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 Dukhat: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim: [qb]BTW, in spite of Okuda's statement quoted on Memory Alpha regarding the [i]Tsiolkovsky[/i]'s NCC-640 registry being left over from the [i]Copernicus[/i], I'm still inclined to believe that the latter ship's registry is NCC-623 (as previously reported by Okuda in the <u>Encyclopedia</u>, and which he once stated to me to have come from a behind the scenes photo of the model during filming of STIV) and that the model was in fact relabeled for its appearance in "The Naked Now" (TNG) as seems to have been the practice from the beginning. (The [i]Hood[/i] establishes a precedent both for this and for the fact that one number might be put on the model while another was used on set dressing.)[/qb][/QUOTE]I used to have the same feeling about the Copernicus having the 623 registry until I read this from Okuda: "I seem to recall that Grissom may have been relabeled to serve as another ship in Star Trek III or IV. I didn't try to relabel the model for 'The Naked Now,' partly because we realized that the existing registry would not be legible in standard-def video, but also because we were all so insanely busy at the time that no one could take on an additional project that wasn't likely to be seen on the screen." So Okuda himself stated that he didn't relabel the model, which to me means that it was labeled "U.S.S. Copernicus NCC-640" when it was filmed as the Tsiolkovsky. Remember, the VFX guys were separate from the Art Department and the scriptwriters. Their job was just to film the model. It was Okuda's job to relabel the models, which he clearly states here that he didn't do. [QUOTE][qb]It will indeed be interesting to see if the registry is visible in a future transfer of "Emissary" (DS9). The model was relabeled as the [i]Yosemite[/i] for "Realm Of Fear" (TNG) as seen from a behind the scenes photo from the DS9 episode and confirmed in the remastered TNG episode, but we don't know if it might have been relabeled after the photo was taken. Let's remember that there were TWO [i]Oberth[/i]-class ships in the episode, and according to the <u>Encyclopedia</u>, the one destroyed in the opening battle sequence was the [i]U.S.S. Bonestell[/i] NCC-31600. We can't see this in the episode, nor the names and registries of the other ships apart from the [i]Saratoga[/i] and [i]Melbourne[/i], but we know from behind the scenes photos that they were all in fact relabeled with the names and numbers reported for them in the same source.[/qb][/QUOTE]You bring up an excellent point. All the models used [i]were[/i] relabeled even though they weren't at all clearly seen in the shots. So logically, this would mean that that Oberth, even though it was on screen for only half a second, could very well have been labeled "Bonestell" with the accompanying registry change. But does that mean that it was still labeled as the Bonestell when the model is next filmed bringing Dax and Bashir to the station? It's been commonly believed to have been the Cochrane, but by chronological use of the model, it should have been labeled as "Yosemite" by then (and vwuser claims to be able to see the Yosemite's registry, which I cannot). If the model was relabeled Bonestell, would it still have that name in the second shot? I suppose it would depend on when the VFX shots were originally done. [QUOTE][qb](Query: Do we think the [i]Bonestell[/i] was represented by the same filming model or a separate one? It kind of got blown up, and I seem to recall that in the case of the [i]Saratoga[/i]'s destruction they used a special "stunt" model.)[/qb][/QUOTE]I believe that the intact model was replaced with the damaged Vico model for that shot, but I could be wrong. [QUOTE][qb]I've never examined all the instances of the various starship mission assignment lists to confirm that their chronology bears this out, but for whatever it's worth to the conversation, Okuda also once told me that the reason he changed the [i]Trieste[/i]'s registry from [i]Yosemite[/i] to [i]Merced[/i] was because of the name [i]Yosemite[/i] being used for the ship in "Realm Of Fear," so I suppose that if something so small as that was noticed and "fixed," then it isn't entirely outside the realm of possibility that they'd take the destroyed vessel's signage off the model for its next appearance. (Am I remembering correctly that the [i]Yosemite[/i] was destroyed?)[/qb][/QUOTE]No, the Yosemite was not shown to be destroyed by the end of the episode. [QUOTE][qb]Lastly, I will reiterate my previously stated view that it is useless and counterproductive to ignore facts known from behind the scenes sources simply because they cannot be definitely confirmed onscreen, and that it is moreover [i]worse[/i] to then draw conclusions from the resultingly incomplete data and impose them where they directly contravene the actual intent. If your inferences can be made only through arbitrarily choosing not to look at all the data, deliberately excluding from consideration the points that go against them, they are bad inferences. That the number NCC-59318 belongs to the [i]Biko[/i] is such an inference. [/qb][/QUOTE]Agreed (since this is what I basically said to o2). [/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