View Single Post
Old August 16 2009, 05:10 PM   #810
Cary L. Brown
Rear Admiral
 
Location: Austin, Texas
Re: USS Grandeur - One... More... Time!

ST-One wrote: View Post
Psion wrote: View Post
Vektor wrote: View Post


Undoubtedly true, although I would dispute the last point. The new Enterprise from Trek ‘09 was relatively sleek and uncluttered, compared to the Sovereign class and most other late 23rd century designs anyway.
Sorry, Vektor -- and with the greatest respect, but the latest Enterprise is the most cluttered design yet. I've got the toy right here in front of me, and the junk all over the nacelles (especially on the cowling) is staggering. Much more so than the refit, and even more than 1701-E. And while the primary and secondary hulls aren't as cluttered, they still have more than 1701-A. Maybe even the D.

I guess the worst offender was the NX-01, but I'll forgive them that since a cluttered look suited a more primitive vessel.
You can hardly compare a toy to the movie's CG-model.
I don't think that's what he's doing. The "toy" has all the MAJOR components and details, but is actually quite a bit less detailed, overall, than the CGI model (and it's fair to point out that it's probably not "the model" but a series of different-resolution model versions, and even a few "partial builds of the model" just like you'd have in real-model work... each set up for slightly different purposes, and potentially having a few details subtly different).

Still, the toy is the best reference we currently have. It's pretty accurate (I'm sure that they had access to the one of the CGI models when they made it... it would be silly not to have given them that, after all.)

It IS pretty "cluttered" in terms of big, bold, structurally-pointless curvy- blobby shapes, particularly in the dorsal and nacelle areas. The dorsal area is just STUPIDLY constructed, frankly... a smooth shape, rather than the "tiered" construction, would be orders of magnitude stronger, no matter what magic-construction-materials you use. The engine pylons are covered with "graphic art geometry" as are the nacelles... the ship is just covered with stuff there just for "visual interest" (as it's usually described) without it seeming to serve any functional purpose.

Hell, even the hangar doors show this... instead of a simple rotational system, the shape they have requires the door panels to perform a "warping/bending" action as they withdraw into the ship... you can see this very clearly in the shuttle-launch sequence.

The new ship isn't designed as a functional, 3D mechanism, it's designed as a piece of 2D graphic art, with all the trademark foibles that go along with that... and that includes the "big bold curvy-shape high-lights for visual interest" one.
Cary L. Brown is offline   Reply With Quote