Redisplay Messages: Compact | Brief | All | Full Show Messages: All | Without Replies| Author: | crazylegoman  | | Posted: | May 3, 2020 16:14 | | Subject: | Re: Ants | | Viewed: | 55 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Adjour writes:
| | In Catalog, hpoort writes:
| | Except for the coloring, is there any difference between [p=62575cx1] and ?
Also, how do we go about numbering in such a case in general? 62575 is the LEGO
design number for the marbled version, 23714 for the plain version. Is the former
really seen as an assembly (cx1)?
I would suggest 62575cx1 renumbered to 23714pb01 and 62575 listed as an alternative
number. Before making such a request, I'd like to be sure about any differences
and guide lines.
And yes, Robert, I know the catalog team has different priorities right now,
but this one just came up and I wonder.
|
I have both of these. They look different in person. I don't have them in
front of me at the moment but one sits taller and one looks longer.
|
I am in favor of renaming the newer one (or maybe both) in a way that designates
that one is taller and one is longer.
David
|
 |
| Author: | crazylegoman | | Posted: | Mar 22, 2020 11:55 | | Subject: | Re: Wheel plate stuck on car chassis piece | | Viewed: | 39 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog, crazylegoman writes:
| | randyf, the part is definitely made up of 3 separate parts (1 of the main chassis,
and 2 of the modified 2X2 plates.) Each of the 3 parts has a molded part number
that you can see on the underside.
|
What I meant to say was that the part comes as one complete unit in the sets
directly from LEGO and is counted as one part by LEGO. There is no need to assemble
it, and it is not meant to be disassembled. I was rushing through messages before,
so I didn't explain it well enough.
Cheers,
Randy
|
That makes sense. I did have a strong suspicion that the parts came pre-assembled
in sets, since that chassis is a juniorized part (for young kids), and the precise
force that would be required to put the 2X2 modified plates on the underside
looked like something that would take adult level effort.
Thanks,
David
|
|
| Author: | crazylegoman | | Posted: | Mar 21, 2020 23:28 | | Subject: | Re: Wheel plate stuck on car chassis piece | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, BricksThatStick writes:
Good find! It looks like bag #2 comes with the red chassis that already has
the red 2X2 plates with small pins attached.
Thanks,
David
|
|
| Author: | crazylegoman | | Posted: | Mar 21, 2020 19:28 | | Subject: | Re: Wheel plate stuck on car chassis piece | | Viewed: | 38 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, BricksThatStick writes:
| | In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Catalog, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog, crazylegoman writes:
| | Does anyone know if
is meant to be able to be removed from
* | | 11650c01 Vehicle, Base 5 x 10 x 2 1/2 with Mudguards and 6 x 2 Recessed Center with 3 Holes with (Same Color) Wheels Holders Attached
Parts: Vehicle, Base |
once they are together?
|
The whole vehicle base is one part. Nothing on it is meant to come off.
|
Sure?
LDraw has the part (11650.dat) without the plates with wheel pins and the part
with the plates exist in two versions: 12622.dat in one colour and 12622p01.dat
with LBG plates.
Are those some sort of rivets?
Or do they use a special technique to connect the plates?
| | | | I feel like the axles are going to snap off of the 2X2 plates if I pull any herder
than I already am. Also, I've never seen a post with a tapered part at the
end like the chassis piece has. It seems a bit like those Bionicle brains and
heads.
David
|
|
|
The pin that holds them on clips through and then can't be reversed - see
pic
|
That's the same as what I have, except in different colors. Do you know
if they come already assembled in the box? (The one I have is from a used lot.)
randyf, the part is definitely made up of 3 separate parts (1 of the main chassis,
and 2 of the modified 2X2 plates.) Each of the 3 parts has a molded part number
that you can see on the underside.
