RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 138,234
Posts: 5,347,937
Members: 24,609
Currently online: 588
Newest member: chipper803

TrekToday headlines

Insight Editions Announces Three Trek Books For 2015
By: T'Bonz on Jul 24

To Be Takei Review by Spencer Blohm
By: T'Bonz on Jul 24

Mulgrew: Playing Red
By: T'Bonz on Jul 24

Hallmark 2015 Trek Ornaments
By: T'Bonz on Jul 24

Funko Mini Spock
By: T'Bonz on Jul 23

IDW Publishing Comic Preview
By: T'Bonz on Jul 23

A Baby For Saldana
By: T'Bonz on Jul 23

Klingon Beer Arrives In The US
By: T'Bonz on Jul 22

Star Trek: Prelude To Axanar
By: T'Bonz on Jul 22

Abrams Announces Star Wars: Force For Change Sweepstakes
By: T'Bonz on Jul 22


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 Fandom > Fan Art

Fan Art Post your Trek fan art here, including hobby models and collectibles.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old May 4 2009, 07:28 AM   #76
Cary L. Brown
Rear Admiral
 
Location: Austin, Texas
Re: Another take on the Original Enterprise...

Gep Malakai wrote: View Post
Cary L. Brown wrote: View Post
This time, with my renders, I put sources inside of the running lamps. It's not really surprising to see how it turns out, but it IS curious that we never saw any indication of this on-screen... we really ought to have, don't you think?
That depends. Do your light sources have falloff on them (e.g, are they decaying with the square of the distance)? If not, then the light hitting the bridge module going to look much, much brighter than it would in reality.
Well, the add-on renderer I'm using here has "normal falloff" by default, though it can be tweaked. Basically, it's sort of like Christmas lights... the impact of the lights is greater when other light sources are at their minimum. I just through that it was interesting that we could never really see this (obviously studio lighting techniques, etc) while, if the ship were real, we certainly would see it, to some extent or another.

Obviously, I picked things up and did a bit more... when I get onto a roll this is almost compulsive. Ah, well...

So, two final images for today. Mainly, this is showing the (nearly complete, except for the concentric rings) deflector/sensor dish. I never liked how FJ (and others) just have it "stuck" onto the front of the secondary hull, with no special support structure or anything. So... mine is separated by a massive "shield wall" to isolate the enormous energies from the dish from the inhabited areas... and the main "stem" of the dish actually is tied into the secondary hull's principal structural elements.

FYI, the lower regions of the secondary hull, below the hangar deck (remember, the hangar is the deck below the landing bay in my terminology!) will be cargo decks, though they may also have a pool and/or a bowling alley or something like that. Main engineering will be aft, with the "triangle" between the pylons and the control room forward of that, fairly high up. Other engineering spaces will surround the central structures. There will also be some habitation space down there, mainly along the outermost areas, adjacent to the hull. And the uppermost region, which isn't complete yet, will be the "strongback"... a lot of ribbing and trusswork, probably double-purposed as bulk storage space of some sort.



Cary L. Brown is offline  
Old May 4 2009, 02:10 PM   #77
ancient
Vice Admiral
 
ancient's Avatar
 
Location: United States
Re: Another take on the Original Enterprise...

It's pretty cool that you're doing this in Pro-E, that's pretty much the only 3D program I'm any good at. Aside from some versions of CAD that are useless for doing art. Too bad I don't have Pro-E on my home computer.

I think one of the first things I did with my ENT model (the physical one I bought, not a CG one) was see what it looked like in the dark lit up. The entire upper saucer is bathed in red light from the nacelles and the bridge & sensor domes are like headlights, hard to look at directly, under those conditions. So if the ship were real and in deep space it would look pretty different.
__________________
----------------------------
Time Travel was and will be confusing
ancient is offline  
Old May 4 2009, 03:17 PM   #78
Professor Moriarty
Vice Admiral
 
Professor Moriarty's Avatar
 
Location: System L-374
View Professor Moriarty's Twitter Profile
Re: Another take on the Original Enterprise...

Hey Cary, I may have missed this earlier in the thread, but are you positing that the three circular portholes on the bow of the saucer rim are sensors or weapons emplacements of some sort? I was admiring your latest cutaway just now and noticed what appeared to be some sort of machinery directly attached to the center port.
__________________
My crappy blog
Professor Moriarty is offline  
Old May 4 2009, 06:12 PM   #79
Cary L. Brown
Rear Admiral
 
Location: Austin, Texas
Re: Another take on the Original Enterprise...

Professor Moriarty wrote: View Post
Hey Cary, I may have missed this earlier in the thread, but are you positing that the three circular portholes on the bow of the saucer rim are sensors or weapons emplacements of some sort? I was admiring your latest cutaway just now and noticed what appeared to be some sort of machinery directly attached to the center port.
Hi, Prof...

Aw, you missed the entire "Nomad" exchange earlier. I did those details almost identical to "Nomad" in profile originally, but altered them a bit to make it a little less "cheesy." However, it was still caught by a couple of guys on here. Go back to the first page (about 3/4 down, I think?) and you'll see the entire conversation, including a description of what the details are.

However... "Cliffs' notes version... The TMP Enterprise had a "bright forward light" on the underside of the primary hull (part of an array of four, with another three on-top, around the bridge base). I always took these as active scanners (remember, scanners are like radar - active devices which send out energy and measure the returns. Sensors are passive - things like IR cameras and so forth.)

