Topic: Revised Colour Mod explaination

Hello there!

Recently, I've become very interested in possibly creating a short video explaining in detail the exact rules of the Colour Mods for THAC and BRAWL.  The reason for this being that either contest can be extremely stressful and quick.  An animator may not always have time enough to wait for an official response to their inquiry, and the runners of the contest obviously cannot be expected to be available every minute of the event to provide the answers required.

As they are, the rules are rather clear, however, there is still some apparent confusion every THAC or BRAWL about the colour mod which can be a source of great distress for the animators involved.  Not that I mean to criticize the runners of any contest here on BiM for not being clear enough, nor do I mean to to criticize every entrant who has ever not understood the rules fully, but there could be something better.

A detailed video guide could be extremely useful as many people are much better at grasping information visually rather than reading a chunk of text.  The video could contain visual examples of possible Colour Mod situations which are either right or wrong.  With nice big green check marks and red Xs to emphasize this.

This video could cover subjects brought up less commonly, such as people wondering if a colour printed upon a piece of another colour would count towards their goal.

However, of course, I would need official BiM approval before this video is created.  As well as approval for each individual point brought up in the video.  Plus, it would be useful for people to point out issue which I myself have not remembered or not thought up.  I would want it to be as detailed as possible, with almost no room for confusion, with almost every scenario considered.  Alternatively, another person could take over making the actual video if they'd rather handle it personally.

Ideally, this video (if approved) could be linked in every THAC or BRAWL announcement post in the section concerning the Mod Element, as well as that same place in the official start thread for the contests.  Thus the contestants would be able to watch it beforehand, but also watch it again during the contest if they had forgotten anything or not seen that announcement thread.

Although, I would recommend actually changing the rules slightly before this.
This rule is somewhat misleading:

[X] brick connected to [Y] brick

As not all elements are literal "bricks" such as minifigure elements.  Although this detail is explained in the rules, it is still possible that it may raise some confusion, as when read with a certain mindset, will appear to be contradictory.  Also, the rule exists that touching can be used instead of connexion if you want.

I would suggest instead phrasing the rule always as this:

An [X] colour element connected to or touching a [Y] element

This rectification might hopefully mitigate slightly some unnecessary confusion.

Another issue is that currently capes, baseplates, and some other elements are not considered "bricks" but are instead segregated into another category which does not let them count towards the mod element.  I personally believe that this exception is unwarranted, as a cape or baseplate are no less a LEGO piece than any other element.  Also, baseplates do increase the piece count in LEGO's own official set piece count.
More importantly, this exception is entirely unnecessary, and simply creates additional confusion.
There is no way a contestant could cheat specifically because of baseplates.  Especially since they don't come in many colours.

Anyway, that concludes my suggestion.  Please tell me what everyone thinks!
I really do think that this video and slight rectifications to the rules would be extremely beneficial to the Bricks in Motion community.  That way we could focus more on making really cool films really quickly, and the people running the show could spend less time answering questions.
Obviously, it would not erase all problem entirely, but I truly think that the number of issues might at least be significantly mitigated.

Thanks for reading all of that!

Re: Revised Colour Mod explaination

I think it's a good idea, and would be a nice resource, BUT I also think the current rules are pretty clear, and that the contest runners are pretty quick to answer any questions already.
(Questions that are silly, already answered, actually legitimate, or otherwise)

I can see how some people may get confused, but we announce how it works a month or so in advance, and they have years and years of previous threads and videos to see how it works and doesn't work. Again, it may be a good idea, but I don't think it's entirely necessary. And I don't think we've had much issue with color mod mix-ups the past few contests, most of the time it's folks just plain forgetting to include it, not getting mixed up about it.

BUT, the letter mod is a much bigger issue, and a video explaining that in detail may be more profitable. After all, pikes can be 'K's, (So I was right about that...) but swords can't be 'T's, and funny looking markings on jackets may or may not count. A cursory mention of color mod stuff, with more time and detail explaining the letter mod would be much more welcome.

Also, making a custom video would be best probably, but including examples from past videos using certain tricks may also be cool. Just a thought.