David
|
|
| Author: | crazylegoman | | Posted: | Mar 21, 2020 16:19 | | Subject: | Wheel plate stuck on car chassis piece | | Viewed: | 105 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Does anyone know if
is meant to be able to be removed from
* | | 11650c01 Vehicle, Base 5 x 10 x 2 1/2 with Mudguards and 6 x 2 Recessed Center with 3 Holes with (Same Color) Wheels Holders Attached
Parts: Vehicle, Base |
once they are together?
I feel like the axles are going to snap off of the 2X2 plates if I pull any herder
than I already am. Also, I've never seen a post with a tapered part at the
end like the chassis piece has. It seems a bit like those Bionicle brains and
heads.
David
|
|
| Author: | crazylegoman | | Posted: | Mar 18, 2020 23:42 | | Subject: | Re: Plant Stem (#28870) trans-neon green? | | Viewed: | 42 times | | Topic: | Colors | |
|
| In Colors, randyf writes:
| | In Colors, stutrippant writes:
| | This piece is listed as having Trans-Neon Green as one of its colours.
The neon colours glow under a black light (if you don't have a black light
and have never seen this then invest in one and be amazed!) but these don't,
which makes me wonder whether (a) the colour is listed wrong or (b) I bought
counterfeit Lego which doesn't have the neon qualities and is just a colour
match.
Does anybody elses glow under a black light?
|
Nope, the part does not fluoresce under UV light. But LEGO does list the color
as TRANSPARENT FLUORESCENT GREEN (which is Trans-Neon Green on BrickLink), so
the part is definitely classified correctly.
Cheers,
Randy
|
I have some of that part in trans-neon green, and I can concur that it does not
phosphoresce under UV light. To the naked eye, under normal light, however,
it does appear just like other trans-neon green parts. The difference must be
the plastic material those parts are made out of. It is a non-ABS slightly bendable
plastic.
David
|
|
| Author: | crazylegoman | | Posted: | Mar 14, 2020 17:37 | | Subject: | Re: Silly to Consider This Sprue a Part? | | Viewed: | 66 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, axaday writes:
| | I apologize for the quick lo-res pic, but I think a lot of people are familiar
with this piece. It's the sprue from [p=19807c01]. And it IS just a sprue.
But I was looking it over today before tossing it in the trash and it is a pretty
neat looking piece AND it was obviously designed with some play value, because
it fits on a stud. It has never been used in a set, I believe, but it is easy
for me to imagine it being useful in MOCs. Would it be silly to add it to the
catalog?
|
I think it would be fine in the catalog, although I'm sure there are others
who would oppose it. Are there other sprue-only entries in the catalog?
David
|
|
| Author: | crazylegoman | | Posted: | Mar 12, 2020 12:29 | | Subject: | Re: StormChaser: the tale of two tails | | Viewed: | 47 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| I would be in favor of the part size being determined by the overall part dimensions
and not just the base that attaches to studs in the plane tail category
(and possibly other categories.) However, I think that most categories (modified
bricks, modified plates, etc.) would not benefit at all from such size alterations
in their names.
David
|
| Author: | crazylegoman | | Posted: | Feb 23, 2020 09:32 | | Subject: | Re: wich colors please? | | Viewed: | 31 times | | Topic: | Colors | |
|
| The second one is not LEGO. While sorting batches of used parts, I have found
1X1 round plates like that one many times. Whatever brand they are, they look
extremely close to the LEGO version, but the top of the stud is smooth with no
logo.
David
|
| Author: | crazylegoman | | Posted: | Jan 24, 2020 18:10 | | Subject: | Re: Have A Heart | | Viewed: | 66 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| I agree with everything you said. I didn't even know that was happening.
Was it something they started recently?
