posted
I once asked Okuda about the Copernicus and this was his response in an e-mail dated 05/28/2003:
"If I recall the name and registry number of the Copernicus came from a photo from ILM that showed the Grissom model as it was used in the end of ST4."
Take it for whatever it's worth. His recollection may not be completely accurate, and he did get the Saratoga's registry wrong, after all.
But I would also propose an alternate theory of what might have happened: it might be a similar situation to that of the U.S.S. Hood, where the Excelsior model was relabeled by the VFX department for "Encounter At Farpoint" (as NCC-2541) but the art department came up with a different (higher, perhaps more fictionally "plausible") number that ended up becoming the "official" one because the original one was not readable in the episode.
Perhaps NCC-640 was the VFX department's idea for the Tsiolkovsky's number but the art department came up with NCC-53911 for the dedication plaque and because it was more prominent and "plausible" (and because Okuda was likely the one going to the effort of keeping track of such things) it was that number which became the official one. During remastering, the number was "corrected" in one shot but was overlooked in others.
-------------------- The flaws we find most objectionable in others are often those we recognize in ourselves.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
While that's certainly possible, without that photo as proof, we'll never know the Copernicus's true registry.
quote:Perhaps NCC-640 was the VFX department's idea for the Tsiolkovsky's number but the art department came up with NCC-53911 for the dedication plaque and because it was more prominent and "plausible" (and because Okuda was likely the one going to the effort of keeping track of such things) it was that number which became the official one. During remastering, the number was "corrected" in one shot but was overlooked in others.
It's possible that when Okuda made that plaque, he was assuming that the Tsiolkovsky would be a new model, a ship contemporaneous to the Enterprise-D, since both ships were launched in the same year. If that were the case, then the term "Oberth" was never meant to be the class of the Grissom-type ships, and only became that class retroactively.
It's also possible, as you say, that the VFX personnel weren't aware of the info on the plaque, and changed the registry to be more contemporaneous with the Grissom, and that they thought the Tsiolkovsky was an old ship from Kirk's era.
This could also be why later appearances of the Grissom model sported such high registries: because once the Tsiolkovsky set the precedent, Okuda just followed through with the same registry nomenclature.
It's too bad really, because NCC-640 would have fit the Tsiolkovsky so much better. i myself do not find Oberths with regs of 5XXXX and Excelsiors with regs of 4XXXX to be plausible at all. This is one of my few sticking points with Okuda's registry assignings.
-------------------- "A film made in 2008 isn't going to look like a TV series from 1966 if it wants to make any money. As long as the characters act the same way, and the spirit of the story remains the same then it's "real" Star Trek. Everything else is window dressing." -StCoop
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
Is there any way to get an updated from Mike Okuda on this topic? His last statement is almost 10 years old and with the blu rays we have now a new situation here. Would be great to have a little bit more first hand information on that topic, especially who was it who has triggered the digitally change of the one shot in 'The naked now' and why the others have not been done.
Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
I wrote about this over at the TrekBBS. If Okuda wants to pipe in, he's welcome to. However, I don't see how he'd be any more knowledgeable about the registries now than when he was ten years ago. At best, he would just agree with our theory that there was simply a disconnect between the Art Department and the VFX Department when creating the registry info for the Tsiolkovsky. The same exact thing happened with the Prometheus in ST:Voyager.
-------------------- "A film made in 2008 isn't going to look like a TV series from 1966 if it wants to make any money. As long as the characters act the same way, and the spirit of the story remains the same then it's "real" Star Trek. Everything else is window dressing." -StCoop
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
The idea was more to ask him about the recent change of the Tsiolkowsky's registry in just one scene. I'm pretty sure that Mr. Okduda still have some memories of the background of that event.
Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged
From one of the featurettes: sometimes effects shots are replaced when the originals can't be located. There's I think two sequences in Encounter at Farpoint where the original film couldn't be located so a digital mattee painting was inserted instead.
This also affects the shot of the Klingon bird of prey & the Enterprise in "Sins of the Father."
The Crystalline Entity had originally been modeled in 3-D, but the files are lost. It was re-created (and looks jaw-droppingly amazing).
Also: all F/X had to be redone, but they tried to keep as true to the original as possible.
Additionally, they cleaned up the planet modelling, and made some changes to the star backgrounds.
Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by o2: The idea was more to ask him about the recent change of the Tsiolkowsky's registry in just one scene. I'm pretty sure that Mr. Okduda still have some memories of the background of that event.
From Ex-Astris-Scientia:
quote:In this shot of the S.S. Tsiolkovsky and the U.S.S. Enterprise-D, the registry of the Oberth class ship is NCC-640. The very first time an Oberth class ship was seen was in "Star Trek III: The Search for Spock". The registry of the U.S.S. Grissom was NCC-638. Why is the S.S. Tsiolkovsky labeled "NCC-640" in this shot then?
Mike Okuda: "I seem to recall that Grissom may have been relabeled to serve as another ship (the Copernicus?) 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."
NCC-640 must have been the registry of the U.S.S. Copernicus, briefly seen in "Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home" then. After this appearance in the fourth Star Trek film, the model wasn't used until "The Naked Now".
Again, I don't quite agree with Bernd. I think the Copernicus had the NCC-623 registry in STIV, and the TNG VFX guys changed it to NCC-640 for the Tsiolkovsky, unaware that Okuda made a plaque for the ship with NCC-53911 while possibly under the impression that the ship was going to be a new model.
As for changing the registry for that one scene: I think it's pretty clear that the change was done to be more in line with the info in the Encyclopedia and the dedication plaque, and the other scenes that were missed were just oversights.
-------------------- "A film made in 2008 isn't going to look like a TV series from 1966 if it wants to make any money. As long as the characters act the same way, and the spirit of the story remains the same then it's "real" Star Trek. Everything else is window dressing." -StCoop
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Malnurtured Snay: If you don't want to splurge on the BR, I'm looking to sell my TNG S1 DVD set. $30.
Thanks but no. I did not recall exactly what was in that season as it's taken me years to forget people in pajamas fighting floating L'eggs containers... Still, overall it beats season 7- where the few great episodes are eclipsed by CRusher's goddamn ghost story romance or Troi's forgotten dead sister or.. (screams for hours)
Okay, I'm better now that the Thorazine has blurred those episodes back to where I can function again.
Hmm...I bet itunes has it by the episode- I might just get Silicon Avatar. Despite the dopey "evil teim brother" premise, it was a nicely paced episode with a truly ailen menace- not some humans with forehead deformities.
Has there been any word on a season 2 yet? when they get to season 3 and BOBW, I'm hoping they can use today's technology to make some things more presentable. Shelby's face for starters...I mean...damn.
As long as we're on Season 1, I say we do a CAPTION CONTEST for old time's sake!
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
Thank you Mars, for ruining a perfectly good keyboard with liquid I was intending to drink. I shamefully admit that I looked for a "like" button immeidiately too.
Registered: Feb 2008
| IP: Logged
Printer-friendly view of this topic