RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 141,566
Posts: 5,514,224
Members: 25,147
Currently online: 516
Newest member: Wolfspaw

TrekToday headlines

Two New Starships Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Dec 26

Captain Kirk’s Boldest Missions
By: T'Bonz on Dec 25

Trek Paper Clips
By: T'Bonz on Dec 24

Sargent Passes
By: T'Bonz on Dec 23

QMx Trek Insignia Badges
By: T'Bonz on Dec 23

And The New Director Of Star Trek 3 Is…
By: T'Bonz on Dec 23

TV Alert: Pine On Tonight Show
By: T'Bonz on Dec 22

Retro Review: The Emperor’s New Cloak
By: Michelle on Dec 20

Star Trek Opera
By: T'Bonz on Dec 19

New Abrams Project
By: T'Bonz on Dec 18


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Star Trek Movies > Star Trek Movies XI+

Star Trek Movies XI+ Discuss J.J. Abrams' rebooted Star Trek here.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old August 22 2013, 10:18 AM   #946
Gep Malakai
Vice Admiral
 
Gep Malakai's Avatar
 
Send a message via AIM to Gep Malakai Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to Gep Malakai
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

Gonzo wrote: View Post
The bright horizontal centre line looks exactly like what's left of a deck divider
I see that part you're talking about, but it appears to be twisted debris sticking into the corridor. It extends out into the dark and bends upwards to join the other bits of hull.



Gonzo wrote: View Post
or exit from a double height deck observation area.
There's no evidence that such an observation deck or juncture exists on this Enterprise. What we see is constant with the single-deck set used throughout the rest of the film.

Gonzo wrote: View Post
Nothing you have said changes the fact that the ship is 725 meters long, why bang on about it, I can understand if you don't like it but its tough.
I like the larger size quite a bit, actually. And I'm not disputing that the preponderance of data supports the 725 meter size. What I am pointing out is that ILM was not constant about it throughout the film. I've lurked this thread since the beginning, and it's annoying watching people be ideologues about that fact.

This shot is worth revisiting because it got discussed earlier in the thread with bootleg footage; now we have a clear copy and can take another look. It's clear that, contrary to earlier analysis, in this scene the saucer is two to three decks tall.
__________________
"From the darkness you must fall, failed and weak, to darkness all."
-Kataris
Gep Malakai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 22 2013, 10:23 AM   #947
Belz...
Fleet Captain
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Location: In a finely-crafted cosmos... of my own making.
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

You'd think when they switched to CGI they'd at last get rid of scaling problems.
__________________
And that's my opinion.
Belz... is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 22 2013, 10:27 AM   #948
Gep Malakai
Vice Admiral
 
Gep Malakai's Avatar
 
Send a message via AIM to Gep Malakai Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to Gep Malakai
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

Ha! I work in the VFX industry and I can tell you first hand that scaling problems are even easier with CGI. A little tweak here and there, and BOOM! Nothing lines up any more.
__________________
"From the darkness you must fall, failed and weak, to darkness all."
-Kataris
Gep Malakai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 22 2013, 10:36 AM   #949
Gonzo
Lieutenant
 
Location: England
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

Gep Malakai wrote: View Post
Gonzo wrote: View Post
The bright horizontal centre line looks exactly like what's left of a deck divider
I see that part you're talking about, but it appears to be twisted debris sticking into the corridor. It extends out into the dark and bends upwards to join the other bits of hull.



Gonzo wrote: View Post
or exit from a double height deck observation area.
There's no evidence that such an observation deck or juncture exists on this Enterprise. What we see is constant with the single-deck set used throughout the rest of the film.

Gonzo wrote: View Post
Nothing you have said changes the fact that the ship is 725 meters long, why bang on about it, I can understand if you don't like it but its tough.
I like the larger size quite a bit, actually. And I'm not disputing that the preponderance of data supports the 725 meter size. What I am pointing out is that ILM was not constant about it throughout the film. I've lurked this thread since the beginning, and it's annoying watching people be ideologues about that fact.

This shot is worth revisiting because it got discussed earlier in the thread with bootleg footage; now we have a clear copy and can take another look. It's clear that, contrary to earlier analysis, in this scene the saucer is two to three decks tall.
The bootleg copy was clear enough the first time, and no it is not clear that the saucer is two to three decks tall.

In your opinion it is, this is a size argument thread to identify how large the NuEnterprise is, questioning the number of decks in one place or the size of x in another place does not really add anything new or change the fact that the size has been confirmed by multiple official sources.

I am done with this, maybe some of the others will be willing to go over the same stuff again.
Gonzo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 22 2013, 10:43 AM   #950
JarodRussell
Vice Admiral
 
JarodRussell's Avatar
 
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread



That looks like two decks only alright.
JarodRussell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 22 2013, 03:21 PM   #951
WarpFactorZ
Captain
 
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

Thank you. I made this point many pages ago, concerning that scene. The shot clearly shows a complete corridor exposed, taking up half the saucer height. Ergo, the rim is two decks high. But I was swarmed by posters who were convinced it showed 4 corridors, etc...

