• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Vokhev last won the day on July 14

Vokhev had the most liked content!

About Vokhev

Recent Profile Visitors

290 profile views
  1. It worked! thanks!
  2. I recently submitted alternate inventories for a few sets. They were added very quickly (thanks for that!) but I think something about the way it was done might cause other people problems especially in one case. The set is 6970-1 Beta I Command Base. It seems the V1 inventory has been modified to reflect the alternate inventory I submitted and the original inventory is now V2. If I'm not mistaken, this will cause everyone who already has the set on their list to find themselves with the alternate inventory, which is probably not their reality. That's what happened to me. I didn't have to change my inventory to have the alternate in my collection. I think the inventories should be switched so the V1 is the basic inventory and V2 is the alternate one I submitted. Other point, for the other inventory I submitted. In this case the inventories are ok but the behavior of the site seems strange. The set is 6941-1 Battrax. I find it strange that now when you display the set's page the V2 inventory is the first one displayed by default. Shouldn't it be the V1 since it's probably the most common?
  3. Many inventories for a set?

    Ok, because I do have some sets that had different inventories. For example some parts were not the same color as on the box/instructions. I think it's a regional thing. It happened to me more than once here in Canada. So I could do a change request to add this different inventory. And after it's added, I could change the ones I have to this inventory so my parts are right? Is it ok to just list the changes in the change request?
  4. Many inventories for a set?

    At the top of the inventory of a set, there is now a listbox: "Viewing v1 - Initial Inventory". What is that exactly? Is it a feature for when there are variations in the inventory of a set?
  5. B Model link from main model

    Is there a way to avoid having these pop up in set searches (like the checkbox to exclude accessories)? It's cool to have these in the database but it really pollutes the results when you're looking for actual sets: https://rebrickable.com/search/?search_type=sets&q=&theme=130&min_year=1976&max_year=2017&min_parts=0&max_parts=5000#sets
  6. B Model link from main model

    My analyst fiber is loving this! This would really represent reality. If this feature was there, I would be tempted to populate it with alternates of my old sets.
  7. B Model link from main model

    It might indeed be nice to have a category for these but the way I see it, You'll often have to extrapolate how it was built (except for very small sets) so they could technically be MOCs. The one thing I have to say about these "back of the box" models is: Please don't have them come out as sets in searches or have a way to exclude them. It's really annoying when you're looking for real sets and you get a bunch of alternate in the results.
  8. Part Images

    I'm not an admin but since I've sent in over 100 photos that were accepted, I guess I mustn't be too bad at it and I might be able to help you. The picture submission page gives some guidelines: White background Single part per photo Correct coloring Part is in focus Minimal shadow Minimum 500 x 500px Consistent orientation for all colors Along with some examples. Personnally, I use a large white cardboard sheet (2' X 3') as a background. I usually curve it upwards and lead it against a box or something. That way, it's white both on the "ground" and the "back wall" without any seam. And it only cost me about 1$. For angles, I try to find similar parts on Rebrickable and reproduce the angle to keep things coherent. For light, one thing that helps is to have at least two sources of light to minimize shadows. I usually use simple clamp lights like this because I have some around: https://i5.walmartimages.com/asr/0aecde81-484e-42f6-9417-e353f7c1eec3_1.ccfdcbab7e9730267725d11d6b6898a1.jpeg?odnHeight=450&odnWidth=450&odnBg=FFFFFF But you can use pretty much anything. You could be ok with you flash if it has a diffuser, once again, to help with shadows. This is not much of an issue for small parts but something that can make pictures of large parts much better is to change the aperture on your camera. The higher the number, the more depth of field, which means a greater depth will be in focus. This will require more light but you should be ok if you have dedicates lights. Don't raise the ISO too much; it may create noise in your picture. Know that you don't need to rescale or crop your pictures in advance. The uploader has these features. But try to make sure you have enough white space to make a square that fits the entire part.
  9. List not included in number of parts

    That's what I thought i would need to do but I was hoping there was a better way. I'll see if it does the job for what I need. Thanks!
  10. Varying number of spare parts

    Wow! I just checked Bricklink and it lists the quantities at 20 and 7 respectively. So they agree with my count for the bushes but list even more than Rebrickable for the pins...
  11. Varying number of spare parts

    I was not looking for a vote. I don't think we should be telling you how to run the site. I just wanted to discuss the issue with members and admins and see if you guys had agreed on an approach when various instances of a set don't include the same spares. And if not, I hoped one could be agreed upon so things would be consistent. By the way, maybe my change request wasn't clear but in my specific case, Rebrickable is optimistic for both parts. I got 17 X 2780, the site lists 18. I got 7 X 3713, the site lists 8. Many people in my local LUG got the same set at the same time, since there was a big special. I asked if anyone had kept their spares aside or counted them and unfortunately had no luck.
  12. I recently submitted a change request for this case. I built a new set and got a few spare parts less that what is listed on Rebrickable so I sent it in. The admin responded that it sometimes vary from one batch to the other. That's not very surprising and obviously, the site will never be 100% accurate because of that. What I would like to discuss though is what the approach should be when this happens. Should Rebrickable be pessimistic or optimistic about spare parts? In other words, should it list only parts that are always there or all parts that may be there. Personally, I think it would be better to have the site be more pessimistic, that is, give the lower number of parts in cases where there is a variation. Here are the reasons: 1) It's much simpler (and cleaner) to add a loose part when you get more than to mark a spare part as lost, especially since you probably don't intend to replace it. It's a spare part. 2) Many people don't validate their spare parts. Those people will find themselves with less parts in reality than their inventory indicates if Rebrickable is optimistic, which is much more problematic than realizing you have more of a part than you thought because Rebrickable is pessimistic. What does everyone think?
  13. Submitting set photo

    Does this link work? https://alexamp.smugmug.com/LEGO/n-xvvN6/For-the-web/
  14. Submitting set photo

    I recently submitted a new picture for this set: https://rebrickable.com/sets/640-2/fire-truck-and-trailer/#parts My original submission was refused because something was wrong with my link to the picture. the second one was accepted and marked as done but the picture still hasn't changed. Did I do something wrong? Is there a delay before the change is visible?
  15. Help identifying parts

    Oh I intend to! I already submitted over 100 part photos. I'm waiting until I have enough new parts for it to be worth setting up for pictures.