RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 138,396
Posts: 5,358,476
Members: 24,627
Currently online: 546
Newest member: space2050

TrekToday headlines

Star Trek: Prelude to Axanar Online Debut
By: T'Bonz on Jul 31

Warp 5.0: Trek Toward Sci-Fi’s Golden Anniversary
By: T'Bonz on Jul 31

Takei To Host Pittsburgh Symphony PNC Pops’ Sci-Fi Spectacular
By: T'Bonz on Jul 31

Kurtzman In Mummy Talks
By: T'Bonz on Jul 31

The Gene Roddenberry Project Kickstarter
By: T'Bonz on Jul 30

Moore: No Deep Space Nine Regrets
By: T'Bonz on Jul 30

Pegg Star Wars Rumor
By: T'Bonz on Jul 30

Borg Cube Fridge
By: T'Bonz on Jul 29

Free Enterprise Kickstarter
By: T'Bonz on Jul 29

Siddig To Join Game Of Thrones
By: T'Bonz on Jul 29


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 TV Series > Star Trek - Original Series

Star Trek - Original Series The one that started it all...

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old August 29 2013, 05:58 AM   #61
Maurice
Vice Admiral
 
Maurice's Avatar
 
Location: Maurice in San Francisco
Re: Photo request -- Enterprise hangar deck studio miniature

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Do you suppose Star Trek The Magazine got these pix from a fan?
__________________
* * *
"If you wanted to get a good meeting... just go in and
say 'darker, grittier, sexier' and whatever."
—Glen Larson, 2010
Maurice is online now   Reply With Quote
Old August 29 2013, 12:35 PM   #62
Robert Comsol
Commodore
 
Robert Comsol's Avatar
 
Location: shore leave in La Baule, France
Re: Photo request -- Enterprise hangar deck studio miniature

Maurice wrote: View Post
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Do you suppose Star Trek The Magazine got these pix from a fan?
Do you believe what you are being told or do you believe what you do see? (to quote from one of my favorite scenes in Chicago).

The close-up shots of the embayments reveal these to be only half as long as the embayments in Richard Datin's pictures (or the one in Allen Asherman's Compendium with a shuttle takeoff).

This begs for explanation.


I don't know where Star Trek The Magazine got these pictures from, but publications are most assuredly not ultimate authorities:
  • ILM-The Art of Special Effects claims that Earth Spacedock, the orbital mushroom (ST III), debuted in ST II. The ILM model builders created the Spacedock, so an ILM book should have known better.
  • The Art of Star Trek claims that Andrew Probert's Ambassador Class (matte) painting of the USS Fearless was actually a pre-production sketch for the Enterprise-D. The Reeves-Stevens should have known better.
  • Star Trek Sketchbook claims that the pressure schematic of the TOS Enterprise ("Day of the Dove") is the one from the bridge alcove (wrong) and wasn't there anymore during the shooting of the last episodes (terribly wrong). As a matter of fact "Turnabout Intruder" featured one of the best views of this Enterprise bridge schematic.
Bob
__________________
"The first duty of every Starfleet officer is to the truth" Jean-Luc Picard
"We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them."
Albert Einstein
Robert Comsol is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 29 2013, 11:32 PM   #63
Maab
Lieutenant
 
Location: Rome, Italy
Re: Photo request -- Enterprise hangar deck studio miniature

Sorry if I ask again, I understand that those pictures come from Star Trek The Magazine. I have all the issues, but I don't remember having ever seen those. Can anyone tell me in which issue they were?

Maab
Maab is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 30 2013, 04:59 AM   #64
Maurice
Vice Admiral
 
Maurice's Avatar
 
Location: Maurice in San Francisco
Re: Photo request -- Enterprise hangar deck studio miniature

Actually, I misremebered. Two of the photos I posted came from Datin's own website;

And I see no discrepancies between the closeup photos and the shots from that site.
__________________
* * *
"If you wanted to get a good meeting... just go in and
say 'darker, grittier, sexier' and whatever."
—Glen Larson, 2010
Maurice is online now   Reply With Quote
Old August 30 2013, 06:50 AM   #65
CorporalCaptain
Vice Admiral
 
CorporalCaptain's Avatar
 
Location: Kentucky
Re: Photo request -- Enterprise hangar deck studio miniature

I don't know whether this is the issue that Robert Comsol has or not, but I can see what might be a problem, here.

Maurice wrote: View Post
^ In this picture and on the second page in it, part of the "WARNING FIRE" sign is directly under what looks like a red light. The section shown is evidently of the port side, and the sign is in what the FJ Tech Manual seems to call a "storage pocket". In this picture, that sign is apparently nearly at the bow end of the storage pocket.

Maurice wrote: View Post
^ However, in this picture, that sign is evidently much further aft from that red light. The sign is not at the bow end of the storage pocket at all, but rather seems to be somewhere more in the middle.