David
|
|
| Author: | crazylegoman | | Posted: | Dec 14, 2019 11:32 | | Subject: | Re: 3rd black 1x2 plate in set 4819 | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, hpoort writes:
| | It is most likely a spare for if the horse is to graze in the field, replacing
the Reddish Brown 1x4.
|
Agree. If my memory is correct, the part in sets with horses usually would have
been a 1 x 2 tile, not a plate . . . but we all know how absolutely unreliable
memories are. By the way, the Peeron inventory for this set shows the 3rd plate
and that inventory was verified twice from sealed contents.
|
I agree with paulvdb. It was a 1X2 plate instead of a tile included in sets
for the horse's back.
David
|
|
| Author: | crazylegoman | | Posted: | Oct 17, 2019 10:51 | | Subject: | Re: Upgrade for Forum / Message macro tags | | Viewed: | 41 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| I really like both of these upgrades. Thanks!
David
|
| Author: | crazylegoman | | Posted: | Oct 14, 2019 01:00 | | Subject: | Re: 1X1X3 brick & door compatibility question | | Viewed: | 49 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, RecycledBrick writes:
| | It fits. The door swings freely
|
Thank you!
|
|
| Author: | crazylegoman | | Posted: | Oct 13, 2019 21:10 | | Subject: | 1X1X3 brick & door compatibility question | | Viewed: | 83 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| I thought that this door
* | | 64390 Door 1 x 4 x 6 Round Top with Window and Keyhole, Reinforced Edge
Parts: Door |
fit onto this modified brick
(either version of the 1X1X3 brick.)
The catalog pages for both the brick and the door list other parts that they
are compatible with. I thought that these 2 parts worked together, but from
what I see here, they do not. Perhaps the relationship just hasn't been
added yet? Can anyone tell me for sure if that door will fit into the clips
of that brick?
Thanks,
David
|
|
| Author: | crazylegoman | | Posted: | Sep 13, 2019 13:53 | | Subject: | Re: We have a new Catalog Associate! | | Viewed: | 105 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| |
|
| Author: | crazylegoman | | Posted: | Sep 5, 2019 11:37 | | Subject: | Re: What year were part numbers introduced? | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, 1271moggy writes:
| | I have just wondering if anyone knew when Lego started putting the part number
on the pieces. I have just found part 3176 which looks fairly 'new'
but has no part number. It just has the numbers 5 and 04 on the underside.
What do these numbers refer to?
Apologies if this has been asked before - I cannot find a thread.
Thanking you all
|
The one or two digit numbers indicate molds and mold cavities in the actual machine
that creates the parts from liquid plastic injection. As far as what year TLC
started putting part numbers on the parts themselves, I'm afraid I do not
know.
David
|
|
| Author: | crazylegoman | | Posted: | Jun 23, 2019 21:55 | | Subject: | Re: Does 970653-1 come apart? | | Viewed: | 58 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, axaday writes:
| |
I got two of these in a set that will need its inventory updated. But I am trying
to figure it out. The part is inventoried but it doesn’t really look playable.
I gave it a soft tug to see if it was just clutched and I don’t think it is.
|
|
|
| Author: | crazylegoman | | Posted: | Jun 17, 2019 20:35 | | Subject: | New part that doesn't exist without printing | | Viewed: | 107 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| There's a new part I want to add to the catalog, and so far it only exists
with a printing on it. Is the proper procedure to add a sort of "placeholder"
entry for the actual new mold/part that has no printing, and then add the new
printed part that I have? I will upload a photo of the printed version I have,
but of course, cannot for the base part.
Thanks,
David
|
|
| Author: | crazylegoman | | Posted: | May 8, 2019 10:41 | | Subject: | Re: Mystery part | | Viewed: | 77 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| I have no idea what it's from, but I do find it very interesting. The non-stud
end looks like it's the same as a notched 2L axle, which means that there
are all kinds of places that it could securely fit as either a decorative or
functional piece.
David
|
| Author: | crazylegoman | | Posted: | May 1, 2019 11:12 | | Subject: | Re: Make website mobile-friendly | | Viewed: | 56 times | | Topic: | General | |
|
| I cannot figure out why someone would try to use Bricklink on a phone. A tablet
maybe, but even the biggest phone screens wouldn't be enough to make good
use of this site in any form.
