|
 |
| | | Author: | alahaka  | | Posted: | Nov 30, 2016 03:46 | | Subject: | Tap on thumbnail shows thumbnail - Pointless! | | Viewed: | 129 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | | Status: | Open | | Vote: | [Yes|No] | |
|
| Hello,
While shopping in any BrickLink store, a click on a part's thumbnail image
results in a popup window showing the exact same, tiny-sized thumbnail image.
The change in visual information presented is zip, diddly, bupkis, niente.
An added click on the popup window's (strangely) secondary image takes the
BrickLink customer to what she or he was obviously hoping to see
... a large image of the part.
I don't understand why we have to endlessly and repeatedly deal with
this nonsense.
Fix it, Matthew
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Nov 30, 2016 10:09 | | Subject: | Re: Tap on thumbnail shows thumbnail - Pointless! | | Viewed: | 74 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, matejo writes:
| | Hello,
While shopping in any BrickLink store, a click on a part's thumbnail image
results in a popup window showing the exact same, tiny-sized thumbnail image.
The change in visual information presented is zip, diddly, bupkis, niente.
An added click on the popup window's (strangely) secondary image takes the
BrickLink customer to what she or he was obviously hoping to see
... a large image of the part.
I don't understand why we have to endlessly and repeatedly deal with
this nonsense.
Fix it, Matthew
|
I am in the process of updating thousands of part images to use the new functionality
in the store interface. It is a lot of work and very time consuming. Until higher
quality images are in the database, the new system will use the existing small
images from the old site structure. The problem will get better over time, but
it is not going to go away in the blink of eye and is not a fault of the new
site. We just need better images and the work is underway.
For an example of how it should work, find any store selling
and click on the thumbnails while in the store.
Cheers,
Randy
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | sonofagunk | | Posted: | Nov 30, 2016 11:51 | | Subject: | Re: Tap on thumbnail shows thumbnail - Pointless! | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, randyf writes:
| | In Suggestions, matejo writes:
| | Hello,
While shopping in any BrickLink store, a click on a part's thumbnail image
results in a popup window showing the exact same, tiny-sized thumbnail image.
The change in visual information presented is zip, diddly, bupkis, niente.
An added click on the popup window's (strangely) secondary image takes the
BrickLink customer to what she or he was obviously hoping to see
... a large image of the part.
I don't understand why we have to endlessly and repeatedly deal with
this nonsense.
Fix it, Matthew
|
I am in the process of updating thousands of part images to use the new functionality
in the store interface. It is a lot of work and very time consuming. Until higher
quality images are in the database, the new system will use the existing small
images from the old site structure. The problem will get better over time, but
it is not going to go away in the blink of eye and is not a fault of the new
site. We just need better images and the work is underway.
For an example of how it should work, find any store selling
and click on the thumbnails while in the store.
Cheers,
Randy
|
wow, only IF there were some kind or programming trick where you can use one
image IF you have it ELSE use the old small one. IF it were possible, THEN it
would be useful. ELSE IF it is not, maybe someone could invent it
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Nov 30, 2016 12:08 | | Subject: | Re: Tap on thumbnail shows thumbnail - Pointless! | | Viewed: | 27 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, sonofagunk writes:
| | In Suggestions, randyf writes:
| | In Suggestions, matejo writes:
| | Hello,
While shopping in any BrickLink store, a click on a part's thumbnail image
results in a popup window showing the exact same, tiny-sized thumbnail image.
The change in visual information presented is zip, diddly, bupkis, niente.
An added click on the popup window's (strangely) secondary image takes the
BrickLink customer to what she or he was obviously hoping to see
... a large image of the part.
I don't understand why we have to endlessly and repeatedly deal with
this nonsense.
Fix it, Matthew
|
I am in the process of updating thousands of part images to use the new functionality
in the store interface. It is a lot of work and very time consuming. Until higher
quality images are in the database, the new system will use the existing small
images from the old site structure. The problem will get better over time, but
it is not going to go away in the blink of eye and is not a fault of the new
site. We just need better images and the work is underway.
