RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 143,109
Posts: 5,595,350
Members: 25,390
Currently online: 703
Newest member: MrWatchmen

TrekToday headlines

Retro Review: When It Rains…
By: Michelle on Feb 27

Nimoy Dead At Eighty-Three
By: T'Bonz on Feb 27

Breaking news: Leonard Nimoy – ‘Mr Spock’ – dies aged 83
By: AntonyF on Feb 27

Hurley Passes
By: T'Bonz on Feb 26

USS Excelsior Model Coming Soon
By: T'Bonz on Feb 25

Hemsworth To Host SNL
By: T'Bonz on Feb 25

Quinto To Guest Star On HBO Comedy
By: T'Bonz on Feb 25

Wheaton To Voice Firefly Game
By: T'Bonz on Feb 24

Nimoy Health Scare
By: T'Bonz on Feb 24

Star Trek #42 Preview
By: T'Bonz on Feb 23


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 > Misc. Star Trek > Trek Tech

Trek Tech Pass me the quantum flux regulator, will you?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old February 17 2011, 06:37 AM   #31
Captain Robert April
Vice Admiral
 
Location: In selfless service to fandom, on the road to becoming a Star Trek trivia god...
Re: Ship sizes: ALL LIES! (big pics)

LCARS 24 wrote: View Post
From John Eaves regarding the NYFST E:

Captain Robert April is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 17 2011, 07:04 AM   #32
Saquist
Commodore
 
Location: Starbase Houston
Re: Ship sizes: ALL LIES! (big pics)

Yeah that's pretty good.

I'm sure Ryan Church did exactly what he was supposed to but he has the infamous distinction of creating one of the worse looking ships to bear the name Enterprise. Fortunately it's not NX-01.
Saquist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 17 2011, 07:13 AM   #33
Vincent Law
Lieutenant Commander
 
Vincent Law's Avatar
 
Location: Romdo
Re: Ship sizes: ALL LIES! (big pics)

I'm rather fond of the one that shows a much larger modern VW Beetle next to a regular-sized old VW that made fun of John Eve's claim that the new ship was always supposed to be much larger rather than being scaled up. That being said, Bernd Scheider has an interesting article on the matter.
__________________
"Just remember this, some day I'm going to pull that trigger. So, can you still love me knowing that?" - Re-l Mayer
Ergo Proxy
Vincent Law is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 17 2011, 07:59 AM   #34
Shaw
Commodore
 
Shaw's Avatar
 
Location: Twin Cities
Re: Ship sizes: ALL LIES! (big pics)

Vincent Law wrote: View Post
I'm rather fond of the one that shows a much larger modern VW Beetle next to a regular-sized old VW that made fun of John Eve's claim that the new ship was always supposed to be much larger rather than being scaled up.
Are you talking about this one that I put together a couple years ago?

Shaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 17 2011, 09:18 AM   #35
Mytran
Commodore
 
Mytran's Avatar
 
Location: North Wales
Re: Ship sizes: ALL LIES! (big pics)

Well ... seeing as how they've just balanced the ceiling on top of the existing set walls, wouldn't that put ceiling height at 10 feet?
Mytran is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 17 2011, 01:20 PM   #36
The Inquisitor
Lieutenant Commander
 
The Inquisitor's Avatar
 
Location: UK
Re: Ship sizes: ALL LIES! (big pics)

Why do people get overly stressed out about the JJPrise being big? Fair play, it's not the most beautiful if ships (I prefer the kelvin by a long way), and it's nacelles look like they were made to vibrate on 3 different settings and make ladies happy. Did anyone get all worked up when TNG first aired because the galaxy class was huge?
__________________
Set Phasers to kill, stuff and mount.
The Inquisitor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 17 2011, 01:55 PM   #37
blssdwlf
Commodore
 
Re: Ship sizes: ALL LIES! (big pics)

Mytran wrote: View Post
Well ... seeing as how they've just balanced the ceiling on top of the existing set walls, wouldn't that put ceiling height at 10 feet?
I would think so... at least for specific decks seen and the other decks can have some wiggle room to 9 or 8 feet and completely unseen decks could be any height. (Like the height off the deck of the 2nd level of engineering at a mere ~6.x feet there is precedence for very short decks as well )
blssdwlf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 17 2011, 03:06 PM   #38
Shaw
Commodore
 
