Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
Flare Sci-Fi Forums
»
Star Trek
»
Starships & Technology
»
TNG in HD
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message:
HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by o2: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Dukhat: [qb] ^Again, you're assuming that not seeing the ships in the original shot constitutes a problem that they needed to fix. The Tsiolkovsky's registry was deemed a problem because the studio model said one thing and the dedication plaque and the ship's listing in the Encyclopedia (which Okuda co-wrote) said another thing. [/qb][/QUOTE]Then I'm curious to see how the conundrum regarding the USS Br(a|i)ttain has been solved in season 4. [QUOTE]Originally posted by Dukhat: [qb]I'm curious as to how you came up with those figures you gave. What's your experience working with CGI for a television show? [/qb][/QUOTE]Obviously I am neither a CGI artist nor do I have a history in movie business. But I did a quick proof of concept to get an idea of the work involved: It took me roughly 15 min. to get the pictures (the USS Sutherland and the scene from Sarek), 'repair' the damage to the Sutherland (since the ship should represent the Monitor), scale it down, rework the color palette a little bit, flip the ship (since Riker said that the Montior just arrived so I guess the ship should be facing towards the planet) and paste it in the existing shot of the Enterprise with the planet. I have to admit that this is only 1 frame out of 120 (24p multiplied with 5 secs), but modern software is able to automate certain steps in the process so things can be expedite a little bit. Therefore I think that 8 hours effort is reasonable. [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
© 1999-2024 Charles Capps
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3