 | | | | | |
I've heard many builders incorporate the SNOT method into their creations.
As far as I can tell this means that the Lego piece is turned on its side or
upside down. Am I missing something because this does not seem impressive to
me at all. What's the big deal?
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.technic, Todd A. Schroeder writes:
> I've heard many builders incorporate the SNOT method into their creations.
> As far as I can tell this means that the Lego piece is turned on its side or
> upside down. Am I missing something because this does not seem impressive to
> me at all. What's the big deal?
Well in using a piece on its side, or upside down, one can achieve new
geometry, new shapes, new orientations etc. I guess the possibilities are
endless.
Too bad I have little or no experience using SNOT-techniques.
-Bryan
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
> Well in using a piece on its side, or upside down, one can achieve new
> geometry, new shapes, new orientations etc. I guess the possibilities are
> endless.
>
> Too bad I have little or no experience using SNOT-techniques.
>
> -Bryan
Oh really? What about the plane you did for last year's town comp with the
upside down windows? (sure nobody else could see it, but the SNOT was
there). I'm sure it'll simple happen when the need arises (wait till you try
to build more stuff with moving features (like your opening plane), and
you'll find that's the only way to cram it in). Of course, most of us won't
ever get anywhere near as good at is as say Bram, or Muffin Head Sandlin
(Bram... Muffin... I'm sure there's a terrible pun in there somewhere). I
wish I could absorb some of Muffin Head's 'greebliness' through osmosis.
Mark W.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.technic, Todd A. Schroeder writes:
> I've heard many builders incorporate the SNOT method into their creations.
> As far as I can tell this means that the Lego piece is turned on its side or
> upside down. Am I missing something because this does not seem impressive to
> me at all. What's the big deal?
It's not a big deal at all for Technic builders, who are very familiar with
building on all aspects and directions. However, for Town and Train
builders, this is a major departure from the way Trains have normally been
done. Building on side allows for an increase in detail expression.
Calum
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Calum Tsang writes:
> It's not a big deal at all for Technic builders, who are very
> familiar with building on all aspects and directions.
> However, for Town and Train builders, this is a major
> departure from the way Trains have normally been done.
> Building on side allows for an increase in detail expression.
SNOT techniques in non-Technic building are generally quite different
from Technic construction because the goals are different. The goal in
non-Technic design is to fill in gaps as well as possible while adding
lots of detail, and while using parts in a different manner than they
are normally used. In Technic building, parts used on their sides or
upside down to not generally fill the same function...they either
outline a shape or orient another mechanical element in the right
direction.
--Bram
Bram Lambrecht
bram@cwru.edu
www.bldesign.org
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
On Tue, 5 Mar 2002 20:36:44 GMT, "Todd" <ToddASchroeder@aol.com>
wrote:
> I've heard many builders incorporate the SNOT method into their creations.
> As far as I can tell this means that the Lego piece is turned on its side or
> upside down. Am I missing something because this does not seem impressive to
> me at all. What's the big deal?
Here's a pretty good page about SNOT by Holger Matthews (HoMo):
http://www.home.fh-karlsruhe.de/~maho0013/bricks/snot.htm
It's in German but Babelfish can make understandable English out of it
(at least to me who knows a tad of German):
http://babelfish.altavista.com/
/Tobbe
http://www.arnesson.nu/lotek/
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.technic, Tobbe Arnesson writes:
> Here's a pretty good page about SNOT by Holger Matthews (HoMo):
<snip>
Uh, that's "HoMa". He might not appreciate "HoMo", if you know what I mean.
;-)
TJ
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
On Thu, 7 Mar 2002 13:20:03 GMT, "Thomas Avery"
<thomas.avery@intec-hou.com> wrote:
> In lugnet.technic, Tobbe Arnesson writes:
> > Here's a pretty good page about SNOT by Holger Matthews (HoMo):
> <snip>
>
> Uh, that's "HoMa". He might not appreciate "HoMo", if you know what I mean.
Uhm, sorry HoMa was a quick post during lunch .)
/Tobbe
http://www.arnesson.nu/lotek/
| | | | | | |
