Hands down the most difficult ship I've ever tackled, hence it been an on going process for several months. Some problems yet to be resolved, and texturing is still incomplete -this has been a cause of most of the problems.
In order for this to be acceptable to me, it has to pass the pepsi challenge. This is probably the second most well known and familiar ship. So does it look like a Galaxy?
These are not beauty renders, so ignore lighting/composition.
This isn't a nitpick, as almost every Galaxy class model I've seen does this, but the way the hull pattern abbruptly stops at the saucer impulse engines makes them look a bit...tacked on.
And that starfleet pennent on the saucer leading up to the main shuttle bay looks a wee bit to big for me. And the main shuttle bay itself looks a smidge too far back.
But those are nitpicks. Good job!
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
Day-um! If that's a WIP, I'd love to see the finished product!
Yeah, there are a few nitpicks -- but aside from the ones mentioned above, I can't find anything that's really wrong. I might suggest a lighter shade of blue/grey, but that might just be the lighting. This looks great! A lot better than some of the other attempts I've seen over the years...
Posted by Trimm (Member # 865) on :
Only two problems I see, and they are minor ones, is that the saucer impulse engines look a tad on the large side, as are the vents at the top back end of the nacelles. Otherwise its very good looking, especially for a WIP!
Posted by The Red Admiral (Member # 602) on :
Well thanks! That's a relief, I've been too close to this to be objective and I was being constantly over critical about evey possible nuance. I've had to cheat slightly though on two things. Firstly the textures I nabbed from the net and amended them for the model (i don't know who to extend texture credits to). The texture pattern for the Galaxy is so recognisable that I couldn't draw them in Photoshop and make them look authentic. (MM, I'm crap at Photoshop and 2D - you're the 2D God!)
Secondly, I used my Nebula Class saucer as a template for this (I built the Nebula first), hence the large Starfleet pennent on the saucer which remains, and the deeper and more angular bridge module. Other than that it's all custom built. So at least I can say it's well on the way and I don't have to change anything too much (I built three successive neck sections and threw them about before I got a result - it was horrifically difficult and frustrating to get that right).
Thanks! Look out for some kick-ass animations coming up with this Galaxy.
Posted by Magnus Pym Eye (Member # 239) on :
The aft end of the Engineering hull, where the torpedo launcher is, seems to be too far away from the edge of the flat part of the pylon thing. The part that goes like this: |___|, The horizontal part.
Posted by Springfield Armory Snay (Member # 411) on :
Red,
Could you post an image of the GS coming straight on, and angled slightly up?
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
Just two things. There should be a number only registry marking (no NCC) just behind the main shuttlebay, in yellow, if the AMT model kit is to be believed.
Also, the rear torpedo launcher seems to be missing. (Actually, looking at that now, it's possible that the thin wedge at the back of the stardrive section it just a bit too long. Or perhaps more accuratly, the top of the stardrive section doesn't come back quite far enough before it merges with the flat part).
If you wanted to be reckless, you could alway do the model in the Post-Defiant pennents (where the Stafleet symbol lacks the oval behind it, and the strips are a bit different).
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
Mark, I think you confused me with someone else here. I don't do very much starship artwork at all. Therefore, I doubt that I would be "the 2D God." Posted by Colorful Cartman (Member # 256) on :
Delicious! I look forward to seeing the final "product". Posted by Matrix (Member # 376) on :
I don't think the ship was that shiny. That and the main shuttle bay seems to be... off.
Posted by The Red Admiral (Member # 602) on :
MinutiaeMan - why I thought you were Reverend for a minute I have no idea. Sorry dude.
Thanks for the comment. As I said there are a few things yet to be resolved - further markings, final detailing etc. I also see the point regarding the secondary hull where it meets the pylons. There is a too big a gap, you're right.
What problem is there with the main shuttlebay?
Posted by Magnus Pym Eye (Member # 239) on :
Well, I suppose it could stand to have some more detail, it's a lot flatter than the one on the filming models.
Posted by Prismatic EdipisReks (Member # 510) on :
the dorsal secondary hull seems to be too rounded in general, and the gap at the torpedo tube has been mentioned. other than that, it looks good to me. can't wait to see the finished version.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
Doesn't the main shuttlebay have a bit more of a curve to it?
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
NICE!
Just a few extra little things...
I think the main impulse engine is too far down? Is it big enough?
The second and third shuttle bays should be more easily seen... I think they are inset.
The 'back-bone' of the secondary hull doesn't curve DOWN like that I think it tapers with out an arc...
And I guess you haven't finished but there are no windows or vents etc on decks 2? and 3?
Oh, and where are the transporter emitters?
Yes, can we see a front on view.
