posted
Did anyone notice that the D looks like an aircraft carrier when you look at the neck of it from under the saucer?
But still it's my favorite ship. I don't like the Connie in ANY configuration or version. I think it always looked like a model and never like a believable starship. Sorry, that's just IMHO.
-------------------- 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
-------------------- "Nah. The 9th chevron is for changing the ringtone from "grindy-grindy chonk-chonk" to the theme tune to dallas." -Reverend42
Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
The work of the artists depends not only on themselves, but their superiors as well, and then the studio politics. Let's not forget that Matt Jefferies first redesigned the Constitution, and that Andrew Probert had to work from that, whether it helped him or not. Jeri Taylor asked Rick Sternbach to make the Voyager curvy -- his final design would've been the pointy Voyager. Finally, we have the new Enterprise which could've looked different had it not been for the higherups who introduced the Akira into the picture.
Clearly, the test of any artist is how well he works under such limitations. However, here we also need to consider that different models were built under different limitations. The refit Constitution and the Enterprise-E were built on a movie budget, as opposed to the Ent-D which was made for a TV series (and even there, the six-footer which some people seem to prefer was built by ILM, primarily a movie effects company). Then there is also the different resolution of the television screen and the movie screen to consider -- the latter requires more detail and refinement.
Naturally, this doesn't change the fact that the movie ships tend to be better liked, especially since we see them so rarely, but all of these other factors have to be kept in mind when making these comparisons.
capped
I WAS IN THE FUTURE, IT WAS TOO LATE TO RSVP
Member # 709
posted
.. and that TPTB informed Drexler he had to make the NX-01 look like the Akira because they wanted it too, even if it didnt make sense. (this was the subtext of Drexler's 'don't tell anyone i told you this letter' that was posted here
which is odd because now Drexlers is going back on that and saying that he based NX-01 on a twin body plane. meh.
-------------------- "Are you worried that your thoughts are not quite.. clear?"
Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged
OnToMars
Now on to the making of films!
Member # 621
posted
Subtext? He outright said it!
-------------------- If God didn't want us to fly, he wouldn't have given us Bernoulli's Principle.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
I think the Connie's a good design...except for the neck which is just too thin to put anything in there except possibly the warp core, vertcal turboshafts and vertical Jeffries Tubes. But that's about it. I don't even understand why some people need to put decks in there, even though I still accept them.
-------------------- Is it Friday yet?
Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
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.
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?
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