Shaw's Avatar
 
Location: Twin Cities
Re: Ship sizes: ALL LIES! (big pics)

The Inquisitor wrote: View Post
Why do people get overly stressed out about the JJPrise being big? Fair play, it's not the most beautiful if ships (I prefer the kelvin by a long way), and it's nacelles look like they were made to vibrate on 3 different settings and make ladies happy.
Well, I can't speak for anyone else but myself, but my issues with the new Enterprise have a lot more to do with careless implementation than anything else. I liked the original Church illustrations and found them esthetically pleasing... and then they went down hill from there.

But people have had 40 years to learn that many Trek fans are techies and like to see thought and care put into the background technologies. A great story should never be sacrificed for fictional tech, but after a story is told, the longevity of something like a 2 hour film could come from people studying/expanding the tech of it for years.

In that way, this movie was purposely careless. The people making it went out of their way to not be consistent or thoughtful with this aspect (believing that this was a failing of previous Trek). The fact that the new Enterprise was designed and built at one scale, and then changed scale a number of times during the effects production (to the point where people who worked on STXI didn't even know it's size) shows their caviler attitude towards this aspect of the movie.

Personally, I've decided to invest no time or effort into that aspect of the new films... and I enjoyed the new movie with the understanding of what it was and what it wasn't.

Did anyone get all worked up when TNG first aired because the galaxy class was huge?
Size... no.

When TNG came out I was most upset by the fact that the Enterprise D looked like the worst drawings of the original Enterprise from the old Goldkey comic books.
Had those earlier careless drawings of the original Enterprise not existed (or had I not seen them), I might have had a different initial reaction to the Enterprise D when I first saw it.

But I did grow to like/love the Enterprise D in spite of that first impression. And part of the reason for that was that it quickly became apparent that the designers of it cared about making it consistent much like Jefferies had with the original Enterprise.

In the cases of both TOS and TNG, these were weekly shows fighting time and budget constraints, but were still surprisingly well thought out with the background stuff (though sometimes TNG got into too much technobabble... but shows like CSI prove that there is an audience for that type of thing).

By comparison, STXI had the time to spend on this without hurting anything, but dismissed that aspect altogether (and bragged about it).




When all is said and done, the makers of STXI didn't want the audience spending time on the science or technology of their movie. And with that understanding, I haven't... and don't while watching the film. The tech was done the way it was done on purpose (just like all the lens flares were done on purpose... not by accident), and I view the film (and enjoyed it) with that clearly in mind.

I've found that it is best to watch STXI with the left brain turned off.
Shaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 17 2011, 08:27 PM   #39
King Daniel Into Darkness
Admiral
 
King Daniel Into Darkness's Avatar
 
Location: England
Re: Ship sizes: ALL LIES! (big pics)

Vincent Law wrote: View Post
I'm rather fond of the one that shows a much larger modern VW Beetle next to a regular-sized old VW that made fun of John Eve's claim that the new ship was always supposed to be much larger rather than being scaled up. That being said, Bernd Scheider has an interesting article on the matter.
"Interesting" or "stupid"? He's saying to ignore 90% of the movie, all the interiors and pretend the ship's actually the size he wants it to be. What about the corridor network behind the bridge? Or is that a "mistake" that "doesn't count", like the brewery, bridge window and shuttlebay? I get that he's passionate about it, but it's so bias and skewed that it hurts the credibility of his site badly.
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
King Daniel Into Darkness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 17 2011, 10:52 PM   #40
Saquist
Commodore
 
Location: Starbase Houston
Re: Ship sizes: ALL LIES! (big pics)

The Inquisitor wrote: View Post
Why do people get overly stressed out about the JJPrise being big? Fair play, it's not the most beautiful if ships (I prefer the kelvin by a long way), and it's nacelles look like they were made to vibrate on 3 different settings and make ladies happy. Did anyone get all worked up when TNG first aired because the galaxy class was huge?
Really the ship represents the movie perfectly, comical-cartoonish, inconsistent, flamboyant ...and all around spectacle.

