"Polaris" - Page 64

Admiral Buzzkill · January 27 2013, 02:32 AM

It's real.

Starship Polaris design by Vektor and aridas sofia. Optical effects by NEO f/x.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dxyQtCN03Ks

Potemkin_Prod · January 27 2013, 04:54 AM

Outstanding!

M'Sharak · January 27 2013, 06:01 AM

Nice.

Now moar, pls.

Vektor · January 27 2013, 07:07 AM

Looks awesome. Question, though: Did you guys change the engine bells on the booster engines? It's a little hard to tell but they look different.

CorporalCaptain · January 27 2013, 09:30 AM

M'Sharak wrote:

moar

Word.

Admiral Buzzkill · January 27 2013, 02:11 PM

No, we haven't changed the mesh in any way.

roger1999 · January 27 2013, 06:31 PM

Well done!

Vektor · January 27 2013, 07:44 PM

I think it's just an artifact of the motion blur that makes them look a little different. Never mind.

Deckerd · January 27 2013, 08:26 PM

I've watched this whole thread for years in silent fascination and admiration. I can't help but think though that it doesn't matter what orientation you see a ship moving through space. I know in the first days of Star Trek they always showed the Enterprise in a top down orientation and if it was in trouble you would see it slightly askew and not moving. Then, to my surprise, all the other Star Trek offspring did the same thing. But now I think, we've sort of accepted the fact that there is no 'up' in space and that seeing ships always at the same upright position is, I don't know how to say this, a bit tired?

Admiral Buzzkill · January 28 2013, 02:34 AM

Well, J.J. Abrams mixed that up a bit in the last Star Trek movie.

I think you might see Polaris do a couple of different things in the course of our movie. Lacking magical shields it's kind of important that they not get hit by the other guy.

Maurice, one of our producers and a guy who knows a lot more about movies than I do, has pointed out to me that there are also reasons having to do with artful film editing that tend to support having vessels of all kinds move in certain directions and orientations. Returning to TOS as an familiar example, we most often saw the bridge of the Enterprise with Kirk facing screen right - and not by coincidence, the customary orientation of the ship in space was traveling forward from screen left to screen right (and they could vary that if they chose, and occasionally did, despite the now well-known limitations of the filming miniature).

Maurice · January 28 2013, 05:18 AM

^^^That's what's known as "directional continuity". Another film convention is that vehicles traveling west cross the screen in a right-to-left direction and those going east left-to-right, which jibes with how we are trained to view maps with up as north, east as right, etc. A lot of fan films mix up shots of ships so that they don't maintain a directional continuity, with the result that the ship's often appear to have turned around between cuts.

Deckerd · January 28 2013, 09:18 AM

I get directional continuity and agree it's vital to the narrative. However my quibble was about orientation. In order to keep the fiction going about a planet-like environment, artificial gravity was invented. So unless the ship is a spinner like B5 (which I always imagine the first long-distance transport will be) the orientation is immaterial. You're right there were some shots in Star Trek 09 where the orientation was mixed up and IMO it made it much more 'sci fi' and less aeroplanes in space.

Vektor · January 28 2013, 10:01 PM

Artificial gravity was invented primarily because it was too big a hassle and too expensive to simulate it on-screen, and because it almost always looked fake when they did.

Admiral Buzzkill · January 31 2013, 01:59 AM

"Another one of them new worlds..."

junxon · January 31 2013, 03:13 AM

maybe it should move across the screen a little faster if you're going to emphasize the speedyness

cool looking though

January 27 2013, 02:32 AM	#946
Admiral Buzzkill The Man Location: Defying Gravity	Re: "Polaris" It's real. Starship Polaris design by Vektor and aridas sofia. Optical effects by NEO f/x. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dxyQtCN03Ks __________________ "I think [J.J. Abrams has] done a great thing for Star Trek. I’m very grateful to him. We all owe him a lot. When someone comes along like he has done and picks it up and elevates it, we should be grateful." - Leonard Nimoy

January 27 2013, 04:54 AM	#947
Potemkin_Prod Fleet Captain Location: Southwest Georgia	Re: "Polaris" Outstanding! __________________ Randy -------------------- Project Potemkin http://www.projectpotemkin.com

January 27 2013, 06:01 AM	#948
M'Sharak Definitely Herbert. Maybe. Location: Terra Inlandia	Re: "Polaris" Nice. Now moar, pls. __________________ I have long felt that any reviewer who expresses rage and loathing for a novel or a play or a poem is preposterous. He or she is like a person who has put on full armor and attacked a hot fudge sundae or a banana split. — Kurt Vonnegut

January 27 2013, 07:07 AM	#949
Vektor Rear Admiral Location: Spokane, WA, USA	Re: "Polaris" Looks awesome. Question, though: Did you guys change the engine bells on the booster engines? It's a little hard to tell but they look different. __________________ www.vektorvisual.com

January 27 2013, 02:11 PM	#951
Admiral Buzzkill The Man Location: Defying Gravity	Re: "Polaris" No, we haven't changed the mesh in any way. __________________ "I think [J.J. Abrams has] done a great thing for Star Trek. I’m very grateful to him. We all owe him a lot. When someone comes along like he has done and picks it up and elevates it, we should be grateful." - Leonard Nimoy

STAR TREK

CSI

ABOUT US

January 27 2013, 06:31 PM	#952
roger1999 Commander	Re: "Polaris" Well done!