As for baseplates/capes/whatnot, I'll agree. I'm not sure what the reasoning was behind banning them, but honestly it's not that hard to put the mod elsewhere. I've found that the vast majority of animators don't have any trouble including the mod whatsoever, even with the restrictions. So either way, it's that much trouble to deal with, even if it is a bit odd.


Thanks for noticing this issue and offering to help. Often people like complaining without offering any solution, and it's nice to see a more mature response to the problem at hand.

Re: Revised Colour Mod explaination

I think that an explanation video would be very helpful, especially for newcomers. The contest veterans like you, Pritchard, and I have a better understanding of the elements.

I agree with Pritchard that the color mod probably doesn't need to be explained too terribly much, but the alternations in color would be helpful to have pre-explained (like if medium turquoise counts as blue, etc). I think the letter elements are harder. I liked the idea of using one of those weapons as a "K" last BRAWL, but unfortunately, it was rejected as a proper mod element, so I think some per-clairification would have saved a lot of time with that one.

I also agree about the baseplate, cape, etc. rule, it just seems pointless. I think that often times mod elements are used a a restriction instead of just a simple mod element (where some mod elements don't count just because it's not exact, for example that weapon that looked like a "K", or the baseplate rule). But that's slightly off topic.

In summary, I'd love to see a help video on this subject.

YouTubeWebsite
https://bricksafe.com/files/rioforce/internet-images/RioforceBiMSig.png
"Whatever you do, do all to the glory of God." - 1 Corinthians 10:31b

Re: Revised Colour Mod explaination

I think a forum post with still images might be better than a video because you can refer back to different parts of it more easily without rewatching the whole thing while under the gun on a THAC.

But I do agree visual aids would be a great help. I'm so used to these concepts that I rarely think about how they might confuse newcomers.

http://i.imgur.com/wcmcdmf.png

Re: Revised Colour Mod explaination

Sméagol wrote:

I think a forum post with still images might be better than a video because you can refer back to different parts of it more easily without rewatching the whole thing while under the gun on a THAC.

That's actually a much better idea!
My plan for the video was actually more of just mostly images and barely any animation.  Just a slideshow with narration really so it could be made easily.  But a forum post would be basically the same thing, and people could scroll through it easily with loads of pictures to break up the post.

Thus it could also be posted in early stages and other people could suggest edits to be made to it.

Pritchard wrote:

BUT, the letter mod is a much bigger issue, and a video explaining that in detail may be more profitable. After all, pikes can be 'K's, Forget that, I was wrong. But swords can't be 'T's, and funny looking markings on jackets may or may not count. A cursory mention of color mod stuff, with more time and detail explaining the letter mod would be much more welcome.

RioForce wrote:

I agree with Pritchard that the color mod probably doesn't need to be explained too terribly much, but the alternations in color would be helpful to have pre-explained (like if medium turquoise counts as blue, etc). I think the letter elements are harder. I liked the idea of using one of those weapons as a "K" last BRAWL, but unfortunately, it was rejected as a proper mod element, so I think some per-clairification would have saved a lot of time with that one.

If I recollect correctly, my funny weapon used as a K for We The Pumpkins Three was actually accepted.  However, I do admit that it was probably a little risky.  Just in case, I had included backup mod elements in both of those shots.  For the potion purple, I put some trans red and trans orange atop torches at the side, which are just barely visible.  And for the Tears of Silver I put the mod element at the bottom of the screen and cropped it out.  Thus it might have been okay had it been disapproved.

The reason I did not mention the letter mod in my first post is that I felt myself unqualified to make a guide on it correctly.  The letter mod is not as clear and there are a lot of grey areas in that arena.

I do agree that a guide for the letter mod is probably be more needed, I'm just not sure how to go about it.

Perhaps a separate post could be made for the Letter Mod, this one containing a section for every individual letter.  Thus the exact shapes used could be discussed in great detail, with pictures made showing bricks useable for that letter.  Of course, the problem here is that we would have to go through every letter and try to think up everything for every possible letter situation.