I will also re-iterate another point: when Khan jumps from the bridge of the crashed Vengeance, the only thing he could possibly be spanning is the gap in the saucer. Sulu exclaims "Whoa! He just jumped 30 metres!", which puts the Vengeance at about 750-800m long (of course, I'm not sure why this is impressive, since the 30m was mostly vertical, but...).
WarpFactorZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 22 2013, 04:22 PM   #952
F. King Daniel
Admiral
 
F. King Daniel's Avatar
 
Location: King Daniel Into Darkness
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

Gep Malakai wrote: View Post
As he is the unofficial official documenter of these things, I leave it to King Daniel for further investigation.
Thanks for the screencap! Here's what I worked out:


Keep in mind that none of the new Enterprise schematics available online are exact matches for the real ship. Their proportions differ quite a bit. I'm using the view which appears on the bluray here since it's the only one directly from Paramount. I'll post a comparison of the schematics' differences at some point.
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
F. King Daniel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 22 2013, 04:28 PM   #953
Chemahkuu
Vice Admiral
 
Chemahkuu's Avatar
 
Location: United Kingdom
Send a message via Yahoo to Chemahkuu
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

Yup, still needs the room available in the 725m range to make it fit inside.
__________________
"But there's no sense crying over every mistake. You just keep on trying till you run out of cake."
Chemahkuu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 22 2013, 04:36 PM   #954
ComicGuy89
Lieutenant Commander
 
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

Sorry, just to get this right, King Daniel, are you saying that the very edges of the saucer could be 2 decks tall while still keeping the proportions of a 725m ship?
ComicGuy89 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 22 2013, 05:01 PM   #955
F. King Daniel
Admiral
 
F. King Daniel's Avatar
 
Location: King Daniel Into Darkness
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

ComicGuy89 wrote: View Post
Sorry, just to get this right, King Daniel, are you saying that the very edges of the saucer could be 2 decks tall while still keeping the proportions of a 725m ship?
It seems like three decks would fit, but not to the very edge. The way it curves at the edge leaves only room for two - and I think it's that, and an extreme close-up shot, that are giving the impression of a flatter saucer. If that makes sense.
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
F. King Daniel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 22 2013, 05:18 PM   #956
ComicGuy89
Lieutenant Commander
 
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

Having stared at all the photos and that gif for a long time, I'm beginning to see how at least 3 decks could fit over there. The 2 deck set-up simply doesn't match very well. Although I'm still trying to picture in my mind how the ship works out to be 700+m (although I'm confident it is), it just doesn't make sense as a 300+m ship.

I look forward to more of whatever you guys can dig up.

Now I went to look at the windows of all the Enterprises to get a feel of how many decks fit in them...and my goodness, none of the ships are perfectly in-scale with each other. It's like they adopt a new scale for each Enterprise!
ComicGuy89 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 22 2013, 05:45 PM   #957
WarpFactorZ
Captain
 
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

King Daniel Into Darkness wrote: View Post
Keep in mind that none of the new Enterprise schematics available online are exact matches for the real ship.
Then why do you keep using them, and finding a way to squeeze in as many decks as you can? As you love to say (parapharsed): look at the photographic EVIDENCE! I see one deck fully exposed in that hull breach, fitting perfectly between the upper and lower line on the saucer edge. There is room for one more deck below it.

I guess the decks above and below those are for Keenser, a few Hobbits, and the diplomatic liaisons from the Merry Old Planet of Oz? (because they all hate looking out into space, there are obviously no windows).
WarpFactorZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 22 2013, 05:48 PM   #958
Chemahkuu
Vice Admiral
 
Chemahkuu's Avatar
 
Location: United Kingdom
Send a message via Yahoo to Chemahkuu
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

Slight inaccuracies does not suddenly invalidate the large amount of visual evidence for a 700m+ ship, which is expressely the size given by everyone who worked on the design of the ship, even if they couldn't perfectly convay that in every shot in a tight work schedule.

It's a bigger ship, not the skinny little grey lady from 1966 anymore.
__________________
"But there's no sense crying over every mistake. You just keep on trying till you run out of cake."
Chemahkuu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 22 2013, 05:58 PM   #959
WarpFactorZ
Captain
 
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

Chemahkuu wrote: View Post
It's a bigger ship, not the skinny little grey lady from 1966 anymore.
I am willing to believe up to about 400m maybe (which makes Vengeance's 800m precisely "twice the size"). But not much bigger. 700m is ludicrous, as I've always said.
WarpFactorZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 22 2013, 06:13 PM   #960
F. King Daniel
Admiral
 
F. King Daniel's Avatar
 
Location: King Daniel Into Darkness
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

WarpFactorZ wrote: View Post
King Daniel Into Darkness wrote: View Post
Keep in mind that none of the new Enterprise schematics available online are exact matches for the real ship.
Then why do you keep using them, and finding a way to squeeze in as many decks as you can? As you love to say (parapharsed): look at the photographic EVIDENCE! I see one deck fully exposed in that hull breach, fitting perfectly between the upper and lower line on the saucer edge. There is room for one more deck below it.

I guess the decks above and below those are for Keenser, a few Hobbits, and the diplomatic liaisons from the Merry Old Planet of Oz? (because they all hate looking out into space, there are obviously no windows).
Learn perspective.


And please, please explain to me how the bridge, atrium, shuttlebay and engine rooms are supposed to fit into a 366m ship. I asked you this before and you never replied.
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
F. King Daniel is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
argument, size, starship

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:07 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.