View Single Post
Old June 20 2013, 10:12 AM   #242
Re: Kirk's Television Enterprise Deck Plans WIP

Robert Comsol wrote: View Post
blssdwlf wrote: View Post
1. Can accuracy always comes first?
Yes, IMHO, it should be the first thing to be considered before deviating from it, and once you deviate you should have good and sound reasons to do so. Otherwise you may end up with just another conjectural deck plan version just as the one FJ came up with.
I think it's how you had written that rule in absolutes that caught my attention. Accuracy can't "always" come first if you're willing to deviate from it. I think what you wrote in your restated mission statement "to stay as accurate as possible while reflecting MJ and producer intent" makes far more sense, IMHO.

Robert Comsol wrote: View Post
blssdwlf wrote: View Post
2. Do you need to invoke an ineffective technicality like overscanning to put the ceiling height issue in the not onscreen rule to be able to claim that it is not onscreen and thus you can change it?
Fact is that Star Trek was produced for television, not for theaters, and the directors and everybody else involved in this TV production had an understanding of what the audiences with their overscan tube TV sets would actually be able to see and therefore composed the cinematography accordingly.

A good TV set (in the 1960's) would just trim the edges until the "safe action area", a bad TV would just leave you with the "title safe area". So this is about obvious intentions what the DPs and producers expected and wanted us to see.
The problem is that the camera does show the areas in question that you want to change even with the safe action and title safe areas applied. This line of justification is ineffective and unnecessary.

Since you already state that you're going to reflect what MJ and the production folks intended you should just go with that and say, "I think the ceiling starts where the top of the structural brace ends as that's probably what the production people were thinking." I'd buy into that instead of thinking, "Why is Bob invoking overscan when the problem area is still visible on the screen even with the overscan area accounted for?"

Robert Comsol wrote: View Post
The mission goal is still to be as screen accurate as possible and wherever possible stay clear of overdrive rationalizations. At the same time (bearing in mind the budget restrictions) the final deck plans should reflect what Matt Jefferies and the other members of the TOS production intended the ship to look like once all the puzzle-pieces of information have come together. Of course there's plenty of room for different interpretations and I can only assure you that I'm trying my best to come up with an interpretation which I hope Walter Matt Jefferies would have liked and supported (and one that comes close to what he might have had delivered, would he have had the time and energy to do it).
Fair enough and with that clarification I get what you're now doing.
blssdwlf is online now   Reply With Quote