I don't have any screencaps to back this up, but I've noticed that the Enterprise-D looked distinctly different after a few seasons. There seem to be two versions of the ship. Are these models or CGIs? Or were there any CGIs of the Ent-D?
Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
The proportions of the 6 foot and 4 foot models were ever-so-slightly different, so new VFX shots from season 3 three onwards might have contrasted somewhat with the stock footage in those episodes. Frankly, I have a hard time noticing it, although the increase in the depth and detailing of the panelling is pretty obvious.
The only CGI mesh of the Enterprise-D was the one ILM built for the warp jump in Generations. We then didn't see a CGI Galaxy until either Digital Muse or Foundation whipped one up for the Dominion War.
Posted by Cadet Sorak (Member # 874) on :
I wouldn't have noticed it either, except I rigged up a tape to place them side-by-side. The later model seems to be smoother somehow, less "stark", if that's the right word.
Posted by EdipisReks (Member # 510) on :
well,the later 4 foot model had a lot more detail and was covered in raised panels, so i'm not sure if i would call the 4 foot one smoother, since it was much more heavily textures.
Posted by Starship Millennium (Member # 822) on :
The four footer looked a bit like a bulldog, IMHO, while the original six footer was much sleeker and curvaceous. (One of the interesting things about the four footer is that the hatch for the motion control stand is quite visible on the stardrive's belly.)
I still curse the fact that ILM put all that work into refurbishing the model for Generations only for it to be used in less than ten minutes of footage.
Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
The bulldogs where you live must look rather unusual.
Posted by Starship Millennium (Member # 822) on :
Y'know how bulldogs are stockier? That's what I meant... guess I have to watch the figurative language around here...
Posted by Dr. Phlox (Member # 878) on :
Was the four foot one the model that got damaged when some guy hung it in his kitchen?
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
I have never heard that story.
For what it's worth, the last time the 6 footer was used in the series was the episode before "The Enemy", although it was hauled out for the seperation sequence in BOBW part 2, and for Generations, by which point it was apparently fairly damamged.
The 4 footer was last used (I think) for the Venture in Way of the Warrior.
Posted by Guardian 2000 (Member # 743) on :
(((Edit: Okay, I swear I've seen a reference to a ten-foot E-D model that was built by ILM and used for separations. Really, I swear. But I can't find it. Grr.)))
Then there was the pretty six-footer that ILM made, with its graceful, slender lines.
Then there was the 4-footer, which was actually known as "the bulldog" because it was beefier-looking. (Also note that another reason you'll notice differences is that there was a newer, easier, cheaper ultraviolet matting technique used in later TNG, which in my opinion looked funny.)
Last but not least, there was the two-foot low-detail model used for the slit-scan "leaping to warp" effect. This was also seen in one of the early Starlog ST:TNG magazines.
[ November 14, 2002, 02:04: Message edited by: Guardian 2000 ]
Posted by Dat (Member # 302) on :
There was never a 10 foot model of the E-D. There was however a 12 foot model of the saucer used in the crash landing scene in "Generations"
Posted by Austin Powers (Member # 250) on :
Speaking of which, has anybody been able to upload the Making-of of Generations somewhere?
I asked about that way back, and some were willing to do it, but somehow it got forgotten along the way.
I have already searched Morpheus, Kazaa, etc. for an avi or mpg, but could not find it anywhere.
Anyone else have it or have any idea how to get it?
Posted by TheF0rce (Member # 533) on :
The darker lighting later on combined with the more "bumpiness" of the panels [especialy the ones near the forward rim of the saucer] makes the ship look more like a warship with armor better than the Sovi or Defiant and especially over the damm Prometheus. Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Well I for one have always preferred the later-seasons E-D model than the Earlier one... which is oft used for that promotional picture infront of the beige planet (look at the back of your Star Trek Compendium books.)
I love the texture and following the shadows and moreover the REALISM that the E-D(model II) has. The Re-work of the Model I in Generations, though WAS brilliant.
Posted by EdipisReks (Member # 510) on :
i think that the 4 foot model had the best proportions. hey, haven't we had this thread before?
Posted by EdipisReks (Member # 510) on :
quote:Originally posted by Starship Millennium: Y'know how bulldogs are stockier?
stockier than what? making a comparison using a term "stockier" requires two things to compare. bulldogs certainly aren't stockier than, say, pickle barrels.
