Home› Brick Owl

Dimension system not working properly: Can't add dimensions

TeupTeup
edited August 2014 in Brick Owl Vote Up0Vote Down
There seems to be something wrong with the dimension system and in my opinion it has high priority for fixing. I noticed that several items do not have dimension entry boxes. These items seem to have implicit dimensions that are not zero, but infinite. The result is that some people will buy them for extremely high shipping costs, and most people (like me), I assume, will leave the store instantly and not even order.

Examples include:
http://www.brickowl.com/catalog/lego-black-rubeus-hagrids-black-hair-and-beard-40238#edit-dimensions (and several other headgears for that matter)
http://www.brickowl.com/catalog/lego-medium-dark-flesh-axe-with-red-head-and-silver-edge-16994

Please set implicit dimensions for parts to zero rather than infinite. I hope this can be done ASAP. Right now there is a whole list of parts that can practically not be bought, except by the very few who are either really rich or forgot to check out the shipping costs. We're losing out on a great deal of transactions right now. Thanks!

Comments

  • 15 Comments sorted by Votes Date Added
  • TeupTeup
    Vote Up0Vote Down
    Or maybe there's a way for me to add the dimensions for these parts? I see that they are included in the list of parts that are missing dimensions, but I can't seem to find a way to add them...
  • minithingsforlifeminithingsforlife
    Vote Up0Vote Down
    The links you have are for the coloured items. The dimensions are held in the non-coloured items.
    I usually just click edit and a banner comes across saying you are editing the coloured item and provides a link to the non coloured one.
  • TeupTeup
    edited August 2014 Vote Up0Vote Down
    The links you have are for the coloured items. The dimensions are held in the non-coloured items.
    I usually just click edit and a banner comes across saying you are editing the coloured item and provides a link to the non coloured one.
    Oh I see, thanks! I wonder why the coloured items have individual weights though, does that really ever differ?

    Still, the link from "items missing dimensions" from my dashboard also takes me to the coloured ones, so that was a bit misleading. I see the banner now, I guess I overlooked it.

    Maybe it is still a good idea if BO automatically provides small items (headgears, utensils, ...) with an implicit volume of zero until someone enters the dimensions? There are so many of those, and so many will be added in the future.. it'd be a shame if they'd all indicate €10 shipping rather than €2.. Dimensions set to zero isn't perfect but it's more accurate than infinite :P

    Also, it would be nice if there'd be an icon or something that indicates missing dimensions in the order picking list. That way I would immediately measure and add them on the go. I'd be much more likely to add a lot of items that way than by clicking the "items missing dimensions" link on my own initiative.
  • StragusStragus
    Vote Up0Vote Down
    That seems strangely similar to the old suggestion that minifigs shouldn't have very large assumed dimensions by default :).

    Lawrence indicated that he would prefer that people submit dimensions instead. That shouldn't be a problem for the parts you refer to, having to build minifigs and measure them is more troublesome.
  • DadsAfolDadsAfol
    Vote Up0Vote Down
    And to answer the color question, yes weight can vary by color as much as 20% for the same piece. Weigh 100 white bricks and 100 black bricks if you want to experiment...
  • TeupTeup
    edited August 2014 Vote Up0Vote Down
    That seems strangely similar to the old suggestion that minifigs shouldn't have very large assumed dimensions by default :).

    Lawrence indicated that he would prefer that people submit dimensions instead. That shouldn't be a problem for the parts you refer to, having to build minifigs and measure them is more troublesome.
    Hmm yes :D But that was about a default dimension for figs. I appreciate that it's best when the dimensions are all added, and they should be. But I'm saying that until such time it'd make sense if a part is assumed to be tiny (most new parts are, as there are so many headgears, utensils, etc.. I assume new printed heads keep the existing dimensions, otherwise those too). Right now every new part is assumed to have super freaky dimensions that require it to be shipped by Mammoet.
    Downside is of course big parts that accidentally qualify for lower shipping costs, but these parts are very rare, and the odds that that one particular piece spoils it is even smaller. Something worth to consider IMO.
  • LawrenceLawrence
    edited August 2014 Vote Up0Vote Down
    We choose to err on the side of caution, so sellers don't loose out on shipping. The best way to get accurate shipping amounts is to enter accurate dimensions for parts in your inventory missing dimensions.
  • TeupTeup
    Vote Up0Vote Down
    Hi Lawrence, thanks for the reply. I'm still in favour of zero default dimensions and I hope you'll change your mind, but your position is logical enough. I'll just have to go and do a lot of measuring then :-)

    What's the convension for measuring hair pieces by way? Part taken upright (how they fit on a stud) or how it lieson the table (which may have an arbitrary angle for a hair piece). Maybe a bit of an autistic question but it's more fulfillung work if I know I do it right :P
  • walstibwalstib
    edited August 2014 Vote Up0Vote Down
    The convention for figs themselves is mentioned here.

    http://www.brickowl.com/forum#/discussion/comment/3996

    It is not required by the system to be like this, I measured the first few dozen I did any way I thought at the time, almost always "lying down" like in an envelope.

