Author Options:

When is an Instructable not an Instructable? Answered

I have recently noticed that many of the published works are not in fact Instructables. They are simply displays of someones work/ideas,etc. They do not contain any instructions ie. how to make this.
How does this fit into the Instructables ethos? I love seeing these pieces and have no problem with them being on show but, how are they classed as instructables and do they "count' in competitions and any counting for awards? I would like to display some of my work, see "what do you like to draw?",  but it has never occured to me to simply show them as an "Instructable". This may be covered somewhere but I havn't noticed it.


Click the "Submit" button in the upper right. You'll get this description for "Photos": "Share one or more photos of a project, recipe, or whatever you've made, quickly and easily." It's the same thing that used to be labeled as a Slideshow. While it's always nice to include build photos and some instructions, all that's required for the Photo Instructable submission is a picture of the completed project and a description of what it is. What you're thinking of as a traditional Instructable is now termed a Step-by-Step Instructable.

There are some contests that you can enter with just a Photo Instructable, like the Share Your Space Challenge. Others require a Step-by-Step Instructable, generally the ones with larger prizes. In many cases, even if a Photo Ible can be entered alongside Step-by-Step Ibles, it's vastly more difficult to win anything with one. You almost certainly won't see anyone winning a laser cutter with just a Photo Instructable.

Very clear explanation. Thank you for making it clear. I must have missed it somehow.

I have submitted a couple of instructables that basically have been someone else's idea that I modified a bit. I have tried to give credit to the original author but I still wonder if that is enough.

I guess what I am asking is it considered proper to just make something that someone else designed or should it be original.?

When you make something that has already been made, If you have altered or adapted it , and tried to atribute it to the original then that's fine. Many ibles are like this and are a tribute to the original and a further developement of their ideas. Go For It.

But doesn't that mean I just see the popular stuff not the new, unless it becomes popular of course.

Since asking this question I have used the "Photos" option and published an Instructable. It's called ----How to improve your mood.  I'd love any critiques especially about making my work more attractive to members. Thanks.

It may be just my own personal prejudices, but I'd love to see some exploration of "why" in a project like that.

Did you know, for instance, that the colour combination most visible to the human eye is black on yellow, because it is employed as a warning by venomous animals?

Or that the best colour-combination for the mobiles you hang over a new-born baby's crib is just black-and-white - you add colours and complexity as their cognitive abilities grow.

Then there is the matter of association - I find combinations of maroons, dark greens and browns to be soothing, because of their association with old libraries, stately homes and classic luxury cars.

However, I find dark green by itself to be exciting, thanks to the historical links with pre-F1 motor sport.

There's a bunch of research out there (some of it quakery) about the effects of colour - you could produce a set of pictures along the lines of "this images is calming because..., whereas this image is uplifting because....".

Thanks for the feedback I will think about your idea. Ok I've thought.
Yes I will start on an Ible right away. Thanks so much. craftyv.

You're welcome - I'll look out for it.

Instructables (Eric) recently changed the terminology they used, and have given a lot of prominence to what used to be called "slideshows" and are now just called "photos". They've even gone so far as to refer to the photo/slideshow stuff as "New" (which it patently is not).

I think that change, and the advertising of it, has encouraged a lot of people to produce content that is really not "Instructable" in any way. It's too bad, but on the upside it brings more people to the site, which is not a bad thing.

Blast, I spent too long typing mine and you beat me to it with a better explanation. :P

Yeah, but yours was better at toeing the company line...

Now *thereś* a backhanded compliment, if ever I heard one...

Thanks for the feedback I really didn't recognise the changes for what they are. I'll have to open my view a little.