[ November 14, 2002, 13:26: Message edited by: EdipisReks ]
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Stockier than a Chiuaua?
Posted by The Red Admiral (Member # 602) on :
Austin Powers said:
quote:Speaking of which, has anybody been able to upload the Making-of of Generations somewhere?
I asked about that way back, and some were willing to do it, but somehow it got forgotten along the way.
I have already searched Morpheus, Kazaa, etc. for an avi or mpg, but could not find it anywhere.
Anyone else have it or have any idea how to get it?
I've got this on video, but the problem would be size. Any .avi I captured and compressed would be massive. I can't remember how long the show is, 30 mins, 45... either way it would be far to big to put on my server, and I'd be reluctant to upload it with only a 56K modem. I could make some still captures of the making of the saucer landing sequence though..?
Posted by Austin Powers (Member # 250) on :
What a pity. Having DSL really makes you forget about file sizes. Some weeks back I downloaded a Red Dwarf episode in mpg (~300 MB). I would never have dreamed about doing that back when I had ISDN.
Anyway, if you could do screencaps of that sequence that would make me very happy already. Cheers in advance, man. Posted by Starship Millennium (Member # 822) on :
quote:Originally posted by EdipisReks: stockier than what? making a comparison using a term "stockier" requires two things to compare. bulldogs certainly aren't stockier than, say, pickle barrels.
Sorry, there I go with my assumptions again...
What's this "Making of Generations" special about? I don't remember it... was it similar to that special that aired on HBO for First Contact?
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
I don't know where it was screened - but I got a copy from the local supermarket/variety store when I bought and episode of either Voyager or DS9. (Season 1 Voyager).
It was just a video cassette in a cardboard slip-cover.
SORRY though - I'd copy it if I could but - second video isn't working great, I don't have a capture card, I only have a 56k modem and the video is in PAL (if I copied on tape - which would disadvantage North Americans (for once the TABLES ARE TURNED!!!!!!! HAHAHAHAH!) huh hmm sorry about that
Can I ask - how long would it have taken to download a 300mb Red Dwarf episode on cable?
Tanx.
Andrew
Posted by Austin Powers (Member # 250) on :
I saw a screening of that tape at the Star Trek Exhibition in Cologne a couple of years back. I came into the room right at the point where they showed the making of the crash-landing sequence - with the truck pulling the saucer across the model of the landscape. Awesome material IMHO. I wonder why they haven't included it on the Generations DVD?? Perhaps on a future Director's Edition I hope...
Oh and Andy, I wouldn't mind PAL at all. I live in Germany, remember? No hard feelings to our NTSC-plagued American friends...
The 300 MB took me roughly 45 minutes to download. And DSL is not cable, although similar in connection speed.
Posted by The Red Admiral (Member # 602) on :
Ok, here it is. I've done a capture of the sequence for you. It's short, but webspace is at a premium, it does show though the main crux of the sequence. It is 4.5Mb, avi format, DiVX 5 codec. Get it while you can, it will not be there for long....
Screencap stills of the rest of the documentary are to come.
By the way - that's John Knoll of ILM talking, right?
Posted by QuinnTV (Member # 859) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dr. Phlox: Was the four foot one the model that got damaged when some guy hung it in his kitchen?
Originally posted by PsyLiam: I have never heard that story.
This was told by Penny Juday on the supplemental material for the TNG Season 2 DVD set.
Essentially, the model in question (the 6 footer, I think) disappeared from the Paramount archives. Later, it mysteriously made its way back to the lot. It apparently had been loaned out,and was hung in a restaurant kitchen over the grill. Paramount got it back heavily damaged - cracked nacelles and holes drilled in it, as well as a good coating of grease. The model was restored.
The story refers to one of the original ILM models. They do show the 6 foot model in the same show, restored to pristine fashion...but with 1701-E on the top of the saucer.
Posted by QuinnTV (Member # 859) on :
quote:Originally posted by Austin Powers: Ok, I just downloaded it.
That's great. Thank you so much. Made my day!
By the way - that's John Knoll of ILM talking, right?
That was a great little clip. Thanks for posting it, Red Admiral.
And I think that is John Knoll. Just saw him in the new SW supplements. Weird to see him in two different things in the same week.... and to envy his job both times!