This one would require a lot  more work though, as every letter is a slightly different subject when it comes to bricks shaped like them.  I do agree, though, that an unbent sword with a handle like that should count as a T.  That funny weapon I used would also work quite well as an X.

Pritchard wrote:

Thanks for noticing this issue and offering to help. Often people like complaining without offering any solution, and it's nice to see a more mature response to the problem at hand.

You're Welcome!

visual aids would be a great help. I'm so used to these concepts that I rarely think about how they might confuse newcomers.

I remember not having much trouble my first time around, but I had seen THAC and BRAWL happen before I ever entered.  The rules are reasonably clear right now, but I think every little bit would help.  And a colour mod guide could be made relatively easily.

Re: Revised Colour Mod explaination

I don't think a generic video covering mod elements in both THAC and BRAWL is a good idea. While they currently share many similarities, THAC and BRAWL are definitely separate entities, run by different people, and separated by other factors, including the inclusion of outside sponsors, and the association with BiM.

A lot of your concerns and specific examples were already cleared up in the revised and updated THAC XII rules. For example, I have replaced the word "brick" with the word "piece." Also, I clearly state the parameters on what is and is not acceptable for letter mods: "The letter mod element may exist on a printed LEGO piece, but it must clearly be that letter. An eyebrow or wrinkle on a minifig’s face, or a fold in the shirt on the minifig's torso are not letters."

Other examples of clarifying rules present in THAC XII's rules that were brought up as examples in this thread:

"The blue in the color mod can be any shade of light or dark blue, even transparent. The black can only be black, not shades of gray."

"Minifig parts (for example a red torso attached to grey legs) can count as the color mod, but bricks connected to or touching baseplates do not."

"The letter may be upper or lower case, but it still must be clearly that letter. The letter can be rotated but not mirrored. Again, it must be clearly identifiable as that letter. It may be written or printed on a piece of paper or sticker, drawn directly onto a brick, printed on a piece, or built from pieces and even integrated into the set."


When I ran THAC XII it was my intention to release a guide on mod elements, probably as a series of pictures. However, I ran out of time. For THAC XIII I will have explanation pictures ready.

In conclusion, your enthusiasm for improving the clarity of the mod element rules is appreciated, but I firmly think such explanation pictures or videos should be left to the actual contest organizers.

Re: Revised Colour Mod explaination

A video? I did create one for BRAWL 2014 that was linked in the rules but went fairly unnoticed. I plan making a brand new video for BRAWL 2015 that will go into more detail based on the rules for this year.

Pritchard Studios wrote:

BUT, the letter mod is a much bigger issue, and a video explaining that in detail may be more profitable. After all, pikes can be 'K's, (So I was right about that...) but swords can't be 'T's, and funny looking markings on jackets may or may not count. A cursory mention of color mod stuff, with more time and detail explaining the letter mod would be much more welcome.

Keep in mind, these inconsistencies are mostly due to different contests and different hosts (T sword THAC & K pike BRAWL). It's the host's job to make sure they are consistent on their decisions.

I'll echo NathanWells that a general video covering both could do more harm then good. The rules will always be different between the two contests. Someone might watch a broad overview and think they know it all, so they don't read the rules. They then find out about some violation particular to that contest later, getting them disqualified.

Former BRAWL host, 2013-2017
             Youtube   Twitter

Re: Revised Colour Mod explaination

Fun Sucker wrote:

A video? I did create one for BRAWL 2014 that was linked in the rules but went fairly unnoticed. I plan making a brand new video for BRAWL 2015 that will go into more detail based on the rules for this year.

I did notice that video.  However, there are a few scenarios which are not covered in it.  Which is why I felt something more detailed be created.

I'll echo NathanWells that a general video covering both could do more harm then good. The rules will always be different between the two contests. Someone might watch a broad overview and think they know it all, so they don't read the rules. They then find out about some violation particular to that contest later, getting them disqualified.