David
|
|
| Author: | crazylegoman | | Posted: | Mar 20, 2019 23:29 | | Subject: | Re: Tan 16X32 baseplates different shade? | | Viewed: | 41 times | | Topic: | Colors | |
|
| In Colors, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Colors, crazylegoman writes:
| | In Colors, Ricardo_Penguin writes:
| | I have this set with the 16x32-
And I also have a 32x32 one from the Lego Store I got last year.
Putting them side-by-side, the 16x32 one is darker compared to the 32x32 one.
|
Interesting... That makes it seem that TLC has been making the tan 16X32s differently
than the 32X32s for every production run.
My other colors of 16X32 BP (green, blue, light gray) match the color of their
32X32 counterparts. Oh well, just another unsolved mystery in TLC's manufacturing
process.
|
Wasn’t Tan impacted by the Great Colour Shift?
If there were more “old Tan” 16x32 in stock, they would have been used alongside
“new Tan” 32x32.
|
I have not heard of tan being affected by the 2004 Color Shift. (My tan bricks
and other non-baseplate parts are the same shade of tan before and after 2004.)
However, just because TLC didn't change the exact shade of tan on purpose
doesn't mean that they didn't change it at all.
David
|
|
| Author: | crazylegoman | | Posted: | Mar 20, 2019 11:45 | | Subject: | Re: Tan 16X32 baseplates different shade? | | Viewed: | 31 times | | Topic: | Colors | |
|
| In Colors, Ricardo_Penguin writes:
| | I have this set with the 16x32-
And I also have a 32x32 one from the Lego Store I got last year.
Putting them side-by-side, the 16x32 one is darker compared to the 32x32 one.
|
Interesting... That makes it seem that TLC has been making the tan 16X32s differently
than the 32X32s for every production run.
My other colors of 16X32 BP (green, blue, light gray) match the color of their
32X32 counterparts. Oh well, just another unsolved mystery in TLC's manufacturing
process.
David
|
|
| Author: | crazylegoman | | Posted: | Mar 19, 2019 22:06 | | Subject: | Tan 16X32 baseplates different shade? | | Viewed: | 77 times | | Topic: | Colors | | Status: | Open | |
|
| This past week at Brickworld Indy I noticed that all of my tan 16X32 baseplates
were a different shade of tan than all of my 32X32 tan baseplates.
My tan 32X32 BPs appear to be the same color as any tan brick or other regular
part in tan. However, all of my 16X32 BPs are slightly darker and more yellow.
The difference was, of course, most noticeable when I had the BPs right next
to each other on my display.
The tan 16X32 BP has been in 16 sets over the years, 14 of which were from 1996
to 2002. I have bought all of my tan 16X32 BPs from various sources, and they
are all the same not-quite-LEGO-tan color. There were a couple of Spongebob
sets in 2006 and 2008 that had a tan 16X32 BP. I imagine that none of my BPs
are new enough to be from those most recent sets.
I was wondering, does anyone out there have any tan 16X32 BPs that you know are
from the Spongebob sets, and can verify if they match the shade of other tan
LEGO parts?
Thanks,
David
|
|
| Author: | crazylegoman | | Posted: | Feb 12, 2019 23:40 | | Subject: | Baby body grip capabilities | | Viewed: | 112 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| In the first LEGO Movie 2 preview ( https://youtu.be/XvHSlHhh1gk?t=31 ) the sewer
babies are all holding weapons and the like. Anyway, I was planning on making
my own Apocalypseburg display, and of course, I want to have some sewer babies.
My question is: Is there such a thing as a baby body that has hands that can
grip minifig scale items (3.2mm diameter)?
Thanks,
David
|
| Author: | crazylegoman | | Posted: | Feb 12, 2019 23:08 | | Subject: | Re: Aren't these differences ridiculous? | | Viewed: | 56 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| YES YES YES YES YES!