For an example of how it should work, find any store selling
and click on the thumbnails while in the store.
Cheers,
Randy
|
wow, only IF there were some kind or programming trick where you can use one
image IF you have it ELSE use the old small one. IF it were possible, THEN it
would be useful. ELSE IF it is not, maybe someone could invent it
|
I am not sure if I follow you. What you describe is exactly how the new site
works. IF it has a high quality image for a part in a given color, THEN it uses
that image in stores and generates a smaller thumbnail from it automatically
for other uses. IF it does not have a high quality image, THEN it defaults to
the old thumbnails for everything. Getting high quality images into the system
is the important part to make the whole site better.
Cheers,
Randy
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | alahaka | | Posted: | Nov 30, 2016 12:11 | | Subject: | Re: Tap on thumbnail shows thumbnail - Pointless! | | Viewed: | 43 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| Thank you for the reply,
When clicking on a part's thumbnail image in a store at the old site, the
user was immediately shown a popup of an enlarged image. When clicking on a
thumbnail in a store at the new site, the user is shown a popup of the exact
same, tiny thumbnail image (example attached).
Hence, this now initially pointless step is the fault of the designers of the
new site.
Within the new site's popup showing the exact same, tiny thumbnail image,
the user can click on a thumbnail to the right of the thumbnail for the exact
same, tiny thumbnail, and that secondary thumbnail -- along with the inefficiently
added and now endlessly repeated step of clicking on it -- will display the
larger image desired.
This is code, and code can be changed resulting in the across-the-board elimination
of showing the first exact same image in favor of the second, more informative
larger image, which is what customers desire to see in the first place.
To date, BrickLink administrators have chosen not to change the applicable code
and eliminate the pointless initial step that is being carried out by hundreds
of people thousands of times each and every passing day.
Because the new site is about something other than process efficiency.
Have a good day, Matthew
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Nov 30, 2016 13:18 | | Subject: | Re: Tap on thumbnail shows thumbnail - Pointless! | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, matejo writes:
| | Thank you for the reply,
When clicking on a part's thumbnail image in a store at the old site, the
user was immediately shown a popup of an enlarged image. When clicking on a
thumbnail in a store at the new site, the user is shown a popup of the exact
same, tiny thumbnail image (example attached).
|
You are confused about what the images represent. The old site showed only the
*one* generic large image in the pop-up for each part for *all* colors of that
part. The new site allows for large images in *every* color for every part AND
a generic large image for every part.
| | Hence, this now initially pointless step is the fault of the designers of the
new site.
|
It seems pointless now, but it isn't pointless in the long term.
| | Within the new site's popup showing the exact same, tiny thumbnail image,
the user can click on a thumbnail to the right of the thumbnail for the exact
same, tiny thumbnail, and that secondary thumbnail -- along with the inefficiently
added and now endlessly repeated step of clicking on it -- will display the
larger image desired.
|
The first image that shows in the pop-up is the large image that is associated
with a given part *in* a given color, not a generic large image. If you click
on a white part, it will show you a larger white part image. If you click on
the same part in red, it will show you a larger red part image. Since the site
has very few high-quality images for the parts right now, the developers had
to use the only thing available as a placeholder: the old thumbnail images of
every part in every color. The point to this is that eventually high-quality
images for *each* part in *every* color will be able to be displayed in the pop-up
as opposed to just low-quality thumbnails. The second thumbnail in the pop-up
remains the generic large image in a single color from the original site that
the catmins prefer to be a photograph instead of a render.
| | This is code, and code can be changed resulting in the across-the-board elimination
of showing the first exact same image in favor of the second, more informative
larger image, which is what customers desire to see in the first place.
|
The code works as designed. All that is needed to make it functional is replacing
all of the old site low-quality thumbnails with high-quality images. As I said,
this work is being done by myself as I have time, but it may take months if not
a couple of years to update the entire database of part images to high-quality
images. It is an uphill climb as new parts and colors are constantly created
by LEGO, but I am making progress.
| | To date, BrickLink administrators have chosen not to change the applicable code
and eliminate the pointless initial step that is being carried out by hundreds
of people thousands of times each and every passing day.