Regardless of whatever distortion there is from the lenses in the photos, and despite the problem of the page turn in the upper one, it would seem that the positions of the sign in the storage pocket can still be comparatively gaged by where it is relative to the corners of the storage pocket and relative to the red light immediately over the bow end of the pocket.

Is this the problem you are referring to, Robert Comsol?
__________________
John
CorporalCaptain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 30 2013, 08:28 AM   #66
Maurice
Vice Admiral
 
Maurice's Avatar
 
Location: Maurice in San Francisco
Re: Photo request -- Enterprise hangar deck studio miniature

I suspect we're seeing an illusion created by a lot of odd angles and curves in a forced perspective miniature. The bays back walls appear to be flat or slightly curved but it's difficult to tell, the openings are trapezoids cut into a tapering cylinder, and the end walls with the hatches are at other angles still. When you move a camera around relative to such a thing you'll get all kinds of optical distortion.
__________________
* * *
"If you wanted to get a good meeting... just go in and
say 'darker, grittier, sexier' and whatever."
—Glen Larson, 2010
Maurice is online now   Reply With Quote
Old August 30 2013, 08:43 AM   #67
CorporalCaptain
Vice Admiral
 
CorporalCaptain's Avatar
 
Location: Kentucky
Re: Photo request -- Enterprise hangar deck studio miniature

Perhaps the difference in depth between the sign, which is inside the pocket, and the red light, which is outside on the wall, has something to do with it. Perhaps them appearing to be vertically aligned, in the first picture I referenced, is just an illusion, due to the particular vantage point that that photograph was taken from, and nothing more. Perhaps if we could see the photograph whole and flattened out properly, instead of partially rolled up as it crosses the page boundary, there would be more cues that they are really just aligned in space with the camera.
__________________
John
CorporalCaptain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 30 2013, 10:22 AM   #68
Robert Comsol
Commodore
 
Robert Comsol's Avatar
 
Location: shore leave in La Baule, France
Re: Photo request -- Enterprise hangar deck studio miniature

CorporalCaptain wrote: View Post
Maurice wrote: View Post
^ However, in this picture, that sign is evidently much further aft from that red light. The sign is not at the bow end of the storage pocket at all, but rather seems to be somewhere more in the middle. ... Is this the problem you are referring to, Robert Comsol?
Yes, it is! While I will agree with Maurice that the camera lenses used somehow stretch the length of the embayment / whole shuttlebay, the proportions nevertheless stayed intact (straight lines) and the port side white sign is obviously not where the Star Trek Magazine wants us to believe it is.

Something else I didn't consider previously: How did they supposedly manage to take such pristine close-up shots...back in the 1960's?!?

The black & white shots earlier in this thread ( - just can't help it, sorry) and the Richard Datin color shots had been taken from a noticable distance considering the size of the VFX miniature and focusing capabilities of 1960's consumer or average professional cameras (admittedly I'm not an expert, but suffice to say that I would have loved to have a digital camera back in the 1960's and 1970's with all of nowadays zooming and close-up capabilities). I think to take such close-up shots back in the 1960's would have rather required extremely professional camera equipment and lenses.

Here is the rare VFX shuttlebay picture Allan Asherman shared with us in his Star Trek Compendium, apparently a shot of the miniature with shutlecraft model and (finally) door signs behind closed clamshell doors:




On the port side this picture took us beyond the limits of TV tube set's overscan and the edge of the original camera negatives.

I think this proves Maurice's assertion that the other shots distort the length of the embayment but it's equally obvious that the edge of the embayment does not stop right after the large text sign as shown in Star Trek The Magazine.

Furthermore, it is painfully obvious that the low resolution of the picture (someone please contact Allan Asherman for help) doesn't enable us to read the text of the large sign. However, we are able to realize that the word below the first line is much shorter than what the close up shot of the starboard side (with the blue lines running across) and the "Warning Fire" suggests!

For a complete view of the decal sheet fragment (on Mr. Datin's website) and possible and genuine door sign candidates I refer to my comments here: http://www.trekbbs.com/showpost.php?p=7722322&postcount=701

Summary: I feel we are looking at substantial evidence that the close-up pictures of the shuttlebay published in Star Trek The Magazine are the result of a passionate, accurate and commendable attempt to faithfully recreate the original model, but the artist lacked reference materials to see beyond what was available from onscreen footage.

I do not know in what context the editors of the magazine presented these pictures. Where they told this was not the original model or didn't they want to know?

Anybody remember the Adolf Hitler Diaries Hoax? A renowned magazine got so over-excited with the idea that they might have secured exclusive (and expensive!) rights for publishing that they didn't care anymore to research and analyze whether that stuff was truly genuine. I wouldn't exclude the possibility that something similar had happened here.

After all, seeing what appears to be exclusive, previously unpublished and close-up photographs makes you want to believe it to be true and genuine, but I'm afraid it isn't and instead we have to continue the search.

