RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 141,345
Posts: 5,502,385
Members: 25,118
Currently online: 683
Newest member: Ashanti

TrekToday headlines

IDW Publishing March 2015 Comics
By: T'Bonz on Dec 17

Paramount Star Trek 3 Expectations
By: T'Bonz on Dec 17

Star Trek #39 Sneak Peek
By: T'Bonz on Dec 16

Star Trek 3 Potential Director Shortlist
By: T'Bonz on Dec 16

Official Starships Collection Update
By: T'Bonz on Dec 15

Retro Review: Prodigal Daughter
By: Michelle on Dec 13

Sindicate Lager To Debut In The US Next Week
By: T'Bonz on Dec 12

Rumor Mill: Saldana Gives Birth
By: T'Bonz on Dec 12

New Line of Anovos Enterprise Uniforms
By: T'Bonz on Dec 11

Frakes: Sign Me Up!
By: T'Bonz on Dec 11


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 > The Next Generation

The Next Generation All Good Things come to an end...but not here.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old August 4 2014, 08:21 PM   #1
Gotham Central
Vice Admiral
 
Location: Chicago, IL
View Gotham Central's Twitter Profile
Why are their inaccurate models on the set?

More so than the other series, TNG frequently featured model starships used as decoration on the various sets.

For set decorators models would be fairly easy to come by since most were commercially available.

One thing that I've always found odd though is that on more than one occasion the models were GROSSLY in accurate.

I'm not talking about little details being off...I'm talking about Constitution Class ships with nacells on backwards or missing entire pieces.

The question is why?

AMT kits were cheap and relatively easy to build. Not only were they easy, but they were usually hard to screw up (i.e. pieces would not fit together if they were backwards. Yet there were models on TNG sets that were all kinds of screwed up. The question is why?

I seem to recall a constitution refit model with the nacells lying on their side. That would have been intentional given that the model, out of the box could not do that.
__________________
Well maybe I'm the faggot America.
I'm not a part of a redneck agenda.
Now everybody do the propaganda.
And sing along in the age of paranoia

Green Day
Gotham Central is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 4 2014, 08:33 PM   #2
trekker670
Fleet Captain
 
Re: Why are their inaccurate models on the set?

I think the majority of the time these "inaccurate" models were actually kitbashes. They used off the shelf models, but assembled the pieces differently (often mixing and matching between model sets) to create a different model than intended. This allowed them to make a more diverse fleet without having to create unique designs/molds/models for each one.
trekker670 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old August 4 2014, 08:42 PM   #3
Timo
Admiral
 
Re: Why are their inaccurate models on the set?

For the most part, I think it was a question of effort. There's no point in gluing all the pieces in place when the camera will only barely show the model at all (hence the Constitutions tending to lack those saucer rim pieces with the portholes), and no point in fitting difficult pieces in place with undue accuracy (hence some nacelles placed incorrectly - "on the side" might be an in-universe variant created by kitbashing, but "front end aft" is simply the builder rightfully not caring a bit).

In-universe, I think we have to accept that these kits were built by people who didn't have the skill. Picard's ship would have been teeming with such - no wonder the Captain Picard Day was created to limit the exposure to one day per year...

Timo Saloniemi
Timo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 4 2014, 09:38 PM   #4
Armored Saint
Fleet Captain
 
Armored Saint's Avatar
 
Location: Quebec City
Re: Why are their inaccurate models on the set?

Gotham Central wrote: View Post
One thing that I've always found odd though is that on more than one occasion the models were GROSSLY in accurate.

I'm not talking about little details being off...I'm talking about Constitution Class ships with nacells on backwards or missing entire pieces.

The question is why?
Because people of the 24th century have evolved beyond that.
Armored Saint is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 4 2014, 10:54 PM   #5
jimbotron
Fleet Captain
 
Location: Bay Area, CA
Re: Why are their inaccurate models on the set?

It's funny too when things go full circle, and those models end up in the TV shows and movies representing the actual ships. ILM wanted a smaller scale miniature for when they needed the Enterprise to be small, so they used the commercially available AMT kit, and used it in Star Trek 2, 3 and 6, notably in this shot:

http://movies.trekcore.com/gallery/a...tsfshd0143.jpg
jimbotron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 4 2014, 11:04 PM   #6
TV's Frank
Fleet Captain
 
Location: Los Angeles, CA USA
Re: Why are their inaccurate models on the set?

Because whether it's in-universe explanation or just talking about it as a TV production, these are all items made by human beings and human beings are fallible. Deal with it.
TV's Frank is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 5 2014, 01:44 AM   #7
trekshark
Lieutenant Commander
 
Location: USA
Re: Why are their inaccurate models on the set?

the Constitution with the sideways nacelles was in an engine design lab (unless it showed up elsewhere that I don't remember), so it was probably intended to be a test bed of some kind
trekshark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 5 2014, 04:31 AM   #8
Avro Arrow
Fleet Captain
 
Avro Arrow's Avatar
 
Location: Secret Arctic Base
Re: Why are their inaccurate models on the set?