Because the new site is about something other than process efficiency.
|
Instead of more sarcastic remarks towards those of us trying to make the site
better, I hope you can understand why things are where they are at *now* and
where they are heading from here on out.
I always do!
Cheers,
Randy
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Nov 30, 2016 13:43 | | Subject: | Re: Tap on thumbnail shows thumbnail - Pointless! | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, randyf writes:
| | In Suggestions, matejo writes:
| | Thank you for the reply,
When clicking on a part's thumbnail image in a store at the old site, the
user was immediately shown a popup of an enlarged image. When clicking on a
thumbnail in a store at the new site, the user is shown a popup of the exact
same, tiny thumbnail image (example attached).
|
You are confused about what the images represent. The old site showed only the
*one* generic large image in the pop-up for each part for *all* colors of that
part. The new site allows for large images in *every* color for every part AND
a generic large image for every part.
| | Hence, this now initially pointless step is the fault of the designers of the
new site.
|
It seems pointless now, but it isn't pointless in the long term.
| | Within the new site's popup showing the exact same, tiny thumbnail image,
the user can click on a thumbnail to the right of the thumbnail for the exact
same, tiny thumbnail, and that secondary thumbnail -- along with the inefficiently
added and now endlessly repeated step of clicking on it -- will display the
larger image desired.
|
The first image that shows in the pop-up is the large image that is associated
with a given part *in* a given color, not a generic large image. If you click
on a white part, it will show you a larger white part image. If you click on
the same part in red, it will show you a larger red part image. Since the site
has very few high-quality images for the parts right now, the developers had
to use the only thing available as a placeholder: the old thumbnail images of
every part in every color.
|
To me, it would make more sense to use the generic large image if the color specific
large image is unavailable. That is a design choice.
Every time I open a thumbnail image to see the same thumbnail image, I am annoyed
by what I consider to be another example of sloppy coding. What the designer
intended does not match my user experience.
| | The point to this is that eventually high-quality
images for *each* part in *every* color will be able to be displayed in the pop-up
as opposed to just low-quality thumbnails. The second thumbnail in the pop-up
remains the generic large image in a single color from the original site that
the catmins prefer to be a photograph instead of a render.
| | This is code, and code can be changed resulting in the across-the-board elimination
of showing the first exact same image in favor of the second, more informative
larger image, which is what customers desire to see in the first place.
|
The code works as designed. All that is needed to make it functional is replacing
all of the old site low-quality thumbnails with high-quality images. As I said,
this work is being done by myself as I have time, but it may take months if not
a couple of years to update the entire database of part images to high-quality
images. It is an uphill climb as new parts and colors are constantly created
by LEGO, but I am making progress.
| | To date, BrickLink administrators have chosen not to change the applicable code
and eliminate the pointless initial step that is being carried out by hundreds
of people thousands of times each and every passing day.
Because the new site is about something other than process efficiency.
|
Instead of more sarcastic remarks towards those of us trying to make the site
better, I hope you can understand why things are where they are at *now* and
where they are heading from here on out.
I always do!
Cheers,
Randy
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Nov 30, 2016 14:24 | | Subject: | Re: Tap on thumbnail shows thumbnail - Pointless! | | Viewed: | 22 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, WoutR writes:
| | To me, it would make more sense to use the generic large image if the color specific
large image is unavailable. That is a design choice.
|
The high-quality images replace the low-quality images. There is no either/or,
just one image (i.e. no high-quality and low-quality images stored separately).