Posted by The Red Admiral (Member # 602) on :
Ah right, thanks for that snippet.
I'll leave that clip there for 24hrs, (till 9pm GMT monday) then I'll be deleting it. So any that want it, now's the time...
Posted by Starship Millennium (Member # 822) on :
quote:Originally posted by QuinnTV: Essentially, the model in question (the 6 footer, I think) disappeared from the Paramount archives. Later, it mysteriously made its way back to the lot. It apparently had been loaned out,and was hung in a restaurant kitchen over the grill. Paramount got it back heavily damaged - cracked nacelles and holes drilled in it, as well as a good coating of grease. The model was restored.
What a disgrace to the model! Thank God they got it back...
Posted by Austin Powers (Member # 250) on :
Could have been worse - they could have cut the saucer in half and used it as a pan for making Paella!! Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
I wonder how they got it back!?! Did someone just once go ohh... I wonder if they are looking for that Enterprise Model? Or if they even knew it was from the show!?!?!?!
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
God, I don't know, but my days and nights are filled with restless speculation!!!!!!
Posted by LET CAPTAIN = MIKE THEN GOSUB 420 (Member # 709) on :
i believe the restaurant in question would have been at the Star Trek Experience, meaning they would have a pretty good idea what they had there. waitaminnit.. was it labeled Trinculo when they got it back?
Posted by Dr. Phlox (Member # 878) on :
I have a screencap of it, it doesn't look like the Enterprise's registry actually. But it is blurry. It says it's the Enterprise.
Posted by EdipisReks (Member # 510) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dr. Phlox: It says it's the Enterprise.
so did the Odyssey.
Posted by Dr. Phlox (Member # 878) on :
quote:Originally posted by EdipisReks:
quote:Originally posted by Dr. Phlox: It says it's the Enterprise.
so did the Odyssey.
I mean it's listed as the Enterprise, hang on, I'll upload the pic.
You can see the registry at the top of the page, the number on the model might not be the Enterprise's though.
Posted by EdipisReks (Member # 510) on :
i agree that the model might not be labeled with the Enterprise registry. it's hard to tell.
Posted by SoundEffect (Member # 926) on :
For the record, the USS Odyssey WAS correctly labeled for "The Jem'Hadar". It was seen clearly in a Science of Star Trek special on TV. I have it on tape somewhere. I remember seeing they didn't quite center the word 'Odyssey' to the saucer's centerline correctly. The scene briefly showed two stage hands mounting the 4' model on the stand for filming during a discussion about the scientific validity of Trek ship design.
Posted by Dat (Member # 302) on :
I've been saying that for a while, but no one listens to me.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dr. Phlox: I mean it's listed as the Enterprise, hang on, I'll upload the pic.
You can see the registry at the top of the page, the number on the model might not be the Enterprise's though.
Dear GOD. Could it be?
A TRINCULO PIC??? Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
quote:Originally posted by SoundEffect: For the record, the USS Odyssey WAS correctly labeled for "The Jem'Hadar". It was seen clearly in a Science of Star Trek special on TV. I have it on tape somewhere. I remember seeing they didn't quite center the word 'Odyssey' to the saucer's centerline correctly. The scene briefly showed two stage hands mounting the 4' model on the stand for filming during a discussion about the scientific validity of Trek ship design.
Got a pic??
Posted by Dr. Phlox (Member # 878) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim:
Dear GOD. Could it be?
A TRINCULO PIC???
That's what I think(but have been avoiding saying so far), I have a closer image of the registry which looks to me like it has a similar registry on it to the Trinculo. I'll upload it.
Posted by Dr. Phlox (Member # 878) on :
Here we go;
It could be 1701-D, but the first digit on the left looked like a 7 to me(very blurred though), then a 1 and what could have been a 6, 8 or 9. Then I checked the Trinculo's registry, NCC-71867.
It's too fuzzy to be anywhere near sure, but I'll see if I can get a better cap tomorrow.