This is the #1 upgrade I would want from Bricklink.
David
|
| Author: | crazylegoman | | Posted: | Jan 25, 2019 00:24 | | Subject: | Re: A Smidgen of Lego History | | Viewed: | 56 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| Very interesting! I don't believe I have any Duplo plates of the older style,
so I never knew this.
David
|
|
| Author: | crazylegoman | | Posted: | Jan 8, 2019 23:22 | | Subject: | Re: Please change "Coral" to "Vibrant Coral" | | Viewed: | 52 times | | Topic: | Off Topic | |
|
| In Off Topic, randyf writes:
| | In Off Topic, crazylegoman writes:
| | In Colors, StormChaser writes:
| | In Colors, Classicsmiley writes:
| | I'm not sure who to address this to, but could the color "Coral" please be
renamed to the official "Vibrant Coral"?
|
If anyone knows the hex which properly matches this color, then I could use that
information. The official coral hex doesn't appear to match LEGO renders.
Also, where would you put it on the color guide? Down with the pinks has been
suggested.
|
I'm in no condition to add meaningful content to this thread, but "Down with
the pinks" sounds like some sort of all-girl heavy metal band.
David
|
Would they open for Babymetal? 
|
Probably!
|
|
| Author: | crazylegoman | | Posted: | Jan 8, 2019 23:00 | | Subject: | Re: Please change "Coral" to "Vibrant Coral" | | Viewed: | 51 times | | Topic: | Off Topic | |
|
| In Colors, StormChaser writes:
| | In Colors, Classicsmiley writes:
| | I'm not sure who to address this to, but could the color "Coral" please be
renamed to the official "Vibrant Coral"?
|
If anyone knows the hex which properly matches this color, then I could use that
information. The official coral hex doesn't appear to match LEGO renders.
Also, where would you put it on the color guide? Down with the pinks has been
suggested.
|
I'm in no condition to add meaningful content to this thread, but "Down with
the pinks" sounds like some sort of all-girl heavy metal band.
David
|
|
| Author: | crazylegoman | | Posted: | Dec 24, 2018 17:54 | | Subject: | Re: New Relationship Catalog Project Underway | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, crazylegoman writes:
| | Would Parts that Belong Together work better?
|
I think it would. I think it so strongly that I just changed everything to this
title. If anyone asks you, though, you must tell them that I alone came up with
the title. I will deny your involvement to my dying day.
|
Deal! 
|
|
| Author: | crazylegoman | | Posted: | Dec 23, 2018 22:32 | | Subject: | Re: New Relationship Catalog Project Underway | | Viewed: | 44 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | We have long needed a relationship match that shows items which fit together
and which are frequently used together. I have asked for this type of match
in the past and have gotten nowhere.
Instead, these kinds of matches were added as paired parts even though they did
not fit the spirit or definition of that match (and the sentence "Exceptions
to these definitions are determined at administrative discretion." was added
to the Item Relationships definitions page).
In my ongoing struggle to make the world a better place, generally speaking,
by addressing first-world problems of the lowest magnitude, we now have a new
relationship match:
Parts that Fit Together
Shows parts that naturally fit together which are designed to work together
and which are nearly always used together as a single unit.
If anyone sees where this definition could be improved, then please let me know.
Otherwise, start sending me some new item relationships and let's see how
well this works. I've added a few to get us started and here is one of them
so you can see how it looks:
|
I like this new relation type very much, but I wonder if the title will convey
the intended meaning. Few LEGO pieces are not parts that fit together.
Would Parts that Belong Together work better? I also like the
updated relationship definition.
David
|
|
| Author: | crazylegoman | | Posted: | Dec 20, 2018 08:59 | | Subject: | Re: Is there actually a 3626bpx28? | | Viewed: | 53 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, mfav writes:
| | I can't find this 3626bpx28 "no stubble" head. Certainly there are 3626bpx78
with light stubble printing.
