, I consider comparing the two against one another to be an exercise of dubious merit.

    Oddly, it does seem to be one of those polarizing issues in the hobby. Lots of emotion in the discussion, lots of passionate advocacy on both sides.

    Even that phrase “both sides” reinforces this confrontational paradigm. The discussion is usually couched in broad assumptions that rapidly preclude actual discussion. (not so much right here on El Manifesto, but out in the world… people start splashing acid pretty quickly).

    I have seen many people make the pitch that digital Lego shouldn’t “count as Lego”. I think that’s crap. It is as much Lego as is train, mindstorms, or Duplo. Again the question is one of taxonomy… it’s just a category of Lego. Radically different from other categories (so different in fact… that it becomes it’s own category… see, that’s how it works!) but it is Lego none the less. It can be used to explore possibilities for plastic building… or as an end in itself. It can be executed in a very conservative manner (restricted to parts/colors as they exists in plastic only) or liberalized (allowing for color changes, custom graphics, an even part modification). But this ability to modify parts is not unique to the digital medium. It’s possible in plastic as well. So while I despise modding in any form, I think it is inappropriate to site digital modding as a factor that separates digital Lego from plastic Lego.

    I suppose the single greatest difference between digital and physical builds is the physics. All digital stuff is a zero gravity deal. It allows the builder to depict forms that could never hold in gravity without additional physical supports. Ok. That’s really beyond dispute.

    But for my part, I fully acknowledge digital builds as an important and legitimate part of the hobby.

    That is not to say I would allow them in a contest, challenge, competition, or other such event where they would be compared to physical builds. To me, “comparison” is a separate topic from “legitimacy”. And “comparison” is a necessary component of any competitive effort.

    When running a competitive event, where comparison is an integral part of the exercise, I strive to homogenize the participants… not as much as possible… but certainly quite a bit. I want to compare apples to apples… not apples to peppers. I like both… and you can compare a rotten apple to a not rotten pepper and say… the pepper is better! But I want to compare good apples to good apples… and then select a “best apple from amongst this lot”

    Arguments about unfair advantages are in my opinion irrelevant. The size of your inventory does not interest me. Your poverty, the tornado that destroyed your Legoatory, the fire, the flood, whatever. It’s not part of the MOC. I’m not interested in establishing total socioeconomic equality before firing off the starting pistol. Wealthy people and digital builders DO have substantial “advantages” in terms of potential inventory… but I don’t care. I’m not pursuing social justice, total equality, or liberty and justice for all. I ONLY care about what the MOC looks like, and the medium (as it relates to comparison).

    If equality is your thing… present a restrictive inventory list or maximum part count at the beginning of your competition. Pick a good round number for the part count, like… 102 (Just by way of a random example). There. Inventory advantage eliminated. And… if my thinking were consistent, these external constraints would appeal to me even more because your entrants would be even MORE homogenized! And… if you want to eliminate even MORE random factors, prescribe the exact parts. Like when there are contests at fests for best “alternate models” based on boxed kits. That is the absolute maximum homogenization… All builders using the same parts, the same tiny tables, building under the same conditions and under the same time limitations… very scientific! But really… the MOCs usually don’t look that cool… and that’s where I back off on the whole homogenizing thing. Yes… you built a “mec” out of the log cabin kit… but the mec looks like bloody hell! It might be good science… but I want to see cool MOCs as well…

    But digital compared to physical? The natures of the to exercises are very very different. Maybe no in how most of us observe the final product. Both produce 2 dimensional color images on our computer screens. Indeed, with some of the programs out there now… the computer built stuff “looks” more and more like plastic brick all the time (it is amazing to me… and I dig it!). So the end result as far as we view it… is similar and getting more so all the time. But the build skills, the aptitudes, the process… very dissimilar. To me, it seems like comparing a mosaic to a model. On the computer… both are 2 dimensional images. But in the deed? Two different exercises.

