All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Today
  2. Other example: Why 3 of the magic wands are spare parts? All 6 magic wands are on the official photo (4 in use, 2 lying on the ground ) and they are listed in the instruction (page 122): https://rebrickable.com/sets/75955-1/hogwarts-express/#parts
  3. if you just want the gears why, not buy them loose at bricklink or brickowl?
  4. https://rebrickable.com/blog/187/review-30340-1-emmets-piece-offering/#comments When it comes to that hidden price guide,Shouldn't it just track changes in price. ie if the price remain same don't do a entry, and limit the number of data points to 100 (3+ months worth of changes). That way all sets will have data in that field even if they are rare and barely sold. (as long as one set has bee sold since the feature started monitor the channels) That is the problem with bricklinks price guide data is flushed after 6 months, so if you find a rare sets you won't know what it's worth.if a set is unavailable put it down to zero, so we can see not only value but availability. ie when did the last set sell and how long did it takes for it to sell at that price
  5. Does anybody have any suggestions for small lego sets with many unique gears? They are quite sparse in smaller sets.
  6. Works perfect for my lists. You even managed to sort the -1 to -9 sets prior to the -10 ones. Excellent work! Thank you!
  7. Yesterday
  8. Thanks for providing LDraw Images download, but one color is missing from the download page, which is "322 Medium Azure". Could you please take a look and add the missing color back? Thanks! https://rebrickable.com/downloads/ LEGO LDraw Images
  9. @biodreamer- could you respond to this post?
  10. Well when the photo library is big enough it could actually be a good idea to change those preferences.
  11. I checked several of my set lists that had a good variety of numbers. Everything was going perfect until this one. It started out through the 3 digit numbers and transitioned perfectly to 4 and 5 digit numbers until the MOC for 31079. 5 sets later it is back on track all the way through the transitions for 6 and 7 digit number sets.
  12. This is irrelevant as the vast majority of parts use either EIDs or LDraw images as the main image on thumbs. So you won’t even see a photo until you open the part page, at which point you will be able to tell the difference from its title anyway.
  13. 3003b has a incorrect photo of a 3003a, it makes those entries confusing, since they don't follow chronological order.
  14. This is my personal opinion regarding photos. Standard should be one picture per part taken from a good angle to see the part main features, However if a part has more than one mold, and you can't get the mold difference in the main picture without having a bad view angle, two merged pictures into one is preferred as the main picture. So in case of 3001(a,b,c) and such bricks I would prefer if the two parts in different angle remain, but cleaned up according to guides. and for the notion of it's easier to take 2 pictures than one and your more less requiring photo editing, adding them next to each other is easy compare to cleaning up the shadows and light issues. (you guys still need to add the set light level step to the tutorial, which is great by the way) This way we can be sure that the part exist in that color since the mold difference is fully visible and not hidden under the part. This way I can simply browse my part collection and see all my parts and don't need to hover over each molded brick separately to see which is what mold. I however would still prefer if images had alpha/transparent background instead of white. so for 3005, there is no need for a picture merge, it good to have two picture but since there is no mold with a different underside, no reason to focus on it in the main picture. So the standard stand alone picture should be used. This parts only have different logo on the stud, different pip positions and of course different mold indicators ie letters and number beneath. So far we haven't divided entries of either of those reasons so photos of it isn't required.
  15. So I figured out a way to make this work. If anything looks wrong, please let me know.
  16. Oops, I haven't deployed it yet I need to wait for some image processing stuff to finish which might take a few hours. I have actually modified the change to work numerically where possible for this specific tab. However, getting that to work on all set listings is a much harder problem.
  17. I have no qualms with that. If it is a major issue on a given set, it is easily overcame with renumbering sets -1 to -9 as -01 to -09. That said, though, when I just checked, this change does not appear to be taking effect. Do I need to do something to enable it?
  18. I've added ordering by set number. It's not a numeric field though, so the ordering will be -1, -11 instead of -1, -2. But at least it's consistent now.
  19. Last week
  20. No problem, that is also why i posted it here by help. There are not so many moc's i'm looking ad no time on the moment, i'm stuck in 30 of my own projects/ moc's to end in a short time.
  21. I've installed Pale Moon to test. It doesn't reload the page, it just updates the URL to add the hash. As for the scrolling, I have no idea why it does that so can't even begin to try and fix it just for this browser sorry.
  22. Yes, when better photos are added older ones are deleted so it doesn’t get cluttered. I deleted 10 images from that part when reviewing it to take the total number of secondary part photos from 36 to 26 (which took the total number of photos for that part from 66 to 56). The policy is to only show 1 angle of a part in an image (always has been but was not enforced for a long time, similar to white background policy). That’s why we have secondary photos. This is for numerous reasons. 1. when a photo is a thumb multiple angles in one image make the image far too small to be useful. 2. We don’t want to confuse casual users who may think that the multiple angle is somehow the whole part. 3. Some parts benefit from more than 2 angles. It would be absolutely useless to have an image with 3+ angles in one image. 4. It’s much harder for a user to submit a collaged image than 2 separate images. We are endeavouring to remove photos with the same part in it twice. This doesn’t mean we delete all photos like this, only when a new one is submitted. However newly submitted collage photos are no longer approved. To be clear, duplicate photos have only been getting deleted in the last month-ish as Nathan made changes to the system which allowed this to happen. Nederbriks complaint about missing photos has been ongoing for close to 2 years and has been throughly investigated. We now think we have got to the bottom of it and if you read back on this post it will be clear to you that a couple of big changes to how images are handled by the site over the last year or so have complicated his issue and how he expects the site to act. with the addition of the dummy sets, and upon the completion of Simons LDraw project I am confident Nederbriks issues will vanish.
  23. Nederbrik said that he was not just talking about his photos, but many photos submitted by members were disappearing. Yesterday I was researching Nederbrik's post with the 3005 image showing photos submitted by meregt on Oct 28, 2018. At that time the member photos did show up for me. I had to go do other things, and when I returned, the member photos were gone, leaving me with this photo. In looking at the change log, I found that the photos from Nederbrik's 3005 screenshot had all been deleted during the time that I was gone. So he is correct, member photos are disappearing because they are being deleted. Given the choice, I would much rather see 1 photo showing both top and bottom than have the two photos that are currently displayed.
  24. If you do, I'll change the set image for Classic to something more appropriate: and use this for system:
  25. @biodreamer I suggest changing Classic back to: LEGO-Classic-1 Unused parts sold by LEGO between 1945 and 1965 and adding LEGO-System-1 Unused parts sold by LEGO between 1966 and 2000 1966 being the year in which LEGO overhauled all LEGO basic sets and parts packs. From 1958 to 1965 TLG used the same spare parts pack numbers for all countries (with a few minor exceptions). But starting in 1966, different countries had their own spare part packs, with their own numbering system. Also the year that Town Plan was discontinued and the System I Leg was phased out in favor of LEGO System. 2000 being the year (October 17th) when LEGO [email protected] went online. Can you agree with that?
  1. Load more activity