[p=3626bpx28]
|
You get an A for effort, but there's no way anyone is going to start those
videos and jump to the specified time in all of them. It appears that you're
viewing the minifig world through YouTube goggles. Are you an animator?
David
|
|
| Author: | crazylegoman | | Posted: | Nov 28, 2018 09:51 | | Subject: | Re: Decorated vs. Pattern | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| As bje pointed out, the word "pattern" means a visual design that is repeating.
The vast majority of the things called "pattern" in the BL catalog really aren't.
I think the word "pattern" needs to be changed to "print" since that's what
it really is.
David
|
| Author: | crazylegoman | | Posted: | Nov 26, 2018 23:35 | | Subject: | Re: Unofficial LEGO color guide | | Viewed: | 41 times | | Topic: | Colors | |
|
| In Catalog, maxx3001 writes:
| | Have you read the reviews, it is not the best print, colors do not compare to
real colors in a book about colors.
|
I had been looking forward to the book, but I also read the reviews and decided
to not buy it due to that same reason.
David
|
|
| Author: | crazylegoman | | Posted: | Nov 8, 2018 19:28 | | Subject: | Re: Catalog: Strongly disagree 3830c0 deletion | | Viewed: | 73 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| I definitely agree with dearlydeparted on this. I think this part should stay
in the catalog. I know when I buy it, I look for the assembly.
I assume the multitude of possible combinations would be due to all the different
colors that that hinge comes in? Perhaps the only assembly of it allowed in
the catalog would be one in which both halves are the same color? If the top
and bottom halves are different colors, then the seller will have to list them
separately.
David
|
|
| Author: | crazylegoman | | Posted: | Oct 18, 2018 23:13 | | Subject: | Re: Rejected SW minifig name changes | | Viewed: | 57 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, grimsbricksuk writes:
| | Yesterday I submitted two name changes to minifigs sw500 & sw673 which have been
rejected, however I have no idea why?
sw500 Jedi Knight (Kao Cen Darach)
sw673 Kanjiklub Gang Member (Croking Shand)
These name have been taken from the recent Lego trading cards, series 1, see
images.
|
If they had names different from a set box, then I could see why the changes
were rejected, but since both MF's had no names, I agree that the changes
should have gone through. Maybe try again and put a link to the images in your
post?
David
|
|
| Author: | crazylegoman | | Posted: | Oct 5, 2018 16:01 | | Subject: | Re: Restrictions kill sales! I'm outta here! | | Viewed: | 107 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, npl writes:
| | Twice today I spent time making LARGE orders (two different vendors) for about
$30 or so USD+.
|
|
|
| Author: | crazylegoman | | Posted: | Oct 4, 2018 18:50 | | Subject: | Re: Unknown color | | Viewed: | 60 times | | Topic: | Colors | |
|
| BrickBuy and Pippyblocks are right. It's "brittle" blue.
David
|
| Author: | crazylegoman | | Posted: | Sep 27, 2018 23:34 | | Subject: | Re: Random cape with extra oval hole | | Viewed: | 47 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog Identification, crazylegoman writes:
| | In Catalog Identification, Mistress_Lisa writes:
| | Anyway, I don't know of any capes that would have that extra oval hole in
them. What purpose would it serve? In case the minifig had a tail?
Lisa
|
I think that may be it. Isn't there a Superman dog that has a red cape?
David
|
Looks like I was wrong. There is a Superman dog, but his cape doesn't come
with an extra hole for his tail.
David
|
|
| Author: | crazylegoman | | Posted: | Sep 27, 2018 23:32 | | Subject: | Re: Random cape with extra oval hole | | Viewed: | 52 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog Identification, Mistress_Lisa writes:
| | Anyway, I don't know of any capes that would have that extra oval hole in
them. What purpose would it serve? In case the minifig had a tail?