    What is important to remember here though, is that I am only rattling on about my own assumptions. Just because these assumptions guide my own execution of competitive events does not mean that doing otherwise is some how wrong. It only means that I would regard it as an odd competition between inherently different achievements. I have heard ardent sports fans compare a specific baseball player to a specific football player and argue in earnest, abut which was the better all around athlete. And, intuitively, I am comfortable with the assertion that one of any two athletes will in fact be the better overall athlete… but the comparison as an exercise itself? Usually fruitless. Usually fraught with biases about which “sport” is better. Usually just a bucket beer soaked rhetoric and lousy hyperbola.

    I don’t want to see a Olympic sprinter compete against the winner of the state science fare and the top paid actor in Hollywood in some odd mash-up-atholon. And for the same reason, I don’t want to try to compare an excellent train layout to a brilliant robot to a masterful digital rendering.

    Like

  8. While rowntRee was the first to mention digital entries into contests, I think I was the commenter who really sidetracked the conversation away from the coolness of the model. I’ll put on the hat of shame here. Sorry Digital Dreams.

    Like

    1. Hey, no worries. I actually understand the general resentments towards digital LEGO in the community. I even hate a lot of the digital stuff myself, especially the crap quality LDD screenshots (that could have easily been passed through the ldd-2-povray converter), and the people who blatantly abuse physics. But sometimes it’s a grey area; knowing just how far one can push a strenuous cantilever is not always possible unless you real-brick it. Talking of which, Keith, you seem to be a man with access to a lot of bricks, and a passionate interest in this building, so how about you build it and see just how well those cantilevers work out… 😉

      Like

      1. Welcome to the Manifesto, Digital! I want to apologize for sending the discussion into the digital cul-de-sac, I just know it to be a sore point for builders for some inexplicable reason, contests especially. It always seemed a lame excuse to not allow it, and an even lamer excuse not to blog and celebrate it. My intent was not to drive anyone, especially you, away, nor was it to debate something I too find ultimately pointless. I just find any aversion towards digital builds lacks validity, unless of course it sucks. Talent and skill shine no matter what the media.

        I find your distaste of those who “blatantly abuse physics” very comforting. Granted, seeing that you mostly build structures, I assume that you proceed from an actual physical standpoint, subconscious or intentional. Either way, we are the ones that benefit when we see the care taken for those considerations that we as real-brick builders take for granted but must also deal with.

        Again, welcome! And sorry, mainly for welcoming you to a blog about your build while there is a picture of Stryper in the comments. XD

        Like

      2. I’d also like to say that it gets better in here; however, there is also a picture of Skip Stevenson. Sooooo…

        Cantilevers of brick!!!

        Like

      3. With the Inception reference being made right out of the gate, the comments delving down the path of a conversation within the conversation was inevitable.

        What has to be appreciated here is building the different levels and hidden interiors, especially in digital. I know there are ways to layer, make transparent, etc., but some of these digital building programs are cumbersome to do that. I’ve mainly used LDD, and it is mega painful.

        In the end, “cool is cool”. If a digital render of a build is frickin’ awesome looking, then it will be seen and appreciated.

        Like

      4. it’s really tempting, with the instructions right there to take all the tedious development and guesswork out of the equation…but I have the feeling I’d need a bigger table.

        As Matt said, let me extend a warm welcome to this shabby blog and I sincerely hope you stick around and join in the conversation as the mood strikes you. Hopefully you’re on the mend and feeling better. If you ever get the urge to write an article about your building process or your thoughts on any aspect of the hobby, please feel free to do so. I forgot that I blogged your ghettoblaster back in the day, when you were operating under the name cosmicxanadu, I had a really hard time tracking it down. Sorry the post was so lack-luster, but I was more into brevity back then and keeping things moving. I also forgot how incredible the interior of that model is too. I do remember getting criticized for posting LDD models back then but I was in full-on rebel mode and I just didn’t care (that’s part of the reason I don’t blog there anymore). Anyhow, I love the Geisel and I assure you this won’t be your last blogging on the Manifesto. Cheers and stick around!

        Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s