Here’s where I see the issue with this particular approach:
Then I would imagine NF holding [000 - 999] on a string that is blown up like a balloon and suddenly popping.
I’ve talked to people at competition before about forgetting parts of images. Usually, they were using PAO and the A or the O was the issue. Note here that if you get two digits wrong on a particular row, you’ll lose all 40 points for the digits on that row.
So normally (including me) when you have this issue, you’d leave a couple or blanks continue with the rest of the recall and then you go back to the image you has issue with. With PAO it’s easy… you just go through your As or Os from 00-99 until you find an image that seems to be the one that you placed there. Obviously, that doesn’t always work… sometimes things are too closely related and you already accepted your object for 27 when really it was 56. Let’s say the one was a rocket and the other one a plane.
What I’m trying to say is that, in baseball terms, you are pitching without a catcher. All your “connectivity” comes from 028 and nothing from 008 really links back to it. There is nothing distinct about the “sofa” being on the string.
This to me also just strengthens the 028 part of the image and does not for 008. Don’t get me wrong… let’s go with dancing instead of baseball, obviously you need somebody to lead (028) but your dance partner also needs to know the steps (008). So really the “sofa” should also connect back in only a way the sofa could, but in a way that you know who’s leading (i.e., which number comes first)…
…more like this for example. Even though the balloons become really unnecessary now and unless the sofa is always there for people to fall on (i.e., from 000 - 999) you should make up the connecting action on the fly. Mostly because the next issue will be linking things to a location to ensure that actually remember what happened “there.”
Imagine, you get the image in the bathroom… he could stuff the sofa down the toilet. If under a tree, you it as a swing, etc. Hope that makes sense.
Do you mind if I ask… did you have a PAO before you changed to 3-digt and really liked the convenience that PAO gave you the sentence structure subject-verb-object without you having to put much of an effort into creating the image? I mean in terms of LEGOs I understand what you’re trying to do with this approach… just letting you know where I see potential issues with this approach.