Posted by EdipisReks (Member # 510) on :
quote:Originally posted by SoundEffect: For the record, the USS Odyssey WAS correctly labeled for "The Jem'Hadar". It was seen clearly in a Science of Star Trek special on TV. I have it on tape somewhere. I remember seeing they didn't quite center the word 'Odyssey' to the saucer's centerline correctly. The scene briefly showed two stage hands mounting the 4' model on the stand for filming during a discussion about the scientific validity of Trek ship design.
yes, but the saucer that was blown off clearly says Enterprise.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dr. Phlox: It could be 1701-D, but the first digit on the left looked like a 7 to me(very blurred though), then a 1 and what could have been a 6, 8 or 9. Then I checked the Trinculo's registry, NCC-71867.
It's too fuzzy to be anywhere near sure, but I'll see if I can get a better cap tomorrow.
Well, it's definitely not NCC-1701-D. But that last digit doesn't look much like a 7, either. Looks more like perhaps the Venture's NCC-71854.
But I want desperately to keep an open mind...
-MMoM Posted by SoundEffect (Member # 926) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim: Got a pic??
I don't have a screen cap on my harddrive, but I was looking for the show the other day anyway, so I'll surely take one, no problem!
quote:Originally posted by EdipisReks: yes, but the saucer that was blown off clearly says Enterprise
That's only because the saucer flying out from the debris was the Trek III saucer section! Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
quote:Originally posted by Sol System: God, I don't know, but my days and nights are filled with restless speculation!!!!!!
Gee a bit more sarcasm for table 9!!
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim:
quote:Originally posted by Dr. Phlox: It could be 1701-D, but the first digit on the left looked like a 7 to me(very blurred though), then a 1 and what could have been a 6, 8 or 9. Then I checked the Trinculo's registry, NCC-71867.
It's too fuzzy to be anywhere near sure, but I'll see if I can get a better cap tomorrow.
Well, it's definitely not NCC-1701-D. But that last digit doesn't look much like a 7, either. Looks more like perhaps the Venture's NCC-71854.
But I want desperately to keep an open mind...
-MMoM
If that's the Venture's registry - I think that's it. Before I scrolled down the page to your post I studied the pic - I got 718(or 9 or 5)5(something a little different or 8 or 9) 4... I couldn't make out the last one - it was wierd and 4 fits perfectly.
I think it's the Venture.
And what happened to it's poor nacelle!?!
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
quote:Originally posted by LET CAPTAIN = MIKE THEN GOSUB 420: i believe the restaurant in question would have been at the Star Trek Experience, meaning they would have a pretty good idea what they had there. waitaminnit.. was it labeled Trinculo when they got it back?
Well the description sounded like it was in some Chinese take-away on Melrose Avenue! Posted by Dr. Phlox (Member # 878) on :
Still blurry. Posted by SoundEffect (Member # 926) on :
Here's the pics I promised. Hopefully this will settle the issue of the Odyssey being labeled as such on top of the miniature. The guys you can sort of see in the background had paintbrushes and appeared to be dusting off the model before filming.
quote:Originally posted by Dr. Phlox: This is the best cap I could get.
Going by the look and detail (especially the arboretum windows), it's definitely the 4 footer. And now we know what happened to it after it appeared as the Venture. I wasn't sure which miniature it was when watching the DVD but the screen caps have been a great help.
Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
But didn't the four footer get dreadnaughtified around then?
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
It definitely has the Venture's reg, but then why doesn't it have the raised phaser strips on the nacelles?
What was the Trinculo, I keep forgetting, the 4-footer or the 6-footer? AND WHY DOESN'T ANYONE HAVE A BLOODY PIC? How can there be pictures that existed, but NO ONE can find a solitary one...ANYWHERE?
-MMoM Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
Simple. The picture didn't exist in the first place.
Posted by Dax (Member # 191) on :
The Venture, appearing in "WotW" (after "All Good Things"), only had the extra phaser strips on each nacelle top surface. It's reasonable to assume that the dreadnaught parts can be removed without too much trouble.
As for the Trinculo, did that ship ever actually exist in any form or is it just hear say?
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dax: The Venture, appearing in "WotW" (after "All Good Things"), only had the extra phaser strips on each nacelle top surface. It's reasonable to assume that the dreadnaught parts can be removed without too much trouble.
As for the Trinculo, did that ship ever actually exist in any form or is it just hear say?