Therefore, there is only *one* image *per* part *per* color, whether it currently
be low-quality or high-quality. If the code sees a color image for a part for
a color, it grabs the color image unaware of the quality of it. How would it
know to grab the generic large image of the part if a color image *is* available
for that part in that color that you clicked on?
| | Every time I open a thumbnail image to see the same thumbnail image, I am annoyed
by what I consider to be another example of sloppy coding. What the designer
intended does not match my user experience.
|
It is annoying *right now* due to the quality of the images. And I think it is
*meant* to be annoying so users will help to move the site to high-quality part
images. I am doing my part to do this.
Cheers,
Randy
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | therobo | | Posted: | Nov 30, 2016 14:32 | | Subject: | Re: Tap on thumbnail shows thumbnail - Pointless! | | Viewed: | 35 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, randyf writes:
| | In Suggestions, WoutR writes:
| | To me, it would make more sense to use the generic large image if the color specific
large image is unavailable. That is a design choice.
|
The high-quality images replace the low-quality images. There is no either/or,
just one image (i.e. no high-quality and low-quality images stored separately).
Therefore, there is only *one* image *per* part *per* color, whether it currently
be low-quality or high-quality. If the code sees a color image for a part for
a color, it grabs the color image unaware of the quality of it. How would it
know to grab the generic large image of the part if a color image *is* available
for that part in that color that you clicked on?
| | Every time I open a thumbnail image to see the same thumbnail image, I am annoyed
by what I consider to be another example of sloppy coding. What the designer
intended does not match my user experience.
|
It is annoying *right now* due to the quality of the images. And I think it is
*meant* to be annoying so users will help to move the site to high-quality part
images. I am doing my part to do this.
Cheers,
Randy
|
As a sidenote, these new images are better but still not really "High-Quality".
Even if you improve the quality (color, contrast) of the images grabbed from
the Lego Server, their size still remains 192x192, regardless if you fill them
into a 320x240 blank space (you) or if you just upload them in 192x192 size (Jen).
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Nov 30, 2016 15:01 | | Subject: | Re: Tap on thumbnail shows thumbnail - Pointless! | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, therobo writes:
| | In Suggestions, randyf writes:
| | In Suggestions, WoutR writes:
| | To me, it would make more sense to use the generic large image if the color specific
large image is unavailable. That is a design choice.
|
The high-quality images replace the low-quality images. There is no either/or,
just one image (i.e. no high-quality and low-quality images stored separately).
Therefore, there is only *one* image *per* part *per* color, whether it currently
be low-quality or high-quality. If the code sees a color image for a part for
a color, it grabs the color image unaware of the quality of it. How would it
know to grab the generic large image of the part if a color image *is* available
for that part in that color that you clicked on?
| | Every time I open a thumbnail image to see the same thumbnail image, I am annoyed
by what I consider to be another example of sloppy coding. What the designer
intended does not match my user experience.
|
It is annoying *right now* due to the quality of the images. And I think it is
*meant* to be annoying so users will help to move the site to high-quality part
images. I am doing my part to do this.
Cheers,
Randy
|
As a sidenote, these new images are better but still not really "High-Quality".
Even if you improve the quality (color, contrast) of the images grabbed from
the Lego Server, their size still remains 192x192, regardless if you fill them
into a 320x240 blank space (you) or if you just upload them in 192x192 size (Jen).
|
Yes, not "high-quality" in the "high-resolution" sense, but much better than
80x60px poorly rendered thumbnails.
Cheers,
Randy
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Nov 30, 2016 15:45 | | Subject: | Re: Tap on thumbnail shows thumbnail - Pointless! | | Viewed: | 21 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, randyf writes:
| | In Suggestions, WoutR writes:
| | To me, it would make more sense to use the generic large image if the color specific
large image is unavailable. That is a design choice.
|
The high-quality images replace the low-quality images. There is no either/or,
just one image (i.e. no high-quality and low-quality images stored separately).
