This is topic Akira class renders in forum Starships & Technology at Flare Sci-Fi Forums.


To visit this topic, use this URL:
http://flare.solareclipse.net/ultimatebb.php/topic/6/2698.html

Posted by B.J. (Member # 858) on :
 
Someone posted some renders of the Akira class model he has. Apparently it was the model that Foundation Imaging used.
http://www.resinilluminati.com/showthread.php?t=1005

I'm not sure if they got this model from ILM (who did First Contact), but it looks like it could be. A bit low-poly, but I guess that's to be expected from the time this was made combined with the pressures of TV production.
 
Posted by Josh (Member # 1884) on :
 
Interesting - Funny too, you can see they mirrored the UV map. The name is backwards on one side
 
Posted by Johnny (Member # 878) on :
 
Wow, if these had turned up all those years ago when FC came out I would've been so excited. It does match the other images of the model from the Magazine and Fact Files. Still hard to believe it's such low detail. Just goes to show what good lighting can do, it looked so much more finely detailed when it was firing its torpedoes.
 
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
 
Very interesting. Lots of excellent detail. Except that I'm very disappointed because it turns out that the Akira is an even stupider design than I've previously thought. Unlike Eaves' original claims (published in the Magazine), I've been able to spot not 15 torpedo launchers, but 20! (It's got 3 banks of 4 along the upper half of the rear pod, plus another 3 on the lower front half. Then there's the ridiculously-pointless 2x2 port/starboard launchers on the saucer, and finally the one underneath the deflector dish.)

Having a few extra launch tubes for redundancy and/or rapid-fire attack is all well and good, but this is overdoing it just a little bit.
 
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
 
Depends on the ordinance. Perhaps a certain percentage of those tubes contain microtorp launchers in a MRL type configuration, for point defence. There's also the possibility that some of them are for much larger, long range missiles rather than them all being for standard photon torpedoes.
Which would make sense if it's supposed to be roughly equivalent to a fighter carrier crossed with a guided missile frigate.
 
Posted by MattC (Member # 1391) on :
 
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Josh:
Interesting - Funny too, you can see they mirrored the UV map. The name is backwards on one side [/QUOTE

UV Maps are not present on the model. It's about 11K polys....

i.e. it's fairly shitty. [Smile]
 
Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
 
I'm going to much-belatedly respond to Reverend's post....somehow I doubt the design was intended to be anything other than a shitload of standard photon torpedo tubes [Wink] Still, retcon away...'tis enjoyable.
 
Posted by OverRon (Member # 2036) on :
 
Wow, I'm surprised by how low poly that is. I know it wasn't gonna be getting much screen time, but I would have thought they'd have put a little more effort into it. The bulging bit on the bottom of the saucer, looks very rushed, with the map stretching across it and the fact the bump map doesn't match up with the diffuse map. You can see where they indent windows settings onto the hull but the diffuse map just has the red fed lines on it.
 
Posted by Zefram (Member # 1568) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by OverRon:
Wow, I'm surprised by how low poly that is. I know it wasn't gonna be getting much screen time, but I would have thought they'd have put a little more effort into it.

Considering that the ship was one element in a whole scene full of special effects, and given the lower processing power of computers at the time, and given the low resolution of standard television, it seems a reasonable decision to use a low poly model. There's not much of a point in putting a lot of detail into a model that simply can't be seen. In a similar situation, I seem to remember reading that the NCC-1701 digital model used for TOS Remastered has been revised to include less detail since they were using up valuable computer power and time to render details that even high definition televisions wouldn't catch.
 
Posted by MattC (Member # 1391) on :
 
quote:
Considering that the ship was one element in a whole scene full of special effects, and given the lower processing power of computers at the time, and given the low resolution of standard television, it seems a reasonable decision to use a low poly model. There's not much of a point in putting a lot of detail into a model that simply can't be seen. In a similar situation, I seem to remember reading that the NCC-1701 digital model used for TOS Remastered has been revised to include less detail since they were using up valuable computer power and time to render details that even high definition televisions wouldn't catch. [/QB]
Absolutely true. [Smile]

As a comparison, the Excelsior used in the ST:NV episode with George Takei in it was about 800K polys. So there's an example of a fan production having more detail than the tv/film stuff.

M.
 
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
 
It's not even just the low-resolution. The ships were never intended to be seen up-close, standing still. You don't need much accurate detail when the ship flies across the screen for no more than a second.
 
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
 
Exactly. You can get away with allot if you have enough glowy bits and the right amount of motion blur.
 
Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
 
Even when the crazy fans in the audience are going to be freeze-framing and screencapping them and trying their damndest to 'shop out some detail ;P
 
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
Y'know this kinda disappoints me since I always held the Akira class to be the most detailed of the FC. Yet now it's no more detailed than one you might see in a Bridge Commander Mod.
 
Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
Actually, I think the Bridge Commander one looks better.
 
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
Yeah, your right.
 
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
 
FC came out over a decade ago. People have been obsessing over these ships ever since. And you've only just now noticed that they are not super-detailed.

I would say that means the modellers did their jobs just fine.
 
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
I forgot how long ago FC came out. Considering this, it's not surprising how bad the model is. In fact, for it's day, it might have been the most advanced type of CGI Model available.
 
Posted by Johnny (Member # 878) on :
 
Let's not go nuts.
 
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
Well, okay, not the best available. But we've come a long way baby from 1996.
 
Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
 
I'm rewatching seaQuest. A review I read claimed the CGI holds up well even today. Errrrr yeah right. It's like something out of a mid-budget PS2 game. This was 1993, and looking at FC in 96, even remembering it was a movie and not a TV show, I'd say it was definitely very good for its time.
 
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
 
Well it's ILM. Very little of what they've done over the years fails to hold up.
 
Posted by Zefram (Member # 1568) on :
 
I was watching Jurassic Park just the other day. Granted, most of the dinosaur effects in the movie were practical, but ILM's CGI dinosaurs from 1993 still hold up pretty well and closely match the practical effects.

I think that within a few years movies will enter an era where the special effects won't become dated. The final hurtle will probably be making CGI humans (or humanoids) that can deceive the eye. Right now they just don't move or look right; for example, the clones from Episode II and Episode III or the vampires/zombies from I Am Legend (which really should have been realized with practical effects).
 
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
 
In defence of I Am Legend, you'd need allot of freakish fit anorexics to look and move like that.
They're certainly getting close, Gollum for instance looked totally convincing to me. So much so that I'd often forget I was looking at an animated character, though I imagine most of that has to do with the performance capture technology.

Not that that always works, I saw a bit of polar express a while back and it just looked damn freaky and in a weird way the characters were more wooden than in FF:The Spirits Within. Beoful is so far the closest they've come to photoreal lookign humans, however as soon as the beasties show up, you become suddenly aware you're watching animated characters again.

As with the Akira, most of what the human eye looks for is motion. So if it moves right you've done half the work already.
 
Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Reverend:
In defence of I Am Legend, you'd need allot of freakish fit anorexics to look and move like that.

Yeah, I think contacting a model agency isn't too difficult.
 
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
I always felt that Mainframe Entertainment did a good job simulating human movement of characters in their shows. Most importantly they were able to seamlessly sync the characters mouths to the actors voices. I recall one kid's show where the CGI was of poorer quality. The characters moved as if they were stuck in jell-o and also suffered from lockjaw.
 
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Shik:
quote:
Originally posted by Reverend:
In defence of I Am Legend, you'd need allot of freakish fit anorexics to look and move like that.

Yeah, I think contacting a model agency isn't too difficult.
Except for the freakishly fit part. I doubt those girls have any kind of endurance for running, jumping and being scary, having not much in terms of muscle mass and all...maybe those Chinese martial arts/gymnasts types or ballet dancers at a stretch, but not models.

quote:
I always felt that Mainframe Entertainment did a good job simulating human movement of characters in their shows. Most importantly they were able to seamlessly sync the characters mouths to the actors voices. I recall one kid's show where the CGI was of poorer quality. The characters moved as if they were stuck in jell-o and also suffered from lockjaw.
That's just good old fashioned Ray Harryhausen style key frame talent. Still, as I recall the models on that show were relatively basic, so the movement doesn't have to be THAT realistic because the brain can see it's clearly not "human". It's when things get so that in a still image, they look like they (almost) could be real but if they move wrong, it's all the more noticeable. Part of the whole "uncanny valley" effect I believe.
 
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
Well Reboot was one of Mainframe's earlier shows. They also did a Spider-man cartoon on MTV which had characters which moved pretty realistically(save for Spidey and assorted villains). Of course those characters also suffered from not being realistic. Yet that was more because all the male characters were buff and all female characters were freakishly thin with large breast.
 
Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
 
I think FF:Spirits Within would've looked very realistic if they'd use motion capture (which as I understand they didn't, they wanted it pure CGI). I remember hearing that they rendered the wrinkles on their skin in 3D instead of as 2D textures, even, and if you watch the chick's hair, it's very realistic - I think they actually had several hundred thousand strands of it. I read somewhere most of the rendering time was spent on her hair.
 
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
 
Hey, I liked Spirits Within! I have the DVD and the soundtrack and I shall not apologise for it. [Wink]
 
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
Meh, it was an interesting concept with a bad plot and poor execution.
 