I am told by a number of individuals who I consider to be reasonably reliable sources. (Including some fellow Flare posters) that it did in fact exist and that there were (emphasis on were, in the past tense) pics floating around the internet. Don't ask me what happened to them all, it beats me. Unfortunately, unless someone miraculously comes forward with a pic they saved to their hard drive, I think I shall never actually see one with my own eyes.
-MMoM Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
My point was we previously thought the 4 footer "played" the Enterprise-D in the past/present scenes of AGT, then was reworked into the future Ent-D, then sat in a crate until 18 months later most of the stuff was stripped (with the exception of the nacelle phasers) when it appeared as the Venture. If it was the Odyssey at some point during this sequence of events, the above theory needs to be revised. And this damaged nacelle is coming into this from left field.
Posted by Dax (Member # 191) on :
I've been here a long time and I've certainly never ever seen a picture of the Trinculo. Was the Trinculo supposed to exist before or after the Venture? If it's after, we now have some evidence that the whole Trinculo story is bull.
Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
I'm on an episode title acronym kick. Forgive me.
Anyway, the answer is supposedly after. The thing is, there was never any need to relabel the thing, as there were no appearances of the model after the Odyssey aside from the Venture in WotW. (Actually, I just remembered that I'm not clear on what form of Galaxy was used in the bigass fleet in CtA, which could have been CGI, an ERTL kit, or, yeah, the 4 footer. And I suppose now that we know the Hathaway was in Redemption 2, we have the Valkyrie precedent of a model at a convention getting a new name and registry out of nowhere. So it's hardly airtight.)
My biggest flag against the story is that the legend of a Trinculo-class Galaxy model pictures only came about many months after we heard the name Trinculo referenced in SoA (which at the time had set off totally weird speculation that somehow connected that name to a Galaxy class ship in the fight and from there led to the theory that the lead Galaxy in those fight scenes was the physical model labelled as such). Creighton perpetuated this, IIRC. Of course, we now know all the Galaxies were unlabelled CGI.
Posted by Dax (Member # 191) on :
quote:Originally posted by The_Tom: My point was we previously thought the 4 footer "played" the Enterprise-D in the past/present scenes of AGT, then was reworked into the future Ent-D, then sat in a crate until 18 months later most of the stuff was stripped (with the exception of the nacelle phasers) when it appeared as the Venture. If it was the Odyssey at some point during this sequence of events, the above theory needs to be revised.
Hmmm, "The Jem'Hadar" was aired two weeks after "All Good Things" but I suppose the extra stuff should've already been added to the miniature by then. If we run with the assumption that the extra parts are easy to add and remove, it's possible everything was removed for the Odyssey appearance but for the Venture they decided it would look cool to again add the extra phaser banks.
Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
I suppose so. It just seems odd that they'd gather up the bits and pieces and stick them back on 18 months later for a split-second shot. I'd always assumed the reason we got to see the nacelle phasers again was that they were just stuck on too well.
The TNG Companion, and here I'm fuzzily remembering a book I don't own, talks about how part of the reason they did such extensive AGT refitting was that there were no plans to restore the model. The Venture example shows it wasn't an irreversable modification by any means, but they would have known they'd be using it as the Odyssey in short enough order that I'd take the book into account and assume the Odyssey scenes were filmed before AGT.
Posted by Dax (Member # 191) on :
quote:Originally posted by The_Tom: Actually, I just remembered that I'm not clear on what form of Galaxy was used in the bigass fleet in CtA, which could have been CGI, an ERTL kit, or, yeah, the 4 footer.
IIRC there was a thread on this kind of recently. It was revealed that the "CtA" Galaxys weren't a studio miniature but they were either CGI or a cheap kit/toy model (I can't remember which).
Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
In that case, the Trinculo can be pretty conclusively ruled out from ever having appeared on screen. (Funny, because I'm sure a lot of people said that months ago.) And even if these dubious pictures appear, we'd have to assume it was a relabel job for an exhibition.
Posted by Akira (Member # 850) on :
only 2 thing i have come up with was a picture from the show of some galaxy calss ship and the venture planet hollywood thing
about 4 hrs searching
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
I remember seeing the Trinculo picture(s), too. I really don't think I'm imagining it, but who knows?
And what's this about it being mentioned in SoA? Are you sure you aren't thinking of the Magellan?
Posted by Austin Powers (Member # 250) on :
I didn't hear any mention of a starship called Trinculo in that episode. Where is that remark supposed to be heard??