    For packing the system rotates them so it is irrelevant for that, having a nice tidy catalog is good I think and have tried to keep the format now. Some figs though this should be ignored to fit them in an envelope. Many figs I have the hair rotated to the side so they are still under 2 cm on at least one side.

    The hair I would figure is the same way, especially not being an assembly, not really important but the same as a fig to be most proper.

    Parts you can put in the stud dimensions as well, only profitable for everyone, I have been doing longest side first, short side second, most obvious use for brick height third. Some parts just don't fit logic, better to just get them in than fuss to long on determining a perfect side.

    Hope that helps, just my current understanding,

    Joe
  • TeupTeup
    edited August 2014 Vote Up0Vote Down
    Oh, yeah, but what I meant to say was arbitrary angles, so not just 90 degree flips. For example, this part:

    http://www.brickowl.com/catalog/lego-panel-10-x-6-x-11-2408

    Is only 5 studs high when lying down, however, (and this is also the answer to my question :) ) The catalog takes it as being 6 studs in its smallest dimension, because it takes the upright position.

    I guess you could argue for both. The straight upright standard makes it a nice and consistent catalogue as you say, however, when it comes to shipping, it could be off. If there's a 5 stud width shipping limit for a particular shipping method, the catalog would say this part doesn't fit (it's a box that is 6 studs wide in its smallest dimension as far as the system is concerned), when in reality it does because diagonally it is 5 studs in width. That error is always on the safe side though, so it's alright.. at least the system doesn't force me to puzzle with the bricks too much, it'll accept that something will not fit sooner than I will when packing the order :D
  • SuperBrickSuperBrick
    Vote Up0Vote Down
    Oh, yeah, but what I meant to say was arbitrary angles, so not just 90 degree flips. For example, this part:

    http://www.brickowl.com/catalog/lego-panel-10-x-6-x-11-2408

    Is only 5 studs high when lying down, however, (and this is also the answer to my question :) ) The catalog takes it as being 6 studs in its smallest dimension, because it takes the upright position.

    I guess you could argue for both. The straight upright standard makes it a nice and consistent catalogue as you say, however, when it comes to shipping, it could be off. If there's a 5 stud width shipping limit for a particular shipping method, the catalog would say this part doesn't fit (it's a box that is 6 studs wide in its smallest dimension as far as the system is concerned), when in reality it does because diagonally it is 5 studs in width. That error is always on the safe side though, so it's alright.. at least the system doesn't force me to puzzle with the bricks too much, it'll accept that something will not fit sooner than I will when packing the order :D
    Are you aware that the catalog allows for two sets of dimensions:
    Stud dimensions: Stud dimensions only apply to parts usually. This is a measure of how big the part is in terms of Lego studs. It does not include any protrusions.

    Dimensions: This is the actual dimensions of the item in any applicable packaging. Measure the entire footprint of the item, so if the item includes any protruding bits, include that in the dimensions. The dimensions should essentially be the smallest box that the item could fit into. Minifigures/parts should be measured standing up, most other items should be measured laying down.

    Somebody would need to submit the dimensions for that part so they can be used, at the moment they seem to be calculated from the Stud dimensions.

  • walstibwalstib
    edited August 2014 Vote Up0Vote Down
    I rotate parts like this to a best packing scenario and enter that information. I figure as this info is primarily for sellers to use with their shipping tolerances, entering that info allows the seller to offer more for less through the system, and is priority over having the dimensions make perfect 90 degree grid like sense.

    This is akin to the discussion about having disassembled mini figs calculated for shipping and a real world standing measurement for those who need them for non shipping purposes.

    I think a second level of measurements would be most clear to people browsing the catalog . Packing measurements and "building" measurements for those who don't want to work in studs. Packing could be on the edit screen...

    ..but there are many things I would like to see first. Now I just want the shipping calculator to give everyone the best numbers to work with.

    Not that I have any say or am necessarily correct on everything. :)

    Joe

  • SuperBrickSuperBrick
    Vote Up0Vote Down
    Hi Lawrence, thanks for the reply. I'm still in favour of zero default dimensions and I hope you'll change your mind, but your position is logical enough. I'll just have to go and do a lot of measuring then :-)
    I favor the current defaults. Without any default these parts would fit in any size packaging and thousands of these parts would not take any space which would make the size and volume limits pointless.

  • TeupTeup
    Vote Up0Vote Down
    @SuperBrick: Thanks for clearing that up, I did notice there were two but now I understand the stud dimensions are more a taxonomy kind of thing and the actual measurements are for shipping.

    @walstib: Oh I see, yeah, I do agree that is the most relevant factor. But I thought everyone was adhering by 90 degree grid standards. I think I'll do it your way as well :)
Sign In or Register to comment.