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
 
Says the Reboot fan? Really? [Razz]
 
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
Yes, so says me. [Razz] Though in defense of ReBoot, it didn't take itself too seriously. And you know, it was a kid's show. FF was geared towards adults and tried to stand on par with more serious dramas, which is a commendable. Though you know what would have helped? Maybe having a connection to the games it was named after.
 
Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
 
Since when has Final Fantasy EVER been about interconnectivity?
 
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
True. But there is this one little universe in FF that revolves around the seventh game, and the kids just love it.
 
Posted by Pensive's Wetness (Member # 1203) on :
 
links please (I'd ask my brother about it but... uh.. well... he's deceased. And i'm in no really hurry to get an opertunity to ask him... er... fuck.) just provide fucking links, god damnit!

/me goes to corner to sulk. [Frown]
 
Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
 
Reverend: I liked it too. I'm just saying the graphics weren't as realistic as the hype says they were. Which was to be expected I suppose.
 
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
 
Well I never pay much attention to hype and to be honest, the un-reality of it is part of what I liked. Shades of Akira, Ghost in the Shell, for those familiar with Japanese animated films (ones that DON'T involve giant robots.)
There's something about the concept about an invasion of alien ghosts which seamed so original and truly menacing, which is more than you can say for most Sci-Fi films, animated or no.

As for the graphics, sure they weren't totally realistic, the characters were a bit stiff and there's that slump in the middle that most action films suffer from...but hey, all films are a product of their time and at the time that was the best that was being done and I'm sure if the company lasted longer their second film would have show the lessons they learnt on that project. In fact check out "final flight of the Osiris" from the Animatrix and you can see they did just that.
 
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
Well yeah the alien ghost concept was cool, but then the movie got all metaphysical and "save the whales" on my ass.
 
Posted by The Ginger Beacon (Member # 1585) on :
 
That and the whole "James Woods in the doomsday machine, gonna blow up all the red thingys and destroy all Captain Planet stood for" plot was just crap.
 
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Mars Needs Women:
Well yeah the alien ghost concept was cool, but then the movie got all metaphysical and "save the whales" on my ass.

As I said, shades of Ghost in the Shell, which is about as metaphysical as these things get, just unlike films like...oh...The Matrix, it was reasonably coherent.
 
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
Well I never saw Ghost in the Shell, and The Matrix(though enjoyable)wasn't exactly my cup of tea.
 
Posted by Pensive's Wetness (Member # 1203) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Reverend:
(ones that DON'T involve giant robots.)

So what is your point? [Razz]

Gunhead? (the one made in the late 80's) Robot Jox?

Johnny Socko and his Flying Robot? (Or do you prefer Giant Robo? [Big Grin]

and....

MacrossMacrossMacrossMacrossMacrossMacrossMacrossMacrossMacrossMacrossMacrossMacrossMacrossMacrossMacrossMacross....

[Big Grin] [Big Grin] [Big Grin]
 
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
 
No thank you. There something about giant manned robots with GIANT rifles and GIANT swords that smacks of the sillies to me.
 
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
 
We want the Norway!! [Smile]
 
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
You can't handle the Norway!! Also wasn't it lost, gone FOREVER!
 
Posted by Pensive's Wetness (Member # 1203) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Reverend:
No thank you. There something about giant manned robots with GIANT rifles and GIANT swords that smacks of the sillies to me.

oh. your talking Eva then... or gundam (but yeah, Gundam being the mechawhored frantise and all

but you gotta admit, the Gouf Custom from MSG:8thMST looked cool... [Big Grin]

quote:
Originally posted by Mars Needs Women:
You can't handle the Norway!! Also wasn't it lost, gone FOREVER!

so what was stopping them from remaking one? or for that matter CGI's of, say, the BoBW's ships?
 
Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
 
Rev: I know what you mean. Every time I see something like that I hear the Power Rangers theme music somewhere in the depths of what I claim to be my brain.

I saw an episode of Ghost in the Shell once and liked it. I keep meaning to watch it.
 
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
 
quote:
but you gotta admit, the Gouf Custom from MSG:8thMST looked cool... [Big Grin]
Maybe...if I had the slightest clue what that was.
 
Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
The only shows containing MECH-like robots were power rangers, and Voltron. I saw a couple episodes of Gundam when I was younger, but never really understood it.
 
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
quote:
quote:
Originally posted by Mars Needs Women:
You can't handle the Norway!! Also wasn't it lost, gone FOREVER!

so what was stopping them from remaking one? or for that matter CGI's of, say, the BoBW's ships? [/QB]
Why bother? Its unlikely we're are ever going to see the TNG era again.
 