Therefore, there is only *one* image *per* part *per* color, whether it currently
be low-quality or high-quality. If the code sees a color image for a part for
a color, it grabs the color image unaware of the quality of it. How would it
know to grab the generic large image of the part if a color image *is* available
for that part in that color that you clicked on?
|
Simply use the generic large image if the color image is the 60x80 thumbnail
size.
It is a design choice.
| |
| | Every time I open a thumbnail image to see the same thumbnail image, I am annoyed
by what I consider to be another example of sloppy coding. What the designer
intended does not match my user experience.
|
It is annoying *right now* due to the quality of the images. And I think it is
*meant* to be annoying so users will help to move the site to high-quality part
images. I am doing my part to do this.
Cheers,
Randy
|
Thank you for doing your part.
Did BrickLink ask for help when this new feature was implemented? I might have
missed something, because asking is better than annoying.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Nov 30, 2016 16:09 | | Subject: | Re: Tap on thumbnail shows thumbnail - Pointless! | | Viewed: | 24 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, WoutR writes:
| | In Suggestions, randyf writes:
| | In Suggestions, WoutR writes:
| | To me, it would make more sense to use the generic large image if the color specific
large image is unavailable. That is a design choice.
|
The high-quality images replace the low-quality images. There is no either/or,
just one image (i.e. no high-quality and low-quality images stored separately).
Therefore, there is only *one* image *per* part *per* color, whether it currently
be low-quality or high-quality. If the code sees a color image for a part for
a color, it grabs the color image unaware of the quality of it. How would it
know to grab the generic large image of the part if a color image *is* available
for that part in that color that you clicked on?
|
Simply use the generic large image if the color image is the 60x80 thumbnail
size.
It is a design choice.
|
Ah, yes. That could be done. I have forgotten much in my years since coding web
pages (12 years ago and counting).
| | | |
| | Every time I open a thumbnail image to see the same thumbnail image, I am annoyed
by what I consider to be another example of sloppy coding. What the designer
intended does not match my user experience.
|
It is annoying *right now* due to the quality of the images. And I think it is
*meant* to be annoying so users will help to move the site to high-quality part
images. I am doing my part to do this.
Cheers,
Randy
|
Thank you for doing your part.
|
You are quite welcome. I am more than happy to help things get better.
| | Did BrickLink ask for help when this new feature was implemented? I might have
missed something, because asking is better than annoying.
|
They received feedback on what would happen if they immediately discarded all
of the old thumbnail images, but they pushed ahead with coding their "ideal"
situation. In other words, we are stuck with this in-between old and ideal outcome.
I will keep working towards the ideal by updating images as I don't believe
they are going to do anything about it with much more pressing issues on hand.
Cheers,
Randy
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Nov 30, 2016 16:17 | | Subject: | Re: Tap on thumbnail shows thumbnail - Pointless! | | Viewed: | 21 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, randyf writes:
| | In Suggestions, WoutR writes:
| | In Suggestions, randyf writes:
| | In Suggestions, WoutR writes:
| | To me, it would make more sense to use the generic large image if the color specific
large image is unavailable. That is a design choice.
|
The high-quality images replace the low-quality images. There is no either/or,
just one image (i.e. no high-quality and low-quality images stored separately).
Therefore, there is only *one* image *per* part *per* color, whether it currently
be low-quality or high-quality. If the code sees a color image for a part for
a color, it grabs the color image unaware of the quality of it. How would it
know to grab the generic large image of the part if a color image *is* available
for that part in that color that you clicked on?
|
Simply use the generic large image if the color image is the 60x80 thumbnail
size.
It is a design choice.
|
Ah, yes. That could be done. I have forgotten much in my years since coding web
pages (12 years ago and counting).
| | | |
| | Every time I open a thumbnail image to see the same thumbnail image, I am annoyed
by what I consider to be another example of sloppy coding. What the designer
intended does not match my user experience.
|
It is annoying *right now* due to the quality of the images. And I think it is
*meant* to be annoying so users will help to move the site to high-quality part
images. I am doing my part to do this.