Lisa
|
I think that may be it. Isn't there a Superman dog that has a red cape?
David
|
|
| Author: | crazylegoman | | Posted: | Sep 25, 2018 11:57 | | Subject: | Re: White brick with holes? | | Viewed: | 48 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog Identification, normann1974 writes:
| | In Catalog Identification, crazylegoman writes:
| | In Catalog Identification, normann1974 writes:
| | In Catalog Identification, crazylegoman writes:
| | In Catalog Identification, Stuart9 writes:
| | Looks a little home made but unsure as it's not in front of me.
|
I agree. You can see where the drill bit went through the tubes inside the brick.
David
|
I ask again like I did earlier in this thread: If this brick was customized (by
drill), what part was it made from?
/Jan
|
Possibly from this?
David
|
I've never seen 7049 with opaque white bottom. Does it exist?
/Jan
|
With all of these variations that exist, maybe?
https://www.flickr.com/photos/11462722@N03/25125002192/
David
|
|
| Author: | crazylegoman | | Posted: | Sep 24, 2018 19:35 | | Subject: | Re: White brick with holes? | | Viewed: | 59 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog Identification, normann1974 writes:
| | In Catalog Identification, crazylegoman writes:
| | In Catalog Identification, Stuart9 writes:
| | Looks a little home made but unsure as it's not in front of me.
|
I agree. You can see where the drill bit went through the tubes inside the brick.
David
|
I ask again like I did earlier in this thread: If this brick was customized (by
drill), what part was it made from?
/Jan
|
Possibly from this?
David
|
|
| Author: | crazylegoman | | Posted: | Sep 23, 2018 20:44 | | Subject: | Re: White brick with holes? | | Viewed: | 71 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog Identification, Stuart9 writes:
| | Looks a little home made but unsure as it's not in front of me.
|
I agree. You can see where the drill bit went through the tubes inside the brick.
David
|
|
| Author: | crazylegoman | | Posted: | Aug 14, 2018 19:20 | | Subject: | Re: Brown or Reddish Brown??? Please help! | | Viewed: | 53 times | | Topic: | Colors | |
|
| In Colors, bje writes:
| | Aah glad I'm not the only one with this problem
Sunlight IMO works best, I've sometimes looked at these till my eyes water
under every conceivable type of lightbulb and still made mistakes which came
out later in sunlight. Best is to have them in a pile like you have and then
pick out the ones that do not look as bright, those would be brown (technical
term would be less red, but that would confuse the issue)
If your pile is the same I've marked the ones that stand out clearly.
HTH
Jean
In Colors, patpendlego writes:
| | Is there an easy way to tell which brick is Brown and which Reddish Brown? I've
tried different things, under a lightbulb, halogene light, sunlight... I just
don't see it... please help!
|
|
HA HA! I did the same thing!
David
|
|
|
| Author: | crazylegoman | | Posted: | Aug 2, 2018 22:34 | | Subject: | Re: Question on catalog image uploads | | Viewed: | 24 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, taxan writes:
| | I think you need to make a entirely new entry for it.
The old on only have one USB drive in it and a brick.
The new image have 2 USB drives and no bricks.
|
I didn't realize that, but now that you mention it, the package on the older
image does say that it only has one drive.
David
|
|
| Author: | crazylegoman | | Posted: | Aug 2, 2018 20:36 | | Subject: | Re: Question on catalog image uploads | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, qwertyboy writes:
| | In Catalog, crazylegoman writes:
| | In Catalog, 62Bricks writes:
| | In Catalog, crazylegoman writes:
| | In Catalog, Pippyblocks writes:
| | Isn't 600 the longest side it can be?
In Catalog, crazylegoman writes:
| | I was just trying to upload an image to the catalog, and I got an error that
says,
Oops! There was a problem processing your request:
1. Parameter Error.
The image is within the 800X600 pixel size requirement. What else could be the
trouble?
