People should check out the images on pick-a-brick.
Most of the badly shaded renders have been replaced by what looks like photorealistic
raytraced versions with lighting and shadows. The transparent parts now actually
look transparent.
Could these be used as BrickLink part images in the future? Attached are a few
examples.
People should check out the images on pick-a-brick.
Most of the badly shaded renders have been replaced by what looks like photorealistic
raytraced versions with lighting and shadows. The transparent parts now actually
look transparent.
Could these be used as BrickLink part images in the future? Attached are a few
examples.
/Jan
Wow, those ARE good. I'm impressed. Hopefully that trend continues to other
parts.
People should check out the images on pick-a-brick.
Most of the badly shaded renders have been replaced by what looks like photorealistic
raytraced versions with lighting and shadows. The transparent parts now actually
look transparent.
Could these be used as BrickLink part images in the future? Attached are a few
examples.
/Jan
Maybe they have someone using Studio to create these, they could automate it.
People should check out the images on pick-a-brick.
Most of the badly shaded renders have been replaced by what looks like photorealistic
raytraced versions with lighting and shadows. The transparent parts now actually
look transparent.
Could these be used as BrickLink part images in the future? Attached are a few
examples.
/Jan
These look really good! As for their being used as BrickLink images, since they
are high-quality and official, I see no reason that they would not be accepted
if they were to be submitted to the Catalog.
People should check out the images on pick-a-brick.
Most of the badly shaded renders have been replaced by what looks like photorealistic
raytraced versions with lighting and shadows. The transparent parts now actually
look transparent.
Could these be used as BrickLink part images in the future? Attached are a few
examples.
/Jan
There is a spin feature!! This will allow official images of the backs of torsos
to be uploaded.
People should check out the images on pick-a-brick.
Most of the badly shaded renders have been replaced by what looks like photorealistic
raytraced versions with lighting and shadows. The transparent parts now actually
look transparent.
Could these be used as BrickLink part images in the future? Attached are a few
examples.
People should check out the images on pick-a-brick.
Most of the badly shaded renders have been replaced by what looks like photorealistic
raytraced versions with lighting and shadows. The transparent parts now actually
look transparent.
Could these be used as BrickLink part images in the future? Attached are a few
examples.
/Jan
UGH. These are not better.
~Jen
They're good as far as raytraced images go. Perhaps not better, if one wants
to compare parts one has with these.
They could be used as additional cross-reference images since some buyers will
undoubtedly look at the image of the part in the rendered pick-a-brick images
and have a hard time finding what looks like the same element on BrickLink.
We just have to find out if TLG is okay with these images being used on BrickLink.
If they said no, that would be the end of this discussion thread.
People should check out the images on pick-a-brick.
Most of the badly shaded renders have been replaced by what looks like photorealistic
raytraced versions with lighting and shadows. The transparent parts now actually
look transparent.
Could these be used as BrickLink part images in the future? Attached are a few
examples.
/Jan
UGH. These are not better.
~Jen
Too small.
Not enough contrast.
Distracting reflections.
Muddy colors.
Oblique viewing angle on patterned parts.
Some of the small curved parts look better. And the transparent parts are a big
improvement. That's not hard as the old ones were terrible. But overall,
these solve some problems and create some new ones.
I always worry about how inconsistency affects our catalog images.
People should check out the images on pick-a-brick.
Most of the badly shaded renders have been replaced by what looks like photorealistic
raytraced versions with lighting and shadows. The transparent parts now actually
look transparent.
Could these be used as BrickLink part images in the future? Attached are a few
examples.
/Jan
UGH. These are not better.
~Jen
Oblique viewing angle on patterned parts.
The parts can be rotated via the spin feature, so there are other possible angles.
I always worry about how inconsistency affects our catalog images.
Fair, but images provided by BL members also run into the same issue (not everyone
has a professional setup for photographing parts, as some of our members clearly
do!)
People should check out the images on pick-a-brick.
Most of the badly shaded renders have been replaced by what looks like photorealistic
raytraced versions with lighting and shadows. The transparent parts now actually
look transparent.
Could these be used as BrickLink part images in the future? Attached are a few
examples.
/Jan
UGH. These are not better.
~Jen
Oblique viewing angle on patterned parts.
The parts can be rotated via the spin feature, so there are other possible angles.
All the minifig parts I saw so far were still oblique (shot from slightly above).
I always worry about how inconsistency affects our catalog images.
Fair, but images provided by BL members also run into the same issue (not everyone
has a professional setup for photographing parts, as some of our members clearly
do!)
