Hi . I have made the sideview of an Proto Miranda class starship:(2 versions)
Any commens?
Posted by The Defiant (Member # 818) on :
Great job again, Lobo. My only suggestion is that you should make the bridge module like on the original Miranda, forming the 'peak'. You know what I mean. I like both, but if you have the long pylon of the bottom with the details of the top, and if you take away the rollbar and have the deflector dish above the sensor dome a little.
[ June 01, 2002, 20:13: Message edited by: The Defiant ]
Posted by Lobo (Member # 669) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Defiant: You know what I mean.
Yes i know
Here is the Frontview:
[ June 02, 2002, 09:22: Message edited by: Lobo ]
Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :
Huh? Are those nacelle pylons straight (last image) or angled downwards (first two views)?
Posted by Ferg (Member # 828) on :
I think that's the front view of the first ship. What we see in the side view is a single vertical pylon, with 2 horizontal ones attatched to the base.
Posted by Lobo (Member # 669) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ferg: I think that's the front view of the first ship.
Yeah! Thats right.
Posted by Lobo (Member # 669) on :
And the backview: Posted by Matrix (Member # 376) on :
They're really good. I wish I could post my stuff on Flare, but I need a scanner or something to get them on here.
Posted by Lobo (Member # 669) on :
Here are the 4 Sideview of the ship. Lobo
Posted by Ferg (Member # 828) on :
Just realised I forgot to mention how much I like the design! Great work as usual! Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
I like it as well. Nice design. Nice rendering.
A couple of teeny nitpicks, though. The running lights on the sides of the saucer...should they be green and red like the ones on the nacelles? Also...the registry on the starboard nacelle needs to be flipped
[ June 03, 2002, 11:18: Message edited by: Aban Rune ]
Posted by Matrix (Member # 376) on :
What program do you use Lobo? Photosuite?
Posted by The Defiant (Member # 818) on :
And how do we get it?
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Yeah - I want photosuite!!!
NICE!
I'm gonna nit-pick though, just some comments.
The curvature of the top and bottom part of the saucer section looks more like how the refit-versions curve - not how the E-Nil TOS looks (if that's the era/style you were going for - or maybe something inbetween?)
Does it need a deflector dish? The deflectors on the Miranda were on that 'apartment block' at the back of the saucer weren't they?
Maybe the back of the nacelles could be the old 'grill' version not the ball!?! Just a comment.
Maybe original Mirandas looked like the Lantree - with out the roll-bar which could have been just fitted for refit?
Very nice though. Andrew
Posted by Vogon Poet (Member # 393) on :
Nice ship. But the top view, which you've now down the full set for, is much better.
Posted by Topher (Member # 71) on :
You forget, Andrew, that in TOS the dish wasn't the deflector. It was a sensor dish. So, it would seem as though this ship has no deflectors Posted by Lobo (Member # 669) on :
quote:The curvature of the top and bottom part of the saucer section looks more like how the refit-versions curve - not how the E-Nil TOS looks (if that's the era/style you were going for - or maybe something inbetween?)
Oh yes baby thats right! Look here!
Lobo
Posted by Matrix (Member # 376) on :
It just occure dto me that top pylon thingy looks like the pylon thingy that connects to the Pod on the Nebula class. One more thing: It looks like a retro TNG ship. 23rd century ships did not have that nacelle thingy between the bussard collector and the general cycliner nacelle.
Posted by Lobo (Member # 669) on :
quote:Originally posted by Matrix: 23rd century ships did not have that nacelle thingy between the bussard collector and the general cycliner nacelle.
Posted by Ace (Member # 389) on :
That was a "doh!" moment right there, eh?
Anyway, Lobo, do you plan to make other views of the second version with the pylons coming directly from the saucer? I like that one in particular. The first one's nacelles seem too close for my tastes. The second design reminds me of the Centuar.
Posted by Matrix (Member # 376) on :
Yeah, my mistake. Though in my opinion I think the nacelle should at least have the Enterprise's nacelle seeing that the Miranda class has the Connie refit's or even the Constellation class with half it chopped off.
Posted by Lobo (Member # 669) on :
This is the movie era refit version. The ship will have an little secundary hull. Posted by Topher (Member # 71) on :
My god, that ship is beautiful...!
Posted by Woodside Kid (Member # 699) on :
Ummmm....
Pardon me for being dense, but shouldn't an uprated "Proto-Miranda" BE the Miranda? Posted by Lobo (Member # 669) on :
Hmm yeah maybe...then is it an proto Miranda class starship.
[ July 08, 2002, 04:22: Message edited by: Lobo ]
Posted by Masao (Member # 232) on :
Sorry to nitpick, but there's something bugging me about both these schematics. On the side views of both the ships, the rearward slope of the primary hull's upper mound is shown complete, rather than having it's upper part covered by the bridge mound. The rearward slope is the same as the frontward slope and seems to suggest that the bridge is as thick as a sheet of paper. Nice schematics, other than that.
Posted by Lobo (Member # 669) on :
Do you mean the first pic of the topic or the newest(movie era refit version)? I must say the bridge on the refit version is not soo exactly. And your critic is more as welcome:).
Lobo
Posted by Masao (Member # 232) on :
The problem's the same on both side views.
If you look directly under the bridge, the top of the mound of the primary hull is complete at both its front and back. The back should be covered slightly by the bridge, since the bridge extends down the rear slope of the mound.
Posted by Lobo (Member # 669) on :
If I have understood you right, then do you mean this. But i think is looks similar to the constituition class bridge. or i am wrong? Posted by Masao (Member # 232) on :
Sure, it looks similar, but it's not the same. The main difference is that your bridge extends much further down and back from the center of the mound than does the Consitution bridge.
Try this. Take a bowl and flip it over. This is like the primary hull mound. Take your left hand, and place it where the brige would be, mostly on the bottom of the bowl but partly down the slope to the left. Now, can you see the entire edge of the bottom of the bowl? No, you can't, because your hand, the bridge, is covering part of the edge towards the left, which represents the back of the ship.
That's exactly the same as in your drawing. From the side view, the back/top edge of the primary hull mound should be partially covered by the bridge. Also, the bridge module should have a curved bottom from the center of the hull to its rear bottom point, instead of going back horizontally, then having a sharp corner and downward slope.
Since I don't do 3-D computer modeling, I often use little mock-ups or look at plastic models to make sure I don't have too many mistakes like this.
Edit: I notice now that that where the top part of the bridge meets the bottom part of the bridge is also funny. On both the front and side views, the bottom part of the bridge has a curved edge where it meets the top part. That's not possible. The line where they meet should be straight horizontal. For reference, look at the Connie.
[ July 11, 2002, 18:07: Message edited by: Masao ]
Posted by Lobo (Member # 669) on :
So. Posted by Masao (Member # 232) on :
That's more like it, but since you shortened the bridge's rear extension quite a bit it's less noticeable. (I kind of liked the longer bridge.) You'll now need to make the correction on the refit.
Something else I noticed: On the side view, the block above the rear primary hull extension is missing the lines separting the beveled top and bottom parts from the middle part with straight sides. The lines are present on the other views. I also suggest you darken the top part of the central nacelle pylon. It looks too light to be under the rear engine deck. If I had onlly the side view, I'd assume that the nacelle pylons were actually attacked to the sides of the rear primary hull extension.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
