I've spent considerably more time than I care to admit working on this. Bear in mind that it is my first Trek model, and that it's mostly just modelling practice to learn my new 3D program. I think I'm almost at a place where I can finally start texture mapping it...
It definitely needs some more work. Particularly in the nacelles. I've been having a really hard time with them...
[ February 16, 2002, 14:08: Message edited by: Balaam Xumucane ]
Posted by Bernd (Member # 6) on :
Very nice -- !
Posted by Vogon Poet (Member # 393) on :
Yeah, it's looking quite good.
Hey, Bernd, how does that official side view contrast with your extrapolated version you did, that we used for the UP3 diag?
Posted by Masao (Member # 232) on :
"I can't tell where I got it, but it's the offcial model."
Pretty damned suspicious...
Posted by Balaam Xumucane (Member # 419) on :
Fishy origins be damned, that side view is really helping a great deal. I had been using Bernd's extrapolated side view as a template, but refined it a bit with that deckplan (i'm sure you've seen around). (The top view is, of course, taken from a cleaned up high-rez scan of the spread from TV Guide.) The "official" model side view really helps me nail down a couple disprepencies and gives me a better idea about what's going on with those nacelles. Thanks again, Bernd! Did I mention that you're my hero?
[ February 05, 2002, 21:27: Message edited by: Balaam Xumucane ]
Posted by Balaam Xumucane (Member # 419) on :
Please note that these discrepancies = pretty minor.
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
Hmm.. y'know, without all the excessive textures present on the official model, this one looks like it could've.. um.. i dont know .. come BEFORE the NCC-1701. Strange idea, that..
Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
...only if you remained fixated on the bizarre idea that smooth plating is primitive and rough textured plating is advanced. Posted by Bernd (Member # 6) on :
The main differences between my preliminary version and the official one are that some parts like the observation tower are protruding although I thought they shouldn't, that the strangely twisted double hull doesn't really look strangely twisted from the side, and that I didn't get the hull curvature quite right in the forward upper saucer and where the double hull runs into the bottom of the saucer.
Posted by Vogon Poet (Member # 393) on :
Oh, fuck it, we'll just stick with your extrapolated view. Unless you can be assed to modify it, I know I can't. 8)
Posted by Balaam Xumucane (Member # 419) on :
It's VERY close. Micrographix is Vector based, right?
Posted by Bernd (Member # 6) on :
Yes, it's similar to Corel Draw - although mutual conversion is almost impossible.
Posted by Greg (Member # 739) on :
quote:Originally posted by Bernd: Yes, it's similar to Corel Draw - although mutual conversion is almost impossible.
CorelDraw 10 can import Micrografx Designer 6.0 (DSF) but can't export or save in that format.
Just my two cents.
Posted by Balaam Xumucane (Member # 419) on :
I've never used Micrographix, but if Bernd is using it it can't be that bad. I use a really old version of Deneba Canvas (3.5.4 from like 1990), if it's any consolation. It really tears it up at doing simple B&W drawings because it's tuned to work with an Mac IIci, and I'm running it on a G4/400 with 640MB of RAM. I can beat just about anyone using any other program for speed and accuracy. Unfortunately Strata won't import the EPS files Canvas exports (and Canvas would have a tough time with the HUGE image files I've been using as templates) so I've been using Adobe Illustrator. But even then I'm using 7.0. The idea of vector transparency and mesh gradients appeals to me, but I'm waiting for OSX versions of the whole Adobe Suite before I upgrade...
[ February 12, 2002, 12:00: Message edited by: Balaam Xumucane ]
Posted by Michael_T (Member # 144) on :
Dat's one sexy biatch... really!
Posted by Balaam Xumucane (Member # 419) on :
Having it in the 3D program, moving it around, checking different angles. It pretty much looks good from just about any angle. (Ok, it looks kinda dumpy from below). I'll post some different angles in a bit...
Posted by The Red Admiral (Member # 602) on :
A nice model so far Balaam, a very fine start... Look forward to seeing more.
Posted by Proteus (Member # 212) on :
Adobe. Illustrator.
That is all.
Posted by Balaam Xumucane (Member # 419) on :
Illustrator works pretty well, but there are viable options. I wouldn't say that their multiple tools for editing bezier curves is necessarily the most efficient way of doing things.
Anyway, just a couple more views. God, I gotta work on the bridge riser and spine. She's a pretty boat, though, eh?
Anyone have a better view of what's going on in the rear there than this cruddy screencap?
Posted by Vogon Poet (Member # 393) on :
Courtesy of http://ukscifi.bravepages.com (although he hasn't UL'ed it yet, so I'm putting the cap on my site for now - somebody remind me to change the link when he does!):
Posted by Balaam Xumucane (Member # 419) on :
You rule.
Posted by Vogon Poet (Member # 393) on :
You're welcome. 8)
Posted by Balaam Xumucane (Member # 419) on :
He's got some really nice screencaps up there. Must have digital cable or something.
Posted by Vogon Poet (Member # 393) on :
Well, he gets his caps from Sky One, so it's that or digital satellite.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