Posted by Pensive's Wetness (Member # 1203) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Mars Needs Women prostrate on his knees:
quote:
quote:
Originally posted by Mars Needs Women bent over backwards, with tassles:
You can't handle the Norway!! Also wasn't it lost, gone FOREVER!

so what was stopping them from remaking one? or for that matter CGI's of, say, the BoBW's ships?

Why bother? Its unlikely we're are ever going to see the TNG era again. [/QB]
unless they pull another 'These are the voyages' for what ever format they do...

OH Reveeeeeeereeeeennnnnndddddddddd! Look here! Pig pr0n!
 
Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
Gouf? Is it piloted by Goofy?
 
Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
 
From Akira to Gouf in 4 pages!
 
Posted by Johnny (Member # 878) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Mars Needs Women:
quote:
quote:
Originally posted by Mars Needs Women:
You can't handle the Norway!! Also wasn't it lost, gone FOREVER!

so what was stopping them from remaking one? or for that matter CGI's of, say, the BoBW's ships?

Why bother? Its unlikely we're are ever going to see the TNG era again. [/QB]
I wouldn't be so sure. Some of the elderly Spock scenes in the new movie will probably be set in the TNG era, although it's anybody's guess whether we'll see anything more than some nondescript room on Vulcan or something.
 
Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
 
Dunno; Sarek only just died in TNG era. Depending on just how old Spock is in the new movie, it could be quite a bit after TNG. How old was Spock in Unification? Sarek was just over 200 at the time, I remember that.
 
Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
 
136 as of "Unification", 152 in the current year.

I would expect Spock to die sometime soon due to his mixed heritage.
 
Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
Well, you must also take into account what happened on genesis. Maybe that may extend his lifespan. So, maybe he was younger when he left genesis than when he arrived. I doubt that Kirk and company could have known at exactly what time to take Spock off of the planet, only that they needed to get him off asap. So, he could be 30 or 40 years longer than he originally was. He doesn't have to look younger. Take Tpol, she is like 50 or something and looks in her 20's.
 
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Shik:
136 as of "Unification", 152 in the current year.

I would expect Spock to die sometime soon due to his mixed heritage.

Also remember that by then humans can easily clock-in well over the 100 mark, even McCoy made it to at least 137 and still had the ability to walk on his own and breath without a respirator. Which is more than you can say with most 90 year olds today. Besides, Spock's Vulcan side has always been dominant, biologically speaking so I think he could make it to 200. Oddly enough, ($POILER ALERT!) if the rumours about him travelling back to the mid 23rd century are correct, he'd be about on par with T'Pol, age wise, that is assuming she's still around.
 
Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
 
I don't think so. If anything, he was older after Genesis. I'm basing thins on the fact that, as you said, T'Pol was in her 60s, Sarek 102, Tuvok about 100, & they were fresh-faced...whereas Spock was haggard as fuck all by the time he was 60.
 
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
 
...and not looking much different 80 years later.
 
Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
Do we know have a birth date for him?
 
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
Y'know I always believed T'pol was older than we were made to believe. Carbon Creek to me made it seem that she was lying to Archer and Tucker about her grandma being on that faithful mission and it was she who was on the Vulcan ship that crashed. And yet her mommy was still around for season 4...
 
Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
Well, she told us how old she was at one point, in a humerous Kirk/Spock/McCoy=Archer/Trip/Tpol moment.
 
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
Yeah I know, but I found it so hard to believe that she's a duplicate of her grandmother like the wacky Soong family.
 
Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
 
I didn't know what to make of Carbon Creek. I chose to believe the story was made up and that she came by the heirloom we see her looking at at the end of the episode some other way. Otherwise it's kind of, you know, hard to believe...

Spock was haggard at 60 and about the same 80 years later, yes. So, maybe his mixed heritage means he'll live as old as 200 or so (considering how old humans can be at that time, which was a good point) but he visually ages more quickly - McCoy looked like shit even though he could walk and breathe. Or maybe going through Genesis made him age more quickly, who knows. Bottom line is he may have as many as 50 years left to him, so they could set the 'elderly Spock' scenes as late as 40-60 years after TNG. (And they really should; Leonard Nimoy looks a lot older than he did during TNG. Humans don't age nearly as gracefully as Vulcans [or humans of the 24th century ;P].)
 
Posted by Pensive's Wetness (Member # 1203) on :
 
Ponderings... I can't seem to find the 400 million post strong thread on Paramount's Yard Sale on Ebay, but in light of my curiousity on the idea of CGI BoBW ships...

did they sell the models from BoBW's? if so, who has them? Bernd, you might help on this? (especially the guy who made the Niagara and Freedom vessels? does he still have those two?)
 