Bob
__________________
"The first duty of every Starfleet officer is to the truth" Jean-Luc Picard
"We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them."
Albert Einstein
Robert Comsol is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 30 2013, 04:51 PM   #69
jpv2000
Captain
 
jpv2000's Avatar
 
Location: Georgia, United States
Re: Photo request -- Enterprise hangar deck studio miniature

Great thread and I'm glad I got to read it and see the awesome pics that I otherwise never would have found.
jpv2000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 30 2013, 05:39 PM   #70
Maurice
Vice Admiral
 
Maurice's Avatar
 
Location: Maurice in San Francisco
Re: Photo request -- Enterprise hangar deck studio miniature

I still think they're all pix of the same model and that there is not in fact substantial evidence to the contrary. Studying small or fuzzy images shot with different cameras and different lenses from different perspectives is bound to create apparent inconsistencies where there may not be any.
__________________
* * *
"If you wanted to get a good meeting... just go in and
say 'darker, grittier, sexier' and whatever."
—Glen Larson, 2010
Maurice is online now   Reply With Quote
Old August 30 2013, 09:43 PM   #71
Robert Comsol
Commodore
 
Robert Comsol's Avatar
 
Location: shore leave in La Baule, France
Re: Photo request -- Enterprise hangar deck studio miniature

You posted the pics from Richard Datin's website www.startrekman.us and here is the corresponding text:

"A side view of the miniature reveals signage appropriate for the shuttle bay of the Enterprise. ... [the next page shows the signage sheet fragment] Several examples of the Flight Deck model signage."

Here, again, is the link to the website with the complete signage sheet (go to the end of the post from November 13, 2012)

The one thing everybody can immediately notice is that there is neither a "Warning Fire" or "Elevators" or "Fueling Station" among the signage sheet!

No either Mr. Datin (RIP) didn't know what he was writing about (would be in perfect sync with this retroactive "the creators didn't know what they were doing" manure) or the artist who recreated the shuttlebay miniature was just equally in the dark regarding the actual signage prior to 11-13-12 and therefore had to make it up.

If there is a better explanation I'm eager to listen.

Bob
__________________
"The first duty of every Starfleet officer is to the truth" Jean-Luc Picard
"We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them."
Albert Einstein
Robert Comsol is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 31 2013, 07:07 PM   #72
Maurice
Vice Admiral
 
Maurice's Avatar
 
Location: Maurice in San Francisco
Re: Photo request -- Enterprise hangar deck studio miniature

People make mistakes. People misremember things. The book "Inside Star Trek" proves this in spades. Is it easier to believe someone was mistaken about where some decals came from, or that someone built a near-perfect reproduction of a poorly documented miniature? I'd say the former. You clearly disagree.
__________________
* * *
"If you wanted to get a good meeting... just go in and
say 'darker, grittier, sexier' and whatever."
—Glen Larson, 2010
Maurice is online now   Reply With Quote
Old September 3 2013, 11:27 PM   #73
neoworx
Lieutenant
 
neoworx's Avatar
 
Re: Photo request -- Enterprise hangar deck studio miniature

Maurice wrote: View Post
People make mistakes. People misremember things. The book "Inside Star Trek" proves this in spades. Is it easier to believe someone was mistaken about where some decals came from, or that someone built a near-perfect reproduction of a poorly documented miniature? I'd say the former. You clearly disagree.
I do photo shoots and photo manipulation for a living. IMO, what you're seeing here is the result of two shots taken at two different angles with different lenses. At this scale, a small movement equates to large visual differences. One shot is more compressed, ie: the camera was closer to the wall which is why you can also see the sides of the alcoves better. The difference in relative position of the sign and red light are easily explained by compression. Keep in mind that they are not on the same plane. The sign is inset.

I see nothing specifically inconsistent with these being photos of the same model.
__________________
Don
wrathofdhan.com
wrathofdhanprops.blogspot.com
neoworx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 4 2013, 03:44 AM   #74
Maurice
Vice Admiral
 
Maurice's Avatar
 
Location: Maurice in San Francisco
Re: Photo request -- Enterprise hangar deck studio miniature

^^^Exactly my point.
__________________
* * *
"If you wanted to get a good meeting... just go in and
say 'darker, grittier, sexier' and whatever."
—Glen Larson, 2010
Maurice is online now   Reply With Quote
Old September 4 2013, 06:02 AM   #75
ZapBrannigan
Fleet Captain
 
ZapBrannigan's Avatar
 
Location: New York State
Re: Photo request -- Enterprise hangar deck studio miniature

I'm not sure I followed the whole issue that Robert Comsol is investigating (the port side is on our right in this view, right?), so this is probably not going to add anything, but I noticed that my personal scan of the Compendium photo is framed a little differently. Maybe it's my copy of the book, or the masking I used on the scanner, but if you A/B the two pics, you can see as you flip back and forth:


Last edited by ZapBrannigan; September 4 2013 at 06:12 AM.
ZapBrannigan is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

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 04:11 AM.

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