Cheers,
Randy
|
Thank you for doing your part.
|
You are quite welcome. I am more than happy to help things get better.
| | Did BrickLink ask for help when this new feature was implemented? I might have
missed something, because asking is better than annoying.
|
They received feedback on what would happen if they immediately discarded all
of the old thumbnail images, but they pushed ahead with coding their "ideal"
situation. In other words, we are stuck with this in-between old and ideal outcome.
I will keep working towards the ideal by updating images as I don't believe
they are going to do anything about it with much more pressing issues on hand.
Cheers,
Randy
|
It baffles me that they would even consider discarding all the old images without
having the replacement in place. Sadly, it fits the pattern of what I call "sloppy
design" (I might have other descriptions, but I won't post them here).
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | alahaka | | Posted: | Nov 30, 2016 15:51 | | Subject: | Re: Tap on thumbnail shows thumbnail - Pointless! | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| I am not confused, and I am not making sarcastic remarks.
I recognize that the popup window being discussed is likely a new architecture,
however the data for this architecture does not exist, and not surprisingly it
will not exist for a long time.
Thank you for your efforts to create this data.
Presently clicking on a thumbnail, clearly with the intent of attaining larger,
more detailed information, and being directed to the very same thumbnail does
not seem pointless. It is pointless.
BrickLink administrators are placing their utopian vision of what the site should
be, over what the site can be now. And as a result, there are several less efficient
processes under 2.0 compared to 1.0.
In short, these negative process and customer impacts, which can be fixed, are
secondary, tertiary, or whatever to their vision, for long periods of time.
This is simply a fact, as evidenced every single day on the site, and in this
thread.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Nov 30, 2016 16:03 | | Subject: | Re: Tap on thumbnail shows thumbnail - Pointless! | | Viewed: | 27 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, matejo writes:
| | I am not confused, and I am not making sarcastic remarks.
I recognize that the popup window being discussed is likely a new architecture,
however the data for this architecture does not exist, and not surprisingly it
will not exist for a long time.
Thank you for your efforts to create this data.
Presently clicking on a thumbnail, clearly with the intent of attaining larger,
more detailed information, and being directed to the very same thumbnail does
not seem pointless. It is pointless.
BrickLink administrators are placing their utopian vision of what the site should
be, over what the site can be now. And as a result, there are several less efficient
processes under 2.0 compared to 1.0.
In short, these negative process and customer impacts, which can be fixed, are
secondary, tertiary, or whatever to their vision, for long periods of time.
This is simply a fact, as evidenced every single day on the site, and in this
thread.
|
I agree that the setup is not ideal, and it holds out a lot of hope for being
ideal. Something in the interim could have been done, but they did not set it
up that way. I don't know what else to say than I feel your pain and I am
doing a lot of work to make it less painful. With all of the other things needing
to be fixed and developed on this site that are much more important (e.g. instant
checkout, seller inventory tools, settings that don't stick, the awful version
2.0 wanted list changes that are needed, etc.), I don't see them putting
resources into changing this small annoyance anytime soon.
Best regards,
Randy
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | tEoS | | Posted: | Nov 30, 2016 16:18 | | Subject: | Re: Tap on thumbnail shows thumbnail - Pointless! | | Viewed: | 21 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| Yea, but we'll be getting BL Studio soon. Nothing like it has ever been
done before and it was certainly the most requested feature from buyers and sellers
alike. 
| | I agree that the setup is not ideal, and it holds out a lot of hope for being
ideal. Something in the interim could have been done, but they did not set it
up that way. I don't know what else to say than I feel your pain and I am
doing a lot of work to make it less painful. With all of the other things needing
to be fixed and developed on this site that are much more important (e.g. instant
checkout, seller inventory tools, settings that don't stick, the awful version
2.0 wanted list changes that are needed, etc.), I don't see them putting
resources into changing this small annoyance anytime soon.