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
The BoBW ships, though at the heart of numerous speculation and discussion, were never meant to be more than wreckage to be used for an episode of TNG. The idea that they would be resurrected in CGI in light of all the other more prominent TNG era ships is hopeful wish at best.

In anycase, wasn't there a Galaxy-class model that was lost somewhere. I know the Ent-D existed as several models with different sizes, and one of them went missing. It would resurface in Planet Hollywood and then in the hands of some female Trek uberfan. There was a Galaxy class at Christie's auction, but I don't know if that was it.
 
Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
I just hope that no one destroys those models, or they become lost to time. They are historical artifacts, afterall, if not that, then at least they are uber important to the millions of geeks out there like me.
 
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
Of course I don't wish anything bad for those ships and in fact I'm somewhat saddened when I hear about things like the loss of the Norway class and Excelsior Refit CGI.
 
Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
I'm talking about the models sold at auction, like the TMP motion model, but yeah, it would be bad to lose those piece of shit quickie models too. They are something that noone ever thought anyone would care about at the time they were built, but look where we are now.

Never underestimate the fans TPTB, never underestimate the fans...
 
Posted by Johnny (Member # 878) on :
 
Well the last time we saw anything of the New Orleans model it was hanging up in Mike Okuda's office (titillating many a fan in one of the TNG DVD extras), so I get the impression that the BoBW models haven't surfaced in the auctions because Okuda and co and keeping them in a safe place.
 
Posted by Pensive's Wetness (Member # 1203) on :
 
and hopefully wisely scanning them so they can be used to make TNG-Remastered a better, better place...
 
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
 
TNG-Remastered is not going to happen.
 
Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
 
*sob* Don't *say* that!!
 
Posted by Johnny (Member # 878) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Pensive's Wetness:
and hopefully wisely scanning them so they can be used to make TNG-Remastered a better, better place...

It'd be simpler just to take measurements and build a stand alone CG model than any of that 3D scanning business, but the original models would certainly still make very useful reference material.

I know the TOS Remastered crew have mentioned doing a TNG update, but I can't see it happening. At least not for a long time. Apart from the fact that they probably wouldn't get funding, I don't think a lot of fans would like it.

The fan reaction to TOS:R has been quite mixed even among people who approve of the idea. In some cases the new effects have actually looked worse than the originals, or haven't lived up to the standards we expect in today's effects shots. And that was when they were just updating simple optical effects and models that had little detail.

The potential to fuck up with TNG is greatly increased because everything in TNG is already at a fairly high standard. The models are highly detailed, so the team would eat up valuable time in making their replicas, which wouldn't give much leeway for the one thing that's actually worth updating TNG for, the choreography of the ships.

The best chance you have of seeing anything resembling remastered TNG effects is if the fans do it, like with that Wolf 359 project.
 
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
Also since TOS:R hasn't been generating as many viewers as TPTB were hoping for.
 
Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
Wouldn't that be because the show is in a crappy time slot? I dont think that noon on sundays, on varing networks, depending on where you live is very good for viewership
 
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
 
It's not even a single time; the remastered eps are actually syndicated, so they appear in different time slots in different markets. Plus, they haven't really done too good a job promoting the schedule, either. It's not a good sign when you have to go to a fan site to get the schedule...

Besides, it's not like we haven't seen these eps before. Sure, the new effects are cool, but do I really want to watch every episode all over again just to see the effects? Most times, the answer for me is "no."
 
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
 
Here, they air at 10p.m. on Saturdays. Except during college football season. Then they air whenever the game ends.
 
Posted by Zefram (Member # 1568) on :
 
In Idaho they've been showing TOS:R anywhere from 11:30 PM Saturday night to noon on Sundays. It doesn't matter to me; the DVR takes care of the scheduling problems and I watch the episodes when I please. In fact, I don't know when any of the shows I regularly watch are on. I just go to the DVR listing, see that it recorded a new episode, and watch it.
 
Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
Gee, that would be a nice luxury.
 
Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
 
That's what grown up jobs will buy for you. [Razz]
 
Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
Hey don't rub it in.

At least I dont have to pay taxes.
 
Posted by Zefram (Member # 1568) on :
 
Yeah, but when you do pay taxes they'll help pay for my DVR since I work for the government.
 
Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
 
Sean: I ain't rubbin' anything in. I'm still in school.
 
Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
You're in College right? So you're paying for your schooling.

Well, technically the tax payers pay an outrageous price for my schooling, but as I dont pay that, I don't count it.

My options for local work here ( within a short walk or bike ride, a drive if I have to),once I get my working papers this summer, are probably a stock boy at the local market, a job flipping burgers or making sundaes at the ice cream parlour, or maybe a job in the next town over, working at a McDonalds or the Super Market.
 