David
|
|
It says 800X600 on the upload page. My image was 600 pixels tall, but less than
800 wide.
David
|
The error message for images that are too large specifically gives the reason.
Is it an accepted file type?
|
It's a .jpg file. Is there maybe a file size limit too? The file is 425KB.
|
I don’t know about a size limit, but a JPG under 800x600 weighing in at 425KB
is hard to believe. Even a 800x600 bmp will ‘only’ be 420KB. A JPG file is using
pretty agressive compression. Either the file is not a JPG, or it is not 800x600.
Niek.
|
D'OH! It's actually 83.6KB. I resized it to fit within the 800X600
size and forgot to look at the new file size.
|
|
| Author: | crazylegoman | | Posted: | Aug 2, 2018 20:34 | | Subject: | Re: Question on catalog image uploads | | Viewed: | 27 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:
| | In Catalog, crazylegoman writes:
| | In Catalog, Pippyblocks writes:
| | Isn't 600 the longest side it can be?
In Catalog, crazylegoman writes:
| | I was just trying to upload an image to the catalog, and I got an error that
says,
Oops! There was a problem processing your request:
1. Parameter Error.
The image is within the 800X600 pixel size requirement. What else could be the
trouble?
David
|
|
It says 800X600 on the upload page. My image was 600 pixels tall, but less than
800 wide.
David
|
Minifig parameters are 800 tall and 600 wide.
|
The image is for gear flashdr8gb.
I'll try attaching the image to this message. The photo I took doesn't
have hardly any glare on the plastic, so I thought it would be a better image.
Also the current image shows a package that must've been opened, because
the tiny lanyards have been removed.
David
|
|
|
| Author: | crazylegoman | | Posted: | Aug 2, 2018 18:31 | | Subject: | Re: Question on catalog image uploads | | Viewed: | 23 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, 62Bricks writes:
| | In Catalog, crazylegoman writes:
| | In Catalog, Pippyblocks writes:
| | Isn't 600 the longest side it can be?
In Catalog, crazylegoman writes:
| | I was just trying to upload an image to the catalog, and I got an error that
says,
Oops! There was a problem processing your request:
1. Parameter Error.
The image is within the 800X600 pixel size requirement. What else could be the
trouble?
David
|
|
It says 800X600 on the upload page. My image was 600 pixels tall, but less than
800 wide.
David
|
The error message for images that are too large specifically gives the reason.
Is it an accepted file type?
|
It's a .jpg file. Is there maybe a file size limit too? The file is 425KB.
|
|
| Author: | crazylegoman | | Posted: | Aug 2, 2018 17:56 | | Subject: | Re: Question on catalog image uploads | | Viewed: | 23 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Pippyblocks writes:
| | Isn't 600 the longest side it can be?
In Catalog, crazylegoman writes:
| | I was just trying to upload an image to the catalog, and I got an error that
says,
Oops! There was a problem processing your request:
1. Parameter Error.
The image is within the 800X600 pixel size requirement. What else could be the
trouble?
David
|
|
It says 800X600 on the upload page. My image was 600 pixels tall, but less than
800 wide.
David
|
|
| Author: | crazylegoman | | Posted: | Aug 2, 2018 17:25 | | Subject: | Question on catalog image uploads | | Viewed: | 56 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| I was just trying to upload an image to the catalog, and I got an error that
says,
Oops! There was a problem processing your request:
1. Parameter Error.
The image is within the 800X600 pixel size requirement. What else could be the
trouble?
David
|
| Author: | crazylegoman | | Posted: | Apr 18, 2018 00:33 | | Subject: | Re: Negative feedback on orders that are "purged" | | Viewed: | 67 times | | Topic: | Feedback | |
|
| No feedback, whether positive, neutral or negative, ever expires. It
lasts as long as your account exists.
David
|
Next Page: 5 More | 10 More | 25 More | 50 More | 100 More
|
USA, Indiana