Best regards,
Randy
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Nov 30, 2016 16:22 | | Subject: | Re: Tap on thumbnail shows thumbnail - Pointless! | | Viewed: | 24 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| LEGO could not get it to work commercially, so let's just take their idea
and try again.
In Suggestions, tEoS writes:
| | Yea, but we'll be getting BL Studio soon. Nothing like it has ever been
done before and it was certainly the most requested feature from buyers and sellers
alike.
| | I agree that the setup is not ideal, and it holds out a lot of hope for being
ideal. Something in the interim could have been done, but they did not set it
up that way. I don't know what else to say than I feel your pain and I am
doing a lot of work to make it less painful. With all of the other things needing
to be fixed and developed on this site that are much more important (e.g. instant
checkout, seller inventory tools, settings that don't stick, the awful version
2.0 wanted list changes that are needed, etc.), I don't see them putting
resources into changing this small annoyance anytime soon.
Best regards,
Randy
|
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Nov 30, 2016 16:30 | | Subject: | Re: Tap on thumbnail shows thumbnail - Pointless! | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, WoutR writes:
| | LEGO could not get it to work commercially, so let's just take their idea
and try again.
|
It integrates with BrickLink's database, so it may work out just fine. I
like LDD, so I am willing to give Stud.io a chance once it is out of beta as
I believe it will be much easier to buy what you need from it. However, that
all remains to be seen at this point, and I never ever saw something like this
coming and was hoping for much more critical developments (e.g. ***INSTANT CHECKOUT***)
Cheers,
Randy
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Nov 30, 2016 16:47 | | Subject: | Re: Tap on thumbnail shows thumbnail - Pointless! | | Viewed: | 30 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, randyf writes:
| | In Suggestions, WoutR writes:
| | LEGO could not get it to work commercially, so let's just take their idea
and try again.
|
It integrates with BrickLink's database, so it may work out just fine. I
like LDD, so I am willing to give Stud.io a chance once it is out of beta as
I believe it will be much easier to buy what you need from it. However, that
all remains to be seen at this point, and I never ever saw something like this
coming and was hoping for much more critical developments (e.g. ***INSTANT CHECKOUT***)
Cheers,
Randy
|
I am worried about that integration with the catalog.
I wonder if they thought about the differences between the Bricklink catalog
and other available databases like LDD. We distinguish many mold versions, and
I have not yet seen 3D-models representing those. Also, the Bricklink catalog
groups many colors. That could cause problems for builders. Will the software
contain all parts in the catalog, or only a subset? Which subset and why? What
happens when new parts are added to the catalog, or when existing entries are
split?
Are the models accurate enough? Will the model software guarantee that bricks
that seem to fit actually do fit without damaging the parts or falling apart?
Does the software allow "illegal techniques"?
There are a lot of practical details that need to be considered, and I really
wonder if they have done that.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Nov 30, 2016 18:22 | | Subject: | Re: Tap on thumbnail shows thumbnail - Pointless! | | Viewed: | 43 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, WoutR writes:
| | […]
I am worried about that integration with the catalog.
I wonder if they thought about the differences between the Bricklink catalog
and other available databases like LDD. We distinguish many mold versions, and
I have not yet seen 3D-models representing those. Also, the Bricklink catalog
groups many colors. That could cause problems for builders. Will the software
contain all parts in the catalog, or only a subset? Which subset and why? What
happens when new parts are added to the catalog, or when existing entries are
split?
|
Stud.io uses LDraw parts for the geometry.
They are presented in the UI under their BrickLink name and ID.
For that, they use a matching table to/from LDraw (for the geometry, for import
and for export) but also LDD (for import only).
Colors are BL colors.
For now, there’re still a few errors when importing from LDraw or LDD. The last
patch corrected some.
