Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'General Off-Topic Chat' started by Master Mo, May 18, 2011.
My first thread in a very very long time
I love papercraft, although I never tried it, will do this summer cuz got a lot of free time, thats one masterpiece btw.
Thanks, I appreciate it. If you have a lot of free time it is really something worth while imo, since you start with so many small pieces and in the end when you see it as a whole it is very satisfying
i love it man. that thing itself is like a trophie. but i only like looking at them most of the times.
Ya, I thought so for a long time as well, since I always thought it looked hard to make one but it just takes time and patience. But I always loved watching at papercrafts.
I also thought how can this be steady and don`t fall in itself but it is very steady and hard, which astonished me when I was finished...
Yay! We now have a more-or-less accurate replica. Let's bomb the place. Heck, let's bomb the whole Vatican.
No, don't ask me if I'm joking.
Won't ask, we know you are joking.
At least we hope so
the paving is all wrong
Not really something I could have influenced but you are right. Even though the model is quite accurate (though obviously simplified) the paving is really massively simplified, which came as a surprise to me, since it is just paint on the paper and not something that needs to be modelled...
Though it doesn`t appear on the pics but the lines on Saint Peter's Square are indeed painted onto the floor but like I said not visible on my pics. They are very thin.
Still I think the people who designed this papercraft outdone themself
That is cool! So did you get it as a kit or did you make it from scratch?
also the sides of the square aren't supposed to be parallel, the whole thing tapers out as you approach the basilica.
The ground plan of the whole papercraft was predetermined (it is white under it) so there wasn`t really a choice. It is nearly exactly where it was suppose to be according to the designers of the papercraft, though I don`t know why they didn`t do it exactly how it is in reality. IMO it looks kind of good to be parallel on the model but like I said I didn`t have a choice...
But don`t forget: "All models are in simulacra, that is, simplified reflections of reality, but despite their inherent falsity, they are nevertheless extremely useful." - Wikipedia on "models"
i wasn't pointing it out as a flaw in your assembly. the angled wings are a major feature of the building and it's completely intentional, i would of included it if i designed the model.
I understand and I agree.
It wouldn`t have been hard to make it, since the wing-parts are completely separated from the building-part (before gluing them together of course) but I guess for the sake of simplicity they did it, because the round parts need to be exactly oval-shaped but the wall-parts have very distinctive angles and I don`t know if they maybe thought that it would be too hard to accomplish. But I doubt that, since the length of the wall-parts would have predetermind the angle of the wall itself and thus there nearly wouldn`t have been anything major that could have gone wrong...
But who knows why they changed it... Still I think it is amazing how they`ve translated a complex structure like this into fourteen A4 sheets of paper!
yeah, it's still cool
i was wondering if i can find something similar for my kids "waste your parent's time and build a mission model" project.