posted
o2: It is. So, bluray caps exists. I thought they might, but haven´t seen any more. Anyone?
-------------------- "The Starships of the Federation are the physical, tangible manifestations of Humanity´s stubborn insistence that life does indeed mean something." Spock to Leonard McCoy in "Final Frontier"
Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
Sorry, my reply was to your posting on USS Freedom, not the shuttlecraft.
However, considering all the debris not identifiable onscreen, you never know, they might have slipped it in anyhow. It is such a great modelpiece.
-------------------- "The Starships of the Federation are the physical, tangible manifestations of Humanity´s stubborn insistence that life does indeed mean something." Spock to Leonard McCoy in "Final Frontier"
Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
No, there is just this one shot of the USS Freedom.
Regarding the shuttle: I watched the particular scenes from BoBW and the documentation as well now a couple of times and I'm pretty sure that the shuttle is not in there. The only thing that I cannot identify is the ship or wrackage that is located directly over the Kyushu in this scene: http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/articles/wolf359/wolf359-1-3.jpg
At some point in time I believed that this is a Miranda class model with only one warp nacelle (the other one being destroyed), but now I tend to belive that this is the a piece of the Ent-D model kit (the piece that is forming the underside of the engineering section, including the two pylons for the warp nacelles), flipped upside down and equipped with one warp nacelle.
Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by o2: Regarding the shuttle: I watched the particular scenes from BoBW and the documentation as well now a couple of times and I'm pretty sure that the shuttle is not in there. The only thing that I cannot identify is the ship or wrackage that is located directly over the Kyushu in this scene: http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/articles/wolf359/wolf359-1-3.jpg
At some point in time I believed that this is a Miranda class model with only one warp nacelle (the other one being destroyed), but now I tend to believe that this is the a piece of the Ent-D model kit (the piece that is forming the underside of the engineering section, including the two pylons for the warp nacelles), flipped upside down and equipped with one warp nacelle.
Thanks to the bluray, I've managed to identify every single piece of wreckage that can be seen in all the shots, with the exception of the same piece you linked to. Frustratingly, this piece (which appears in three different shots no less) was not seen clearly at all in the documentary.
1. It's unlikely to be another Miarecki study model, as all five models he built can be seen together in the first scene. It's also unlikely to be a piece of a Miarecki model that was removed, as we don't see any other missing pieces of the ships floating around.
2. It's also unlikely to be something Greg Jein Inc. created, as his main stuff was either two large ships or three large pieces of wreckage. This thing looks really small, so it could be the Kotoi.
3. The perspective of this object changes from the first scene to the last. The shadowing tends to hide characteristics too (like with the Chekov's lower pod). In the first scene, it does kinda look like a Reliant saucer and one nacelle. But in this scene, it looks more like some kind of shuttle:
It could be the Kotoi. Okuda also said that they were considering using a shuttle maquette from Phase II. Could this object be it?
As for your hypothesis, I have an Enterprise-D model kit. I will arrange the pieces the way you described and take a pic of it to see if it looks somewhat like how you see it.
-------------------- "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
After making this image, I've decided that this wreckage is in fact the Kotoi. To my eyes, it sorta matches up with the middle shot, which is the final time we see the wreckage, right below the Ent-D's saucer in the final shot.
-------------------- "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
Well, I'm not so sure that the wreckage is the Shuttle Kotoi. What would be the orientation of the shuttle so that it matches the scene in BoBW? Was is filmed from the side or from behind? The warp nacelle of the shuttle is very close to the body of the shuttle, but the scene in BoBW suggest that the warp nacelle (or whatever this small part on the left botton is)is more apart from the ships main body.
Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
I think he's correct. The dark window combined with the shadow that would fall across the undercut of the shuttle's ventral bow and the blown starboard hatch would lead to the large black area that looks like empty space. Plus, the little dark spot on top seems to match an area of damage in the photo of the Kotoi in The Art Of Star Trek, where part of the hull is sort of peeled back. In addition to all of this, the identification is supported by process of elimination.
-------------------- The flaws we find most objectionable in others are often those we recognize in ourselves.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by o2: Well, I'm not so sure that the wreckage is the Shuttle Kotoi. What would be the orientation of the shuttle so that it matches the scene in BoBW? Was is filmed from the side or from behind? The warp nacelle of the shuttle is very close to the body of the shuttle, but the scene in BoBW suggest that the warp nacelle (or whatever this small part on the left botton is)is more apart from the ships main body.
Keep in mind that the perspective and shadowing in these scenes are very deceptive. For the longest time it looked as if the Princeton's left nacelle was just floating in space next to the ship because its pylon was as dark as the surrounding space.
Here's my take (with admittedly lousy Microsoft Paint editing skills):
I think the first time wee see this wreckage (the pic on the far right), the perspective is just such that it doesn't resemble the shuttle all that much, but then it tends to later.
-------------------- "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
Here's what you're talking about. The above is from both the 1/1400 kit and the 1/2500 kit. I sorta see why you thought this wreckage looked like this, but it looks to me like the pylon with the nacelle would be too thin at the angle wee see it on screen. There's more structure that can be seen than just a thin curved pylon, IMHO.
-------------------- "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
You are suggesting that the windshield of the shuttle is not visible (or black) due to the illumination in this shot. But I think that this is not the case here because in both scenes where the object is visible you can see a faint star that is passing the area. This star moves from left to right and is on the same level as the 'warp nacelle' (or whatever it is). Therefore I would conclude that the space right beneath the illuminated (grey) area is indeed empty and not shadowed. But this would leave us with the question where the windshield of the shuttle is instead.
Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged
Thanks for doing this exercise. Have you thought of swithing the nacelle from left to right and to look at it from behind? I think that orientation would be more like the objekt in the scene.
By the way, it is possible that we have two different objects here (though they seam to be similar in appearence)?
Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by o2: You are suggesting that the windshield of the shuttle is not visible (or black) due to the illumination in this shot. But I think that this is not the case here because in both scenes where the object is visible you can see a faint star that is passing the area. This star moves from left to right and is on the same level as the 'warp nacelle' (or whatever it is)
I think that what you're referring to as a "star" is actually part of the wreckage. I could be mistaken though.
quote:Have you thought of swithing the nacelle from left to right and to look at it from behind? I think that orientation would be more like the object in the scene.
I will do that and photo the result.
quote:By the way, it is possible that we have two different objects here (though they seam to be similar in appearence)?
No, I'm pretty sure it's the same object.
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Dukhat: I think that what you're referring to as a "star" is actually part of the wreckage. I could be mistaken though.
The star is moving with a diferent velocity than the object itself and in the same manner als the rest of the starfield. Please check out time index 0:56:27.
Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
I don't have the blu-rays so I can't check, but are you sure it isn't simply an illusion created by the object rotating as well as moving across the starfield? Or perhaps a compositing error?
-------------------- The flaws we find most objectionable in others are often those we recognize in ourselves.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
Printer-friendly view of this topic