I have always wondered about this (like I do with many other things). How much modding would you have to do to a puzzle for it to be considered created by you? I was thinking possibly 50% of the puzzle has to be changed (whether it be sanding, extending, etc.) What do you puzzle moddifiers think?

If I'm understanding you correctly, I don't think there's any real distinction between what is considered a mod and what is considered something you created. The two terms can be used interchangeably. If I take out one corner of my 3x3, and call it a mod, I can also say I made it.

I've always considered a 'mod' as something that's been transformed from a pre-made puzzle (ie most of Tony Fisher's puzzles are mods) that utilizes it's original mechanism, while something you created would be a puzzle that's either been CAD'd and printed (For example, Oskar's puzzles), cast (Drew's puzzles) or made from scratch. (Aleh's original 4x4x4 which I believe was handmade from a 3x3x3 and some plastic sheeting, SmaZ's Grimace).

I think you will find Tony wouldn't much like his puzzles being called "mods". You were on the right track using the verb "transformed".

People are pretty sloppy about using the term "mod" for pretty much any non-production puzzle, or even sometimes production puzzles that started out as transformations (or modifications ) of an existing puzzle.

As for what makes something yours, that is a huge grey area and is probably fairly subjective. How novel was the idea, and what did you really add to make it a new puzzle? Were you the first to do so? Was what you did also done by someone else independently (this happens now and again)?

Believe me, such issues make upholding our KO policy a non-trivial task

Dave

I am not a great builder, but I would have to say I do both modifications, and making.
I have 'modified' a few balls and cubes. I.e. took existing puzzles and made something different from them. But I consider things like Santa and my bells as a creation. Yes they use a cube for a core, but essentially, I made them from scratch.
It's your puzzle. You choose what to call it.

Regarding the term "mod", I am not sure why it sounds bad at all.
In a context, it is always quite clear as a general term to describe
many puzzles. Especially if we look in depth an asymmetric (or slightly
asymmetric) puzzle which can turn into many different shapes, if it
abides by the same (or very similar) mathematical rules of a given one,
then it *is* a mod by definition.

In any case, if we wish to be specific, we may also use the terms
"shape mod" as well as "transformation", because then, we have
a clearer view.

More specifically, there are (1) shape mods of a given twisty puzzle
and those shape mods never change shape (and I personally prefer).
There are also (2) those shape mods which do change shape after
some manipulation, while sometimes there are (3) other shape mods
which have additional (and often ingenious) features.

So we may describe the first type (1) of such puzzles as shape-mods,
the second type (2) of such puzzles as simple transformations, and
the third type (3) of such puzzles as complex transformations

Then, after this, we may also define the jumble mods, which should be
differentiated from both shape mods and transformations. And of course,
all this is not carved in stone, it is what I use to better organise puzzles
in my own collection.




Pantazis

Surely this is even less of a creation than a transformation / mod? The machines at Shapeways do the making. The people who use 3d printing are designers.
Some might argue that it is unfair to put fully 3d printed puzzles up against transformations / mods in the puzzle of the month voting.

Even though I am a CAD-based puzzle designer myself, I am tempted to agree with Tony, at least partially. The type of work that goes into designing a puzzle in CAD is very, very different from the type of work that goes into a handmade transformation. Trying to compare the thought and work that goes into puzzles made in these two different ways is like trying to compare apples and oranges. But I would not say that either one is "easier" than the other.

Handmade puzzles demand high attention to physical detail, especially during the final stages, when the slightest change could affect how the finished puzzle will look. When designing puzzles in CAD, you need to strike a balance between the stability of the mechanism and the size of the puzzle (along with many other factors). You need to decide how big the fillets need to be so it won't lock up, and you also have to adjust it for engineering fit (referred to as "tolerance" here) before the puzzle is even a physical reality!

Neither set of skills is easy to develop. It takes a lot of experimentation and learning from mistakes, as well as a "can-do" attitude, before you can build up the experience needed to build/design puzzles like Tony and Oskar and all the other awesome people out there. I still produce the occasional dud every so often, like my Comboctahedron.

I think that it is good to have all the puzzles together in one Puzzle of the Month voting thread, as it allows everyone to judge the puzzles the way they see fit. Personally, I tend to wobble back and forth between voting based on creativity, uniqueness, or general all-around wow-factor.

To answer cubeguy314's question: I think that as long as you put some thought into the puzzle, and produced something new, it doesn't matter whether you call it a "modification" or a "transformation" or a "creation." You did something awesome, and you have every reason to be proud of yourself.

-Eitan

I agree. Neither are actually making a full puzzle themselves yet both are contributing a huge amount to the end product.

Nice! Some more extremely interesting points here. My suggestion is that
those made by hand to be called "sculptures", and those by printers
as "prints". Each one requires certain skills, costs, and processes.

So when we say a "shape mod print" or a "simple transformation sculpture",
we immediately know of both the characteristics as well as the method made.

If people feel comfortable, we may even use the types of... mods!
In any case, the above discussion would help me a LOT with the Puzzlification,
(a project which has been slightly stopped because of important things
happening in the background for more than a year!)

We may even define those which during their creation, required both 3D programs
*and* hands (trust me, I have made one of those!) as sculprints!




Pantazis