Another reason I wanted this is that I think that the Mod Element rules should absolutely be standardized betwixt the two contests.  Having any difference would cause quite some confusion.
However, in recent times we have had some steps towards that standardization with THAC's mod rules granting the mod element be once every shot like in BRAWL rather than every single frame of the film.  It makes no sense to have the rules of the mod elements be different in each contest, not even with the slightest degree of subtlety.

One of my suggestions is not just that a guide be made, but that the rules be standardized as so that the guide is applicable to both THAC and BRAWL.  Obviously, a universal guide could not be made until such a time as the rules are standardized.  But having two separate guides, however detailed, will likely create some confusion.

Nathan Wells wrote:

I firmly think such explanation pictures or videos should be left to the actual contest organizers.

As you wish.  As I said before, I do not have to make the guide myself, but was willing to do so if no one wanted to go to the trouble.

However, I do believe that it would be nice to have some degree of community involvement with some suggestions, and I really think that the people running THAC and BRAWL should come together to have these rules standardized.  Also, I think that including capes and baseplates as elements is important.

A lot of your concerns and specific examples were already cleared up in the revised and updated THAC XII rules. For example, I have replaced the word "brick" with the word "piece."

Ah, forgive me.  I was remembering the part much lower down in the post where the word brick is used as opposed to piece.  However, the word piece is at the top of the post in bold which is where it is most important.  Piece or element both work quite nicely either way.  And the use of the word brick lower down in the post is entirely unobjectionable since the word piece is used at the top.
(My suggestion for replacing the word "brick" was a minor point anyway, and not really a big issue)

Re: Revised Colour Mod explaination

Again, THAC and BRAWL are two separate contests, and most notability, only THAC is an official BiM contest. Fun Sucker and I have already worked together on how we could improve our rules, but since BRAWL is not an official BiM contest it is not obliged to do any to meet BiM's contest standards. Fun Sucker is a good contest runner and I'm sure he will make choices to make sure BRAWL's rules are clear and fair, and I've worked with Smeagol do the same for THAC. The updated rules for THAC are already quite detailed and clear, and contest runners have been prompt in responding to questions. During THAC XII we had no entries disqualified due to missing or improper use of mod elements, so clearly the rules were doing something right.

All of the rule changes Smeagol and I implemented were based on community feedback, and we welcome any additional feedback. However, that doesn't mean anything the community says automatically will result in rule changes.

Re: Revised Colour Mod explaination

A bit off topic here but still on the topic of Mod Elements.
If say, a THAC entry were to have a shot that is pixelated, hand drawn, CGI (not in brickfilm form) or something else that might make it look bad if it had a brick in it. How would we get away with doing that?
After all, someone could cheat in that by doing it before the the mod elements are allowed.

Note: halfway through typing, I though of something else. What if we included the colours in the shot themself but not in LEGO brick form. Example: mod elements red&blue can be a red shoe with blue socks inside them. Is that permitted?

Youtube

my dad doesn't want me to brickfilm on because it's his computer, but he's not home right now at the moment.
-FilmyGuy1

Re: Revised Colour Mod explaination

Kd2000 wrote:

A bit off topic here but still on the topic of Mod Elements.
If say, a THAC entry were to have a shot that is pixelated, hand drawn, CGI (not in brickfilm form) or something else that might make it look bad if it had a brick in it. How would we get away with doing that?
After all, someone could cheat in that by doing it before the the mod elements are allowed.

I too am curious how special non-stop-mo shots are regulated, because mod elements can often be added afterward (especially in CGI). What I'd say is if the brick doesn't fit, use the letter mod. Better yet, be safe instead of sorry and attempt to do it without the other type of animation.


Kd2000 wrote:

Note: halfway through typing, I though of something else. What if we included the colours in the shot themself but not in LEGO brick form. Example: mod elements red&blue can be a red shoe with blue socks inside them. Is that permitted?

No, it has to be colored bricks that connect, not just colors. You can use the letter mod though.

YouTubeWebsite
https://bricksafe.com/files/rioforce/internet-images/RioforceBiMSig.png
"Whatever you do, do all to the glory of God." - 1 Corinthians 10:31b