January 27 2013, 07:44 PM	#953
Vektor Rear Admiral Location: Spokane, WA, USA	Re: "Polaris" I think it's just an artifact of the motion blur that makes them look a little different. Never mind. __________________ www.vektorvisual.com

January 27 2013, 08:26 PM	#954
Deckerd Fleet Arse Location: in the Frozen Wastes	Re: "Polaris" I've watched this whole thread for years in silent fascination and admiration. I can't help but think though that it doesn't matter what orientation you see a ship moving through space. I know in the first days of Star Trek they always showed the Enterprise in a top down orientation and if it was in trouble you would see it slightly askew and not moving. Then, to my surprise, all the other Star Trek offspring did the same thing. But now I think, we've sort of accepted the fact that there is no 'up' in space and that seeing ships always at the same upright position is, I don't know how to say this, a bit tired? __________________ They couldn't hit an elephant at this distance.

January 28 2013, 02:34 AM	#955
Admiral Buzzkill The Man Location: Defying Gravity	Re: "Polaris" Well, J.J. Abrams mixed that up a bit in the last Star Trek movie. I think you might see Polaris do a couple of different things in the course of our movie. Lacking magical shields it's kind of important that they not get hit by the other guy. Maurice, one of our producers and a guy who knows a lot more about movies than I do, has pointed out to me that there are also reasons having to do with artful film editing that tend to support having vessels of all kinds move in certain directions and orientations. Returning to TOS as an familiar example, we most often saw the bridge of the Enterprise with Kirk facing screen right - and not by coincidence, the customary orientation of the ship in space was traveling forward from screen left to screen right (and they could vary that if they chose, and occasionally did, despite the now well-known limitations of the filming miniature). __________________ "I think [J.J. Abrams has] done a great thing for Star Trek. I’m very grateful to him. We all owe him a lot. When someone comes along like he has done and picks it up and elevates it, we should be grateful." - Leonard Nimoy

January 28 2013, 05:18 AM	#956
Maurice Rear Admiral Location: Maurice in San Francisco	Re: "Polaris" ^^^That's what's known as "directional continuity". Another film convention is that vehicles traveling west cross the screen in a right-to-left direction and those going east left-to-right, which jibes with how we are trained to view maps with up as north, east as right, etc. A lot of fan films mix up shots of ships so that they don't maintain a directional continuity, with the result that the ship's often appear to have turned around between cuts. __________________ * * * "Star Trek…at times sparkled with true ingenuity, and pure science fiction approaches, and at other times was more carnival like, and very much more the creature of television than the creature of a legitimate literary form." —Rod Serling, 1970"

January 28 2013, 09:18 AM	#957
Deckerd Fleet Arse Location: in the Frozen Wastes	Re: "Polaris" I get directional continuity and agree it's vital to the narrative. However my quibble was about orientation. In order to keep the fiction going about a planet-like environment, artificial gravity was invented. So unless the ship is a spinner like B5 (which I always imagine the first long-distance transport will be) the orientation is immaterial. You're right there were some shots in Star Trek 09 where the orientation was mixed up and IMO it made it much more 'sci fi' and less aeroplanes in space. __________________ They couldn't hit an elephant at this distance.

January 28 2013, 10:01 PM	#958
Vektor Rear Admiral Location: Spokane, WA, USA	Re: "Polaris" Artificial gravity was invented primarily because it was too big a hassle and too expensive to simulate it on-screen, and because it almost always looked fake when they did. __________________ www.vektorvisual.com

January 31 2013, 01:59 AM	#959
Admiral Buzzkill The Man Location: Defying Gravity	Re: "Polaris" "Another one of them new worlds..." __________________ "I think [J.J. Abrams has] done a great thing for Star Trek. I’m very grateful to him. We all owe him a lot. When someone comes along like he has done and picks it up and elevates it, we should be grateful." - Leonard Nimoy

January 31 2013, 03:13 AM	#960
junxon Fleet Captain Location: somewhere boringly picturesque	Re: "Polaris" maybe it should move across the screen a little faster if you're going to emphasize the speedyness cool looking though __________________ Les yeux sans visage, Eyes without a face, Captain. - Harry Kim Hello to Jason Isaacs!