Posted by EdipisReks (Member # 510) on :
i remember seeing a pic of the Trinculo, too.
Posted by Austin Powers (Member # 250) on :
Me too, but I didn't find it on the maze which is my hard-disk - yet. But I was always under the impression that it was relabeled "Trinculo" for an exhibition - not that it was ever shown (or mentioned) onscreen!?
Posted by Dr. Phlox (Member # 878) on :
It certainly wasn't mentioned in SoA, unless it was one of those impossible to see display type references. The story I've always heard was that the Trinculo was just relabled in the same way as the Valkrie for some exhibition or restaurant. I can't think of anywhere we'd see a physical model in SoA except in the Starbase 375 shots(dark neck?).
Posted by SoundEffect (Member # 926) on :
It wasn't an assumption. They're not allowed to 'damage' the hero models. A magazine article had photos of the AGT Enterprise with some of the pieces removed and laying on a table. There were cameras around, so it wasn't a model shop. Greg Jein also said in the interview that the third nacelle and connecting pylon had to have it's own power source, as it couln't be hooked to the internal wiring of the four-footer.
It was the same with the Enterprise-B. The refit version was additional pieces that could be addd on and then removed. Kirk was blown out of a 'new' section added on because the model makers weren't allowed to rip open the Excelsior hull.
If you look closely at the shot from "Way of the Warrior" when the Venture is shown docked, the AGT nacelle addons are actually placed on backwards with the phasers towards the front. It doesn't flow ith the contour of the nacelle if the wide part is at the front. Still, I guess that orientation is canon now...
Posted by Guardian 2000 (Member # 743) on :
1. I remember the Trinculo pic, too, but if I had it on my drive (which I think likely) it would've been deleted at the same time I deleted several other similar backstage pics when I briefly flirted with a full hard drive.
2. I also recall the notion that the Trinculo signage was only seen (or at least confirmed) on a display model, a la some sort of ST:Experience or Planet Hollywood sort of thing.
(On the other hand, I also "remember" a mention of a ten-foot E-D which doesn't exist, so do with that what you will.)
quote:Originally posted by The_Tom: The TNG Companion, and here I'm fuzzily remembering a book I don't own, talks about how part of the reason they did such extensive AGT refitting was that there were no plans to restore the model.
I do own that, and saw no mention of the idea in the AGT section.
The Generations section suggests that the six-footer was used because it had saucer sep capabilities, and that it was therefore stripped down and reworked to bring it up to motion picture specs . . . no mention of the four-footer is made.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
The Trinculo pic had it in a glass/plastic case I think.
Posted by The Mike from C.A.P.T.A.I.N. (Member # 709) on :
quote:Originally posted by The_Tom: The Venture example shows it wasn't an irreversable modification by any means, but they would have known they'd be using it as the Odyssey in short enough order that I'd take the book into account and assume the Odyssey scenes were filmed before AGT.
which makes me more upset they didnt use the TNG bridge in Jem'Hadar.. but then they were probably using it for Preemptive Strike/AGT.
Posted by Dax (Member # 191) on :
quote:Originally posted by Guardian 2000: The Generations section suggests that the six-footer was used because it had saucer sep capabilities, and that it was therefore stripped down and reworked to bring it up to motion picture specs . . . no mention of the four-footer is made.
The "AGT" future D was most definitely the 4' miniature. I'd put money on it.
They repainted and detailed the 6' miniature for Generations.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
The AGT... 3-naceller was indeed the 4' ship.
Posted by Austin Powers (Member # 250) on :
As you can see from every photo of it with some VFX guy near it for size comparison.
By the way, I tried Google as well as several filesharing programs to locate a pic of the Trinculo - to no avail!
Indeed these pics seem to have disappeared mysteriuosly. Section 31 at work?? Posted by Guardian 2000 (Member # 743) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dax: They repainted and detailed the 6' miniature for Generations.
That's what I said. Sorry if I didn't make it more clear.
Posted by Dax (Member # 191) on :
quote:Originally posted by Guardian 2000: That's what I said. Sorry if I didn't make it more clear.
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Y'know how bulldogs are stockier? ![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
Unfortunately, unless someone miraculously comes forward with a pic they saved to their hard drive, I think I shall never actually see one with my own eyes.