^ It showed up in Picard's ready room and some crew quarters in season 1, before the appearance in the Utopia Planitia recreation in season 3.

Memory Alpha link
__________________
Runtime Exception: Witty signature not generated.
Avro Arrow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 5 2014, 09:09 AM   #9
Timo
Admiral
 
Re: Why are their inaccurate models on the set?

...On a ship full of kids, that model no doubt was either built by one, or then broken and rebuilt a dozen times because of one.

Timo Saloniemi
Timo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 5 2014, 09:32 AM   #10
F. King Daniel
Admiral
 
F. King Daniel's Avatar
 
Location: King Daniel Into Darkness
Re: Why are their inaccurate models on the set?

TV's Frank wrote: View Post
Because whether it's in-universe explanation or just talking about it as a TV production, these are all items made by human beings and human beings are fallible. Deal with it.
Yup. Someone probably dumped a model kit in front of some random non-Trekkie Paramount employee and told them to have it ready for shooting in a couple of hours. Those window panels were a bitch to get in place, I wouldn't be surprised if they were rattling around inside that saucer.

Also, I glued the nacelles of my first D7 Battlecruiser on backwards (I was 10 at the time, though)
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
F. King Daniel is online now   Reply With Quote
Old August 5 2014, 11:30 AM   #11
RESPCT
SPCTRE
 
RESPCT's Avatar
 
Location: Skyhold
View RESPCT's Twitter Profile
Re: Why are their inaccurate models on the set?

King Daniel Into Darkness wrote: View Post
Also, I glued the nacelles of my first D7 Battlecruiser on backwards (I was 10 at the time, though)
Well, now they're canon.
__________________
Metro [...] is designed for casual users [...] designed for your computer illiterate little sister, for grandpas who dont know how to use that computer dofangle thingy, and for mom who just wants to look up apple pie recipes. [...] the antithesis of a power user.
Windows UI designer J. Miller
RESPCT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 5 2014, 09:20 PM   #12
Ru ru, chu
Fleet Admiral
 
Ru ru, chu's Avatar
 
Location: Mr. Laser Beam is in the visitor's bullpen
View Ru ru, chu's Twitter Profile
Re: Why are their inaccurate models on the set?

^ Ah, but are they...blue?
__________________
"A hot dog at the ballpark is better than a steak at the Ritz." - Humphrey Bogart
Ru ru, chu is online now   Reply With Quote
Old August 5 2014, 09:43 PM   #13
Ithekro
Fleet Captain
 
Ithekro's Avatar
 
Location: Republic of California
Re: Why are their inaccurate models on the set?

I'm talking a friend into painting some Klingon ship miniatures in a reddish color to represent other houses in the Empire.
Ithekro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 6 2014, 05:17 AM   #14
Nebusj
Rear Admiral
 
Nebusj's Avatar
 
View Nebusj's Twitter Profile
Re: Why are their inaccurate models on the set?

TV's Frank wrote: View Post
Because whether it's in-universe explanation or just talking about it as a TV production, these are all items made by human beings and human beings are fallible. Deal with it.
I'd supposed the thread title was a sly admission that, yeah, these things happen.
Nebusj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 6 2014, 06:20 AM   #15
Dukhat
Commodore
 
Dukhat's Avatar
 
Location: Baltimore, MD
Re: Why are their inaccurate models on the set?

Gotham Central wrote: View Post
More so than the other series, TNG frequently featured model starships used as decoration on the various sets.

For set decorators models would be fairly easy to come by since most were commercially available.

One thing that I've always found odd though is that on more than one occasion the models were GROSSLY in accurate.

I'm not talking about little details being off...I'm talking about Constitution Class ships with nacells on backwards or missing entire pieces.

The question is why?

AMT kits were cheap and relatively easy to build. Not only were they easy, but they were usually hard to screw up (i.e. pieces would not fit together if they were backwards. Yet there were models on TNG sets that were all kinds of screwed up. The question is why?

I seem to recall a constitution refit model with the nacells lying on their side. That would have been intentional given that the model, out of the box could not do that.
You're making it sound like this kind of thing happened all the time. Other than the two instances of AMT Enterprise-A models with their nacelles attached the wrong way, what other examples of this are there? And I wouldn't exactly call it "grossly inaccurate." It's not like somebody glued the nacelles vertically, or stuck the engineering hull on top of the saucer.

And to give my $0.02: Maybe whoever built those models just wanted to see what they looked like with the nacelles backward or at an angle?
__________________
Dont believe everything you read on the internet.
Benjamin Franklin
Dukhat 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 10:32 PM.

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