Classic-Castle.com

An interesting topic... I have thought about this lately as well. I think to me, at least in some cases, it has gotten out of hand. You look over and MOC and near everything has been done in SNOT. I use SNOT very sparingly as I like the more classic lego look. That said there have been some brilliant ideas with SNOT building tech, but I agree with most here that it still need be used where needed not as the standard usually. I have though seen some pretty neat near complete SNOT MOCs that are great but I still prefer the standard SOT looks personally.

Heir

DNL wrote:I'm not a fan of SNOT bases and grass or sand, but i do like making my castles studless. It looks kind of unfinished to me if the crenelations have studs on them, and i also like to make SNOT floors because they look more realistic than studded floors. I do like SNOT or tiled water because it looks much more like real water than water with studs.
I also like studdless rocks because rocks made of slopes don't look as blocky as BURPS or rocks made of normal bricks.

Well Im am totally not a fan of snot grass or baseplate or something like that it looks awful if you do SNOT grass bla just plain I dont like it!

But I totally think maybe SNOT water is ok just like blue tiles but its kind of easier to make

I'm a big SNOT and studless fan
There's some really clever SNOT techniques out there, some still waiting to be discovered!
In my most recent MOC I think you can count the number of studs showing on 2 hands
I do agree though that SNOT or studless grass look too smooth unless you're building the greens on a golf course.

I think it's all about using the correct technique for the job.

Some things will work out better using SNOT techniques. Even LEGO has been using some SNOT for the fronts of vehicles. Of course, some people overdo it and SNOT for the sake of SNOTting where more traditional building techniques would work just as well. For them... well, if they want to do extra work, that's their choice.

"Do you think SNOT is the best thing since sliced bread?"
Yes I do! Ever since I found out about it I've tried to use it as much as possible. I think that smooth, flat surfaces (water, hangar floors, etc.) and any kind of vehicle should use SNOT simply because it's alot more realistic. The only place I'm really okay with studs is the landscape itself (grass, dirt, mud, etc.) because it would very hard to achieve the same kind of subtle elevation changes. Just my opinion though.

Good question! Firstly I think the term 'SNOT' should be clarified-- are we discussing techniques that change the orientation of a brick, or the morass of 'tiled all over' MOCs that seem the standard on MOCpages (and the builders who argue against exposed studs in general)? Firstly, I'll say that I have no right or even desire to tell others how to build.

On SNOT and landscape:

I have used SNOT to build rocks, water, and snow, reasoning that repetition is a good way to validate any techniques's existence (meaning: these used as SNOT work better in a big scene than the same technique would look in a vignette for the simple reason of conservation of detail) Complicated, eye-catching techniques can draw focus away from the heroes in a smaller scene but become nearly ubiquitous when used as a backdrop for a castle or tower.

On SNOT and detail:

The more the better! My building style is almost painfully busy, and complicated, parts-intensive, but flashy SNOT can, for the same reasons above, focus attention on the part of a building I want to draw attention to-- the roof in this MOC is a good example. Other problems are best solved with SNOT!

Finally- sometimes SNOT is just plain cool. My tag is made of SNOTted tiles and bricks!

I like using snot a lot

studs are great when you want to add texture to something

Info out

What an interesting topic, from one "Blue" to another

Earlier the difference between SNOT and studless was discussed. Studless can be great, especially in spaceships. But that can often be an exercise in using your vast supply of tiles--or not, if you don't have that many. I like tiled battlements, but studded wall-walks.

I don't think in SNOT when I mentally design something (never though I'd write that sentence). I have used the technique for water, and walls that I want to have a lot of detail. Otherwise I stick to SOT (Studs On Top). So much so that you could say that I'm rather beSOTted when I build (I did know I would wrote that someday).

Well... personally, I hate overdone SNOT moc's. I must admit that in certain area's of landscaping it looks all the better, like with water. but I do not think that it is necesary to build every signle part of a moc's landscape with snot. I've recently bought a bunch of 2x4 green plates at the lego shop in Cologne, and used together with 1x2 lime green plates, you get a piece of landscape just as awesome.
There are, however and as mentioned before, exceptions to this. some stud works, Including the Crazy Jester moc look really good.
Also, I do make a difference between studless and SNOT. Studless looks more lego-ish to me. It feels better. SNOT is making lego as realistic as possible, which is not lego's main purpose. Lego's purpose for me is to imagine and use your fantasy on the spot. That's also why I rarely plan moc's before I built them.

There's my opinion.

I'm not one who really cares what technique is used where, as long as the creation looks nice. Though I agree that any technique used to much can be a bad thing.

I think SNOTted mocs generally looks better than non SNOTed, and I don't really get what kind of MOCs people are refering to as "overSNOTed"? Can you give some exampels?
Of course everything can be overdone and used in the wrong way, but I can't say i find that more often with SNOT than with any other technique...

I'm not going to say I don't gawk appreciatively at models built with SNOT but I too believe that studs are what make LEGO, LEGO. I'll just say that there is a time and a place to use SNOT techinque within models.

-A

I generally build studs up, but will use SNOT when necessary. The caisson of my Solomon's Lump lighthouse is studs up, but I wanted it to sit flat on the water, so that required SNOTted water. The deck is also SNOTted because that was the easiest way to build an octagonal shaped deck. One should use the best technique available for a given situation.

insurrection wrote:I think SNOTted mocs generally looks better than non SNOTed, and I don't really get what kind of MOCs people are refering to as "overSNOTed"? Can you give some exampels?

I don't think it's entirely fitting to give examples of MOCs one doesn't like, or MOCs they find use techniques badly, that's not cool for the builders.
Instead, you could point out which studless or SNOTty MOCs you like to prove your point.

Bluesecrets wrote:Basically, we are talking you see no studs.

For studless MOCs as Blue describes, I have to say it all depends on what you're going for. As a general tip though, do it in moderation. No studs at all vs all studs is not a question you should ask yourself when building. The right combination of studs and lack of studs can really make a MOC. If I may be so bold as to cite an example, Remyth's Museum is an excellent example of a good mix of studs and lack of studs (and SNOT incidentally). Giving the building all those little studs really brought the simple beauty of the building out for me. Putting studs where normally studs would not be, like on walls, and putting no studs where studs would normally be, like on the ground below, makes for a nice switch, don't you think?

Good discussion, guys.

~Voran