Posted by Pensive's Wetness (Member # 1203) on :
 
from Akira to Taxidermy... in 6 pages.
 
Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
Hey, play on words. I got that one! [Big Grin]
 
Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
 
Actually most of us pay for schooling with massive amounts of debt owed to various banks and financial institutions, coupled with scholarships and grants. The remainder is most usually paid by family members [Big Grin]
 
Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
I know that my family will pay for very little of my final education, so I will have to either get a lot of scholarships ( good grades better get me somewhere), loans, and a part time job(s), or join the service, which looks like one of the best options right now.
 
Posted by Fabrux (Member # 71) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Daniel Butler:
Actually most of us pay for schooling with massive amounts of debt owed to various banks and financial institutions, coupled with scholarships and grants. The remainder is most usually paid by family members [Big Grin]

Yeah, I always joke that when I graduate I'll have my $50k ring. [Big Grin]
 
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
Hope you choke on it.
 
Posted by Zefram (Member # 1568) on :
 
I paid for school with help from my family, educational grants, scholarships, and student loans. During grad school my tuition was paid for and I received a monthly salary for doing research for my graduate adviser. Research student; it's not just a job, it's indentured servitude!

Despite all these sources of income, I had to take out several loans during grad school. We'll have my loans paid off around the time our oldest daughter starts college.
 
Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
 
I heard Barack Obama just recently paid his own student loans off.
 
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
Don't be bitter Dan [Wink]
 
Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
But he's like what, in his 40's. That seems to be the average age that these things get paid off ( my parents just finished theirs). His schooling could have cost a great deal more than normal too, if he went to a prestigious school.
 
Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
 
That's why I'm bitter [Razz] Go to college, your parents and teachers tell you, so you can get a good job and be successful! And then you spend 20 years paying back the debt you incurred, whereas in most other countries people are taking 5 years to pay them back if they needed them at all. 40 years old, you're halfway to dead, it shouldn't take that long to get on your feet and finally own your own ass.
 
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
 
I did two years of further education, one in college the other in sixth form. The only cost I incurred (aside from bus fare) was loosing my 80 library deposit when I dropped out of the College course. Which was a bastard since I never used the place.
My GCSE's were shite, so I never even got as far as A-Levels, so I'm debt free and getting low to mid paying jobs on the basis of experience, skill and of course nice references!

I have very little faith in the further education system since I've worked alongside and even trained people who've spent several years in Uni only to find there's no demand in the field they studied or they're overqualified (which must be a real bastard) so unless you have a VERY clear direction in life (like doctor, teacher or engineer) I can't say that it's worth all that hassle and money. But that's just me, I could be very easily be completely wrong.
 
Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
 
I think the UK has a higher rate of secondary education graduates than the US. It seems to me almost everybody I know works in a factory or fast food. Most of the college graduates I meet are nurses or people with computer science degrees.
 
Posted by Fabrux (Member # 71) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Reverend:
I have very little faith in the further education system since I've worked alongside and even trained people who've spent several years in Uni only to find there's no demand in the field they studied or they're overqualified (which must be a real bastard) so unless you have a VERY clear direction in life (like doctor, teacher or engineer) I can't say that it's worth all that hassle and money. But that's just me, I could be very easily be completely wrong.

Hence I get the $50k ring. Engineer FTW.

It occurs to me that the Iron Ring is a Canadian thing, apparently. Read about it here.
 
Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
Well, I want to be a teacher, specifically highschool US history and Global Studies, so I think College is a must.
 
Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
 
Fabrux: Yeah, I thought you were just making a joke. It looked to me like one of those nuts used to hold sections of pipe together.

Sean: Yeah, but all the students in the "real" majors will be looking down on you, and you won't have anyone to pick on but the Liberal Arts and Philosophy majors [Big Grin] Kidding, of course.... ...although not about the Liberal Arts majors...
 
Posted by Zefram (Member # 1568) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sean:
His schooling could have cost a great deal more than normal too, if he went to a prestigious school.

Obama got his bachelor's at Columbia University. Later he went to Harvard Law School. That would explain why he didn't pay off his loans until recently, despite a darn good income.

I'm sure a couple others at this site could tell you that engineering pays relatively well and can be a satisfying career. It consistently ranks as one of the most profitable salaried jobs. If you want to do any better, you'll have to go to law school or medical school.

For me, the biggest drawback to an education in engineering is that I can't seem to read any sci-fi books or watch sci-fi movies nowadays without shouting something about violations of the second law of thermodynamics or the writer's complete ignorance of Newton's laws. And I just can't stand how poorly writers and moviemakers understand radiation and radioactivity. No, you do not decontaminate someone after radiation exposure! You might as well decontaminate them after exposure to visible or UV light!
 
Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
I could never be an engineer. Sure the field as a whole interests me, and finding out why things do what they do would be cool, but I'm terrible with numbers and see no point to math ( I can do it just fine, but I see no point in a lot of the things math encompases). THat's why I like history. It has already happened. In most cases, there is no disputing that it happened, just why and how. That's what interests me.
I hear teachers get a pretty good wage these days, and you get to interact with and influence people.
 
Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
 
Zefram, I know what you mean. I find myself coming up with all these ridiculous rationalizations in my head just to suspend my disbelief enough to watch the damn show. It's even ruined fantasy - I just can't believe in magic without ascribing it to some kind of unknown energy fields or quantum effects [Razz] However, the real world, on balance, seems more vivid and real when I can envision all the little processes going on around me - data streaming, gears turning, electrons swimming around in the wires, radio waves permeating the air. Or maybe it's just that I'm insane, I dunno.

Sean: I hear Texas has a shortage of teachers and will pay pretty well if you want to go down there. Don't know how it will be when you get to college, but the I heard it the grants for education majors were really good.
 
Posted by B.J. (Member # 858) on :
 
I'm an engineer, too. When watching movies, my wife often has to say "Do I need to get out the 'Hollywood' speech again?"

Since I had several scholarships as well as in-state tuition, I paid off my few loans several years ago. Unfortunately, my wife couldn't figure out what she wanted to do until she was already in her 30s (she's 34 now), and was in school with no scholarships as well as out-of-state tuition for most of the time until then. So we're going to be paying off *her* loans for a long time to come.

BTW, she's a high school Economics teacher now, so her income is less than half of mine.
 
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
 
That's normal for anyone who sees an aspect of their particular field inaccurately portrayed. For example; I imagine the average doctor or nurse can't sit through most medical dramas with a straight face any more than anyone who uses a computer resist rolling their eyes as an actor randomly bashes away on a keyboard to make it do anything from enhancing video (often to an impossible degree) or produce a 3D wire frame of the secret formula to invisibility.
 
Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
I had actually planned on teaching around here, hopefully at my own high school, but if Texas is paying good money...at least there's weather down there.

I only have two more years of high school, and then only 4 years of college, I think, and a few years after getting my bachleor's degree and recieving certification, I need to go back to get my masters degree in order to remain a teacher, or something like that. But, after a teacher is tenured for a few years in my area, their pay can rise from $2500 to $5000 a year for a while, and then after a certain number of years teaching they are eligable for pay in the $70000's and higher. I know of a teacher in his 60's who gets 91,000 per year. That's if I don't go on for a doctorate, so...

But, starting salary for a teacher around here is usually $31,000, so in six years, I may consider Texas.
 
Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
 
Reverend: How right you are. You know what *really* pisses me off? Movies like that one with Patrick Stewart where the kid hacks into a website by using a joystick to guide a character through a castle filled with skeletons. What the FUCK? Also it pisses me off when people are working at a computer and the contents of the screen are projected onto their face.

Sean: The heat. Will kill you. Stay indoors [Big Grin] And I hope you really didn't mean five thousand dollars a *year* for teachers? I mean, around here they make $25k and I thought that was bad [Wink]
 
Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
No, they start at around 30k, and can raise 2.5 to 5k every year or every other year after they are tenured. And at least texas has a predictable climate. This week, the daily high's for this area have gone from 42 deg F to a predicted 72deg F. I had to exchange my parka for shorts within two days!
 
Posted by Zefram (Member # 1568) on :
 
I stopped watching CSI when every other episode showed the agents zooming into surveillance camera footage to find the killer. You cannot turn a 100 pixel image into a 1 million pixel image without a loss in quality!

quote:
Originally posted by Sean:
I could never be an engineer. Sure the field as a whole interests me, and finding out why things do what they do would be cool, but I'm terrible with numbers and see no point to math ( I can do it just fine, but I see no point in a lot of the things math encompases).

One of the biggest surprises to me when I studied engineering was how applicable so much of the math that I had learned was. Unfortunately, many math teachers don't explain the usefulness of what they're teaching, leading students to assume it's yet another pointless exercise. For example, I remember laughing at the idea of imaginary numbers when I was first taught about them. It turns out that imaginary numbers actually have a practical use in fields like electromagnetism, signal processing, and vibration. Even the simple spring/damper system of a car's shock absorbers is described using imaginary numbers.
 
Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
 
It was 43*F/6*C two days ago and 80*F/27*C today. I know what you mean. But I think it has to do with GLOBAL WARMIIIIING *cue music* because climates everywhere seem to be a little "off." The weather wasn't like this around here when I was a kid, at least not that I can remember. And when I was living in Texas, one week it was 80*F/27*C on Thursday and *snowed* on Saturday. It hardly snows at all *ever* in Texas, at least from what I heard from the natives, and least of all 2 days after it's 27*...anyway, natural climate shift and all that.

Zefram: Bout silly things in math. Is x divided by zero infinity or what? I keep getting conflicting answers. It's infinity, it's undefined, it's both, it's uhhh lemme get back to you on that. Math is supposed to be right or wrong, not based on opinions ;P
 
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
 
x/0 is undefined. I think the reason they don't say it is infinity is because infinity is not actually a number.
 
Posted by B.J. (Member # 858) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Zefram:
One of the biggest surprises to me when I studied engineering was how applicable so much of the math that I had learned was. Unfortunately, many math teachers don't explain the usefulness of what they're teaching, leading students to assume it's yet another pointless exercise. For example, I remember laughing at the idea of imaginary numbers when I was first taught about them. It turns out that imaginary numbers actually have a practical use in fields like electromagnetism, signal processing, and vibration. Even the simple spring/damper system of a car's shock absorbers is described using imaginary numbers.

That was one of my wife's peeves when she was growing up. She said her math teachers kept saying "Engineers use this all the time!", but couldn't give any examples. When she taught 7th & 8th grade math last year, she kept using me and my work as an example! [Big Grin]
 
Posted by Fabrux (Member # 71) on :
 
Now, see, in my branch of engineering, all our numbers are real. [Razz]
 
Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
Numerical math isn't that bad when you have a calculator, but chemical math kills me. I don't care what HCL and Na(OH) equall. Actually, I know that it is water and salt, but I hate having to figure out how to write it. I am glad that the school year is almost over, because if I can pass chem, I don't have to take any more science courses. I might take a science elective, but no more regents sciences. Those are fraking hard.
 
Posted by Fabrux (Member # 71) on :
 
Pfft, that shit is easy. [Wink]
 
Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
Ya think so? Try missing 37 days of class, and then being too out of it when you ARE there to digest what you're told.
 
Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
 
Well, that's not really *math* [Razz] It's chemistry.
 
Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
It's chemical math. But, there is a shit load of math in chem too. Thank god most of the formulas are in the reference tables that we get to use for the final.
 
Posted by Zefram (Member # 1568) on :
 
I was never too thrilled about stoichiometry. Fortunately, after chemistry I only had to do it a few more times when we covered combustion in thermodynamics.

I was mostly interested in ordinary and partial differential equations. That's part of the reason I specialized in fluid mechanics and heat transfer in grad school. That and because I find power production to be fascinating. I'm most interested in the machines that make other machines go.
 
Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
Now i feel boring. This place is filled with people who study whats possible, and how it's possible, and I just stick to what has already happened.
 
Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
 
Dude, I don't study shit. I'm a fuckin' bum. So I mean....
 
Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
Just say you're on a journey of self-discovery.
 
Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
 
Except, y'know...I'm not.
 
Posted by Zefram (Member # 1568) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sean:
Now i feel boring. This place is filled with people who study whats possible, and how it's possible, and I just stick to what has already happened.

There's something to be said about studying what's already happened. I love history myself, and have for as long as I can remember. I started watching the History Channel when it was first introduced. However, nowadays I have to watch it while my wife's doing something else to maintain her sanity. While my wife and kids were visiting friends in Boise for a couple days, I took advantage of the time to watch the History Channel's miniseries on the barbarians.
 
Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
 
Yeah, I don't know what it is about the history channel. I mean I never found history boring, but I wasn't *particularly* interested either. But man, doesn't matter what's on that channel, it can always come through for me when there's nothing else on. I know I can just flip it on and whatever they're showing will be interesting. Even if it *should* be boring. Don't know how they do it [Big Grin]
 
Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
I like Tales of the GUn when it was on History Channel. They took it off the air, those bastards...

I watch the history channel like I'd imagine some men watch porn. Compulsively.
 
Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
 
Drooling and whacking your meat? Cuz dude, get to a shrink. [Razz]
 
Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
 
Hitler Channel gets ME hard...or it did when I had TV.
 
Posted by Dat (Member # 302) on :
 
You were getting hard over Hitler?!
 
Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
 
...What, that's standard?
 
Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Daniel Butler:
Drooling and whacking your meat? Cuz dude, get to a shrink. [Razz]

Okay, maybe that was a bad comparison. My shrink doesn't deal with those types of things anyway. [Smile]
 
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
 
Well they dropped the "Channel" part of their name, now they're just "Hitler".
 


© 1999-2008 Solareclipse Network.

Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3