posted
If what, er, someone said about ILM not liking the Ent-D model is true, then they truelly are the hardest people in the world to please. They're notorious for bitching and complaining about the Enterprise-A model for 4 films, saying it was heavy, akward, and they could never find a good angle on it. Compared to the Excelsior and Galaxy, it's a piece of cake to make the Enterprise-A look good.
Someone else (sorry, I really can't be bothered looking) was right, it was well proportioned. It became the base proportion whill all subsequent ships tried to model (as, in some ways, we are more familiar with the A than the original. The A was an upgraded version, so it replaced the original, rather than suceeded it. Kind of). The Excelsior tried to look huge by having a massive body. The Galaxy tried to look huge by having a massive saucer. And both aren't too easy to film,although they improved leaps and bounds with Ent-D shots over the course of the series.
And on the two models debate, I do prefer the 4 footer, but I wonder if that's because it was simply shot and lit better? What was the CGI model based on? And how comes the 6 footer in that pic has had it's decals taken off, whereas the 4 footer still has them? In any case, shouldn't it have the Venture's decals on it?
[ January 14, 2002: Message edited by: PsyLiam ]
-------------------- Yes, you're despicable, and... and picable... and... and you're definitely, definitely despicable. How a person can get so despicable in one lifetime is beyond me. It isn't as though I haven't met a lot of people. Goodness knows it isn't that. It isn't just that... it isn't... it's... it's despicable.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
quote:What?! You mean. . . a female captain had to be in charge of a curvy, feminine ship rather that a pointy, sharp-edged masculine one? Jesus wept. If that's the kind of mindset they were under when they created the Voyager series, no wonder it sucked from on high for seven years.
Is that why the nacelles went up too, to prove that Janeway could make at least something go rise?
-------------------- "and none of your usual boobery." M. Burns
Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by PsyLiam: ...And on the two models debate, I do prefer the 4 footer, but I wonder if that's because it was simply shot and lit better? What was the CGI model based on? And how comes the 6 footer in that pic has had it's decals taken off, whereas the 4 footer still has them? In any case, shouldn't it have the Venture's decals on it?
[ January 14, 2002: Message edited by: PsyLiam ]
To my mind, the only ship to be as well preportioned as the refit conni has been the E-E, and that has mostly been because it borrowed heavily from the old ship.
I belive the CG Galaxy was based on the sleeker 6ft model, judging by the renders that have recently been featured in the fact files.
It depends on when the pictures were taken I suppose. As I recall the Venture was actually the AGT Enterprise, (after they had stripped off all but 2 of the new pieces, I also keep hearing that it also retained the raised bridge section, but I just don't see it) which was originally the 4 footer I belive.
So to answer your question...what do you get if you cross an elephant and a rhino?
posted
Could the CGI E-D be off the 6 footer because - the 6 footer was used in Generations, and this was the first time they used a CGI E-D... (So it would have had to have matched the model.
-------------------- "Bears. Beets. Battlestar Galactica." - Jim Halpert. (The Office)
posted
Gosh, did I pour gasoline into a flame, just because the Ent-A is not my favorite starship? Don't get me wrong, I think the model looks elegant and nice, but like someone said, the neck is far too thin. Same goes for the warp pylons. See where they are attached to the secondary hull? This bit is way too small - at a high accelaration these small joins would never be able to hold the nacelles.
And about the Voyager being a curvey ship. Well, look at the Ent-D again. Isn't she at least as curvey as Voyager? It hardly consists of ANY non-curvey elements.
-------------------- Lister: Don't give me the "Star Trek" crap! It's too early in the morning. - Red Dwarf "The Last Day"
Registered: Nov 1999
| IP: Logged
EdipisReks
Ex-Member
posted
it wouldn't matter if the nacelles are thin or not. warp drive does not use standard physical accereration. the nacelles could be held on by string and wouldn't fly off because oof acceleration at warp (thought they would probably fly off if you turned a corner at impulse). besides, who knows how strong the connection on the nacelles really is? on the model, it's strong enough for motion control
posted
I have a feeling that the Voyager was asked to be made curvier by the Producers, because originally the Voyager was going to be an older ship that had 'made it's name' or 'made it's mettle' during the Cardassian Wars. When that was scrapped - Voyager became a brand spanking new ship.
I like the original Voyager idea - I wish Mojo could get a-hold of it and do a CGI of it!
-------------------- "Bears. Beets. Battlestar Galactica." - Jim Halpert. (The Office)
posted
Although I'm not a big fan of the proto-Voyager design, I think it would be a good representation of the yet unseen Bradbury-class. The Bradbury rego number seems perfect for the look of the ship.
It's also curious how that DS9TM kitbash so closely resembles the proto-Voyager. Just that we know most of them made it on screen.
posted
I'd like to know too. The fact that the Pre-E was more-than-superficially based on the Akira class is almost common knowledge - Eaves himself said in one interview that fans of the Akira would get a kick out of the design (can't remember the exact quote, but it was from an interview online). I haven't read anything about Drexler basing it on a twin-hulled fighter. Where's this one from?
[Edit: it was Eaves, not Berman, who proped the Pre-E as "Akira-cool". Thanks Tom!]
Mark
[ January 15, 2002: Message edited by: Mark Nguyen ]
posted
A very early Eaves interview said, re: the design, that "fans of the Akira" will be impressed.
Then cameth the show, and the bitching, and the whining, and the threats to hold one's breath until they turned blue unless the ship magically changed.
Next up was the "Broken Bow" novelization, which had a small "making of" feaurette in it, in which there was the following quote from Herman Zimmerman:
quote:"We found a ship that was in our archives - a minor vessel that had been used in a battle in one of the features that had been created by ILM. We did not use that ship, but we took ideas from it and from those ideas eventually - and this process took about four months, all week and weekend CGI work by a very talented Lightwave artist, Doug Drexler - we finally came up with a shape that everybody loves. I trust the fans will love it as well as the producers and the cast do."
Then came Doug's famed "hush hush" email to Hobbes which got posted on the Enterprise forum here.
The Eaves/Drexler interview in the current ST:Communicator (partially transcribed here) mentions that the E-nil, E-refit and "other ships from the movies" were an influence, but the principal inspiration was the P-38 (which, IIRC, was also Jaeger's inspiration for the Akira).
[ January 15, 2002: Message edited by: The_Tom ]
-------------------- "I was surprised by the matter-of-factness of Kafka's narration, and the subtle humor present as a result." (Sizer 2005)
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Moj: Found the letter, and edited my post...
-------------------- "I was surprised by the matter-of-factness of Kafka's narration, and the subtle humor present as a result." (Sizer 2005)
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Mojo, just reguarding your deffie-in-progress... about the central 'round part' where the 'bridge' is 'supposed' to be... I don't know if it is the angle or the bright light, but is there the two 'steps' down from the circle 'rim' and then one step back up to the little 'baseball diamond'?? I've got the pic as my windows background - very nice.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