My worry was that LEGO will stop producing the images we are currently using
and start using these new renders. Some are better, some are worse. We can't
just reapply every part in every color. So now there will be a mix of old and
new. And anytime someone at LEGO feels like it, the part is now presented at
a different angle. Or someone uploads the images at all different angles and
now admins (or submitters who care about such things) have to go run down a better
version.
I see the catalog images as needing to serve two masters: accuracy and identification.
Accuracy means that images show what the part really looks like with actual paint
colors, mold marks, variants etc.
Identification means that when going through browsing for parts or picking orders,
the images and colors can be quickly compared. Good identification means having
all the colors consistent and all the identical parts presented at the same angle.
It's also really difficult to compare patterned parts when they are all flipped
at different angles.
Sorry, I am just brainstorming here seeing all the potential problems. I am sure
there are some positive factors I will think of tomorrow.
People should check out the images on pick-a-brick.
Most of the badly shaded renders have been replaced by what looks like photorealistic
raytraced versions with lighting and shadows. The transparent parts now actually
look transparent.
Could these be used as BrickLink part images in the future? Attached are a few
examples.
/Jan
UGH. These are not better.
~Jen
Oblique viewing angle on patterned parts.
The parts can be rotated via the spin feature, so there are other possible angles.
All the minifig parts I saw so far were still oblique (shot from slightly above).
Ah, OK.
To be fair, though, the older type of renders were from basically the same angle.
🫤
I always worry about how inconsistency affects our catalog images.
Fair, but images provided by BL members also run into the same issue (not everyone
has a professional setup for photographing parts, as some of our members clearly
do!)
My worry was that LEGO will stop producing the images we are currently using
and start using these new renders. Some are better, some are worse. We can't
just reapply every part in every color. So now there will be a mix of old and
new. And anytime someone at LEGO feels like it, the part is now presented at
a different angle. Or someone uploads the images at all different angles and
now admins (or submitters who care about such things) have to go run down a better
version.
Maybe we should create some standards for image angles, then? Additionally, perhaps
both old and new renders can be included in part entries when possible, in order
to better facilitate a potential transition. Obviously this would take a lot
of time and effort, so maybe we could start with new parts?
I see the catalog images as needing to serve two masters: accuracy and identification.
Accuracy means that images show what the part really looks like with actual paint
colors, mold marks, variants etc.
Identification means that when going through browsing for parts or picking orders,
the images and colors can be quickly compared. Good identification means having
all the colors consistent and all the identical parts presented at the same angle.
It's also really difficult to compare patterned parts when they are all flipped
at different angles.
Sorry, I am just brainstorming here seeing all the potential problems. I am sure
there are some positive factors I will think of tomorrow.
Fair, but images provided by BL members also run into the same issue (not everyone
has a professional setup for photographing parts, as some of our members clearly
do!)
Hey,
In my hurry, I forgot to comment on this earlier. I don't have a professional
set-up, I have a very amateur set-up with a little cloth photo booth I got off
amazon. I agree this is very helpful for photographing some LEGO parts that are
tricky like torsos and heads.
However, a whole bunch of my images are taken with just a sheet of white paper,
a really bright lamp, and an average camera phone. I think most of us have those
things. What I also have is a perfectionist tendency and a desire to make
clean images.
Here's an image I created today. White paper. Camera phone. 10 minutes in
Photoshop. That's it. My point I guess is that professional equipment
is not required.
These are actually quite good. I would not mind seeing these used as BrickLink
images *IF* any/all mold variations are also available in the same quality. For
parts without any BrickLink-variations I'd actually welcome them directly.
The newer ones are certainly going to take a bit of getting used to and perhaps
even cause some confusion if used here alongside the old existing renders. For
instance what you are looking at here believe it or not is Dark Orange Legs rather
than Reddish Brown!?
In an ideal world the catalog would only use either the old renders or the new
renders however that is just not going to be possible by the looks of things!
The newer ones are certainly going to take a bit of getting used to and perhaps
even cause some confusion if used here alongside the old existing renders. For
instance what you are looking at here believe it or not is Dark Orange Legs rather
than Reddish Brown!?
In an ideal world the catalog would only use either the old renders or the new
renders however that is just not going to be possible by the looks of things!
Yeah, I see the problem. The black and dark blue parts are also hard to differentiate
on a white background.
Denmark
)
)
)
)
)
USA, Indiana
Spain, Comunidad Valenciana
France, Nouvelle-Aquitaine
Australia, Queensland
Netherlands, Noord-Holland
United Kingdom, England
)
)