The integration with the catalog is that:
* you can know what colors a part is available in (and you’re warned if it isn’t
but you can still paint it as you wish),
* and you can know the price of parts and of your model (current for sale average
new or 6 months for sale average new),
* and their weight and the overall size of your model.
As for what parts are available, only looking at the LDraw file names, they are
LDraw Official + Unofficial + some import from LDD (those that are not in LDraw
yet and don’t use LDraw primitives, about a thousand parts that you can get from
digital-bricks.de).
It doesn’t seem that the LDraw community has been contacted (officially or not).
| | Are the models accurate enough? Will the model software guarantee that bricks
that seem to fit actually do fit without damaging the parts or falling apart?
|
Collision detection is toggable.
For what I’ve experienced, collision data is a bit conservative on some parts.
There’re also errors and missing data.
You can place your parts wherever you want (“snapping” is also toggable when
you place a part).
But, even with collision detection on, there’ll always be errors (as there’re
in LDD).
There’s no physics. Your model may fall apart or be totally unbuildable.
| | Does the software allow "illegal techniques"?
|
As you can place parts anywhere, I’d say they are.
Even if you (as a builder) look at what the collision detection say, there’ll
be errors.
Some could be corrected. Others will be difficult to correct.
The big ones (IMHO) are those using technic holes for SNOT: a technic hole is
higher than a side (anti)stud by 0.12mm.
Note that this illegal technique and others are still in recent official sets.
LDD has the technic hole at 0.2mm higher than a side stud, thus forbidding the
constructions (or you have to play on its tolerances and may end up having parts
“disappeared” the next time you load your model).
LDraw has them at the same place (6541 + 4274 = 87087). So I don’t foresee Stud.io
enforcing that illegality any time soon.
| | There are a lot of practical details that need to be considered, and I really
wonder if they have done that.
|
My opinion is they are going blind, eyes shut. (Using LDraw and not talking to
them? Seriously?)
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Nov 30, 2016 16:33 | | Subject: | Re: Tap on thumbnail shows thumbnail - Pointless! | | Viewed: | 30 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, WoutR writes:
| | LEGO could not get it to work commercially, so let's just take their idea
and try again.
|
I think it was not profitable for LEGO because of the cost of picking parts.
BrickLink (’s sellers) already do that (somewhat) profitably.
It’s a good move, in line with the MOC shop.
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | viejos | | Posted: | Jan 2, 2017 01:40 | | Subject: | Re: Tap on thumbnail shows thumbnail - Pointless! | | Viewed: | 52 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, randyf writes:
| | Instead of more sarcastic remarks towards those of us trying to make the site
better, I hope you can understand why things are where they are at *now* and
where they are heading from here on out.
|
I hope this is not taken as a sarcastic remark, but IMO the new images that are
being uploaded are worse than the old "low res" images. You print them out in
an inventory or in an order, and there is this blob of color on the page. You
have to look very closely to see the studs and other features.
As far as the large images go, these should be photographs of actual parts, not
renders. Renders at large sizes make the site look sterile, and are pretty useless
at determining things like variants or color authenticity.
But the big issue I have is with large images being reduced and used as small
images. The original "low res" images that Troy submitted had EDGE LINES so they
looked like parts in Lego instructions, and they were easily identifiable at
a small size. If the edge lines have an appropriate thickness when the image
is large, they will be too thin when the image is made smaller. That's why
rendering programs have a way of adjusting the line thickness, so that instructions
can be drawn to different scales.
It is heartbreaking to see what this development team is doing to BrickLink.
Almost every move they make ends up cheapening the experience. Whether it's
the bland images, the pencil-thin fonts, or the twisted non-intuitive UI -
it's like a really bad bathroom/kitchen remodel, where the house is actually
worth less after the work is finished.
|
|
|
|
|
|
USA, California
)
)
Netherlands, Zuid-Holland
Germany, Berlin
France, Nouvelle-Aquitaine