Frankly any other sensible design like the Kelvin in a Enterprise configuration would have given the film too much self respect.
Saquist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 18 2011, 12:21 AM   #41
Vance
Vice Admiral
 
Re: Ship sizes: ALL LIES! (big pics)

The Inquisitor wrote: View Post
Why do people get overly stressed out about the JJPrise being big? Fair play, it's not the most beautiful if ships (I prefer the kelvin by a long way), and it's nacelles look like they were made to vibrate on 3 different settings and make ladies happy. Did anyone get all worked up when TNG first aired because the galaxy class was huge?
Oh, GOD yes, they did. Me? I was annoyed at the atrocious acting and bad writing. The ship was just 'meh' for me at the time.
Vance is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 18 2011, 01:22 AM   #42
Vincent Law
Lieutenant Commander
 
Vincent Law's Avatar
 
Location: Romdo
Re: Ship sizes: ALL LIES! (big pics)

KingDaniel wrote: View Post
"Interesting" or "stupid"? He's saying to ignore 90% of the movie, all the interiors and pretend the ship's actually the size he wants it to be. What about the corridor network behind the bridge? Or is that a "mistake" that "doesn't count", like the brewery, bridge window and shuttlebay? I get that he's passionate about it, but it's so bias and skewed that it hurts the credibility of his site badly.
If that's what you took out of it, then I believe you missed the point, which was only to illustrate that the ship was obviously designed closer to the size of the original and then scaled up, and that the new scaling doesn't really work with the exterior of the ship.
__________________
"Just remember this, some day I'm going to pull that trigger. So, can you still love me knowing that?" - Re-l Mayer
Ergo Proxy
Vincent Law is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 18 2011, 01:53 PM   #43
King Daniel Into Darkness
Admiral
 
King Daniel Into Darkness's Avatar
 
Location: England
Re: Ship sizes: ALL LIES! (big pics)

Here's a quick comparison chart of the ships at my corrected sizes:

This is the "no fudge" scale. The Enterprise-D and NX-01 are their original/official sizes, the TOS Enterprise scaled up to match Drexler's scale redshirts and Exclesior to match the bridge dome. And please take all this with the pinch of salt it's intended.

Shit, I misspelled starship.
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3

Last edited by King Daniel Into Darkness; February 18 2011 at 05:57 PM.
King Daniel Into Darkness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 18 2011, 04:30 PM   #44
Vance
Vice Admiral
 
Re: Ship sizes: ALL LIES! (big pics)

Daniel, people have been doing this for 40 years now. For you to come up and say "look how clever I am with PSP! I'm smarter than all of you combined and was able to make off of this work because I'm a super genius" is frankly pretty fucking insulting.

Past that point, the fact that your measurements are very off, ignores little tidbits like blurr lines, set reconstructions, statements by the people who made the models and sets, etc, proves your work as pointless and useless.

But, please, Daniel, please go on about how much better you are than the rest of us and how much we should take your half-assed job on pixel-bashing as the gospel truth. That'll really help the rest of us out. Thanks.
Vance is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 18 2011, 05:26 PM   #45
King Daniel Into Darkness
Admiral
 
King Daniel Into Darkness's Avatar
 
Location: England
Re: Ship sizes: ALL LIES! (big pics)

Vance wrote: View Post
Daniel, people have been doing this for 40 years now. For you to come up and say "look how clever I am with PSP! I'm smarter than all of you combined and was able to make off of this work because I'm a super genius" is frankly pretty fucking insulting.

Past that point, the fact that your measurements are very off, ignores little tidbits like blurr lines, set reconstructions, statements by the people who made the models and sets, etc, proves your work as pointless and useless.

But, please, Daniel, please go on about how much better you are than the rest of us and how much we should take your half-assed job on pixel-bashing as the gospel truth. That'll really help the rest of us out. Thanks.
Did I offend you by challenging your preconceptions about Star Trek? Feel free to not post in the thread anymore. If you got "I'm better than you" from this thread, that's between you and your insecurities.
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
King Daniel Into Darkness is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
ship sizes

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 01:51 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.