Andrew
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
I think possibly that the saucer impulse engines are too "inset", or whatever. It makes the part where the neck meets the saucer look a bit structuraly unsound. I'd make the "chunk" taken out of the saucer for them a bit smaller.
Posted by The Red Admiral (Member # 602) on :
A full set of detailed views from all angles won't be available until it's finished. So this is just a quickie - didn't have time to do anything more detailed.
Posted by Gerard Gillan (Member # 684) on :
If you need to have detailed infomation to correct and add in more detail on your Galaxy class ship. I do not want to nitpick your work but help you out with some reference material which I hope this helps in your venture. Galaxy Class blueprints and schematic info
I hope this help's you Red Admiral
Reguards
Gerard - Gilso
Posted by Matrix (Member # 376) on :
Hey it's Gilso! Love your site.
On the front view, to me the upper half of the engineering hull seems to be a little too curved.
The main shuttlebay seems to stand out more because it has different detail from the rest of the ship, and it's also a tad too long.
Other than that, better than most I have seen.
Posted by The Red Admiral (Member # 602) on :
Thank you for the comments and the useful nitpicks, I don't take them as criticisms, because as alluded to before this is a WIP. It is far from finished.
I don't know if, or how, the secondary hull has become too curved. I've used plenty of schematics and reference material to make this model, doing it freehand and on the fly would be utterly impossible. So in my opinion it is correct as far as the dimensions of the hull are concerned. (with a few mesh edges and other details yet to iron out and tidy up)
Gilso, thanks ever so much for the link. These detailed and hi res schematics will be very useful for this and other projects.. Excellent.
Posted by Matrix (Member # 376) on :
What I mean is the deflector dish, the top part is too curved. Take a look at Gilso's and you will know what I mean.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
Of course, the two TNG Enterprise-D models do have differently shaped engineering hulls anyway, so there is room for interpretation.
Posted by Matrix (Member # 376) on :
Seriously? Do you have pictures to show me? I never could tell the difference beyond the surface detail.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
Er, there was a thread about it a few months back. Someone said that they thought the 4 foot model looked "pregnent", and thus hated it. There was probably an anti-Berman & Braga comment in there too.
Someone with better memory who is less lazy than me want to look it up?
Posted by Balaam Xumucane (Member # 419) on :
Great work as usual, RA.
I believe the 'pregnant' discussion was was in reference to the STIII Excelsior looking like a 'pregnant guppy.' Not entirely groundless
There is some discussion of the differences between the 4 and 6ft Galaxy models starting around here .
If someone pokes me with a stick I'll upload a comparison front view of the two models, but then I'm sure the resourceful among you must certainly have this image.
Posted by Matrix (Member # 376) on :
*pokes Balaam Xumucane with a stick*
Posted by The Red Admiral (Member # 602) on :
'poke times two'.
It would be a interesting and useful comparison.
Posted by Balaam Xumucane (Member # 419) on :
[IMAGE REMOVED]
EDIT: Sorry, Kids. Content VERBOTTEN
[ August 13, 2002, 22:35: Message edited by: Balaam Xumucane ]
Posted by EdipisReks (Member # 510) on :
the 4 foot model is way better.
Posted by The Red Admiral (Member # 602) on :
Wow, there are some serious differences there, far more, and far more contrasting then I previously suspected.
Good work BX, and thanks...
Posted by Matrix (Member # 376) on :
Actually I like the top one better, more streamlined. Though that's not what I mean. I'll make my own comparison later.
Posted by Dax (Member # 191) on :
Not to be a wet blanket, but it's worth mentioning that Mojo didn't want the image distributed.
[ August 14, 2002, 01:54: Message edited by: Dax ]
Posted by Balaam Xumucane (Member # 419) on :
*smacks forehead*
That's where I got it...
[so amended]
Posted by EdipisReks (Member # 510) on :
why didn't mojo want that distributed? i know i participated in that thread, but i can't remember the reason.
Posted by Dax (Member # 191) on :
Couldn't say...
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Bugger - missed those pictures... what were they of, I might have seen them.
Andrew
Posted by Colorful Cartman (Member # 256) on :
Frontal views of the two models, unflatteringly showing the rather protuberant appearance of the 6ft miniature.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
At the risk of coming off as having a sloppy vocabulary, "protuberant"?
And didn't Mojo give you permission to post it here in the first place?
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
And we never did find out why Mojo was so desperate to see Doug Drexler's letter... Posted by Dax (Member # 191) on :
quote:Originally posted by PsyLiam: And didn't Mojo give you permission to post it here in the first place?
Yes, but it was a temporary thing. He asked me to take the image offline a week after its initial upload.
Anyway, I have a slight preferance for the 6 footer. It looks a bit more graceful and gives a better sense of size IMO. The chunky paneling and shape of the 4' model is a negative IMHO. I still very much like both but just prefer the original.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