The "three ports" on the primary hull leading edge don't match up with anyone's eyeline. So I always took them as mechanical in nature rather than as "viewing windows." In fact, most of my "round portholes" are windows for detection hardware... while the rectangular ones are for people to look out of. (This lets you work on most of the the sensors and scanners while still inside the ship... very much in keeping with M.J's design philosophy.)

So what you see there are three high-powered "scanner telescopes" which are effectively the Enterprise's main "eyes" looking forward. Since they have to be able to tell the crew that they're about to run over a planet before they get to it, they've got to be pretty powerful (able to reach ahead by at least several minutes' worth of travel at maximum warp).
Cary L. Brown is offline  
Old May 5 2009, 12:10 AM   #80
Praetor
Vice Admiral
 
Praetor's Avatar
 
Location: The fine line between continuity and fanwank.
Re: Another take on the Original Enterprise...

Cary, I'm so glad that your version of the deflector dish setup reflects the ring structure behind the dish. Like you, I always hated that FJ didn't acknowledge that. I know that Jefferies's cutaway drawing didn't show it, but as far as I'm concerned, if it's a part of the models it should be included.

I was thinking another reinforcing ring might be necessary along the line where the secondary hull 'folds' from the 45 degreeish angle to the more or less straight lines of the rest of the structure but she's your baby.
__________________
"If you can't take a little bloody nose, maybe you ought to go back home and crawl under your bed. It's not safe out here. It's wondrous, with treasures to satiate desires both subtle and gross; but it's not for the timid." - Q
Praetor is offline  
Old May 5 2009, 02:33 AM   #81
Cary L. Brown
Rear Admiral
 
Location: Austin, Texas
Re: Another take on the Original Enterprise...

Praetor wrote: View Post
Cary, I'm so glad that your version of the deflector dish setup reflects the ring structure behind the dish. Like you, I always hated that FJ didn't acknowledge that. I know that Jefferies's cutaway drawing didn't show it, but as far as I'm concerned, if it's a part of the models it should be included.
Oh, absolutely... the 11' model is as close to "gospel" as you can get (though it's not without error or flaw).

As I stated earlier in the thread, I'm basing my model primarily on Sinclair's drawings, though I'm also engaging in significant "comparison study" with several other drawing sets out there, including Casimiro's. And for the most part, I'm using the set drawings which David Shaw helped me get my hands on, though I'm using McMaster's bridge blueprints. Obviously, the "real ship" interiors won't be 100% identical to the sets, but the sets are very much a driving factor in my take.

Regarding the rings... yeah, they were on the 11' model, so they're there. In my "personal canon" take on these, these form a "resonator" which is an integral part of the deflector/scanner functionality... "resonator" in the same sense that a pipe-organ uses the pipes for resonators. They're not "just for show" and they're not "wasted space." They're there, because they serve a purpose. I wouldn't object to "tweaking" their configuration if there were some driving technological reason for doing so, but since we don't really have that sort of technology today, it's hard to say. We're sort of like people from the 1800's trying to understand a jet engine... we can get the very rough basics but the hard science behind it is a bit beyond our knowledge.
I was thinking another reinforcing ring might be necessary along the line where the secondary hull 'folds' from the 45 degreeish angle to the more or less straight lines of the rest of the structure but she's your baby.
Oh, the internal structure of the secondary hull is far from complete. There's a reason I haven't put any decks above the landing bay yet. I need to get the structure... completed. I intend to have a set of "rings" adjacent to each of the angled dorsal elements of the keel. But I need to have the windows placed, first, because I don't want the rings to intersect windows. Then, there will be series of axial beams running from fore to aft along the upper section of the hull (with two of them running the length of the secondary hull... those are visible on the ceiling of the hangar... and the rest terminating at the pylon ring structure. Again, exact locations will have to be based upon known window and deck locations, however.

The combination of these beams and rings will form what I'm calling the "strongback" of the secondary hull. Meanwhile, the section going from the intersection of the pylons forward to where it intersects with the beams from the dorsal, and continuing upwards through the dorsal, is what I'm calling the keel. The combination of the "strongback" and the "keel" is what gives the secondary hull it's mechanical strength. The "strongback" will essentially be subdivided into a series of very small compartments... which makes it perfect for fluid or bulk-particulate material storage (containers being strung between the structural members, not actually being made up OF the structural members). Meanwhile, the interior elements of the keel will contain heavy conduits and other critical ship's distribution systems.

In other words... the "Jeffries tubes" are inside of these massive, heavy structural regions... the pylon "beam structures" and the horizontal and upwards-slanting elements of the keel.

The only thing that's still very fuzzy for me is how to have a strong joint between the primary hull and the dorsal, and the minimal "keel" element of the primary hull (in large part, indicated by the rib on top, forward of the impulse engines) and the regular primary hull structure. As I mentioned earlier in the thread, I see this as the single weakest element of the ship, no matter what "magic" materials it's made out of. If I were designing the ship from scratch... I'd have made it like this (modified from the Casimiro drawing, just because that's what I had at hand at the moment I did this):

which would be a far more mechanically-robust solution, and actually looks pretty good as far as I'm concerned. But it's not the Enterprise, and my goal is to have something that in every meaningful way "is" the Enterprise we saw on-screen, just given a bit more "polish" and care than MJ was ever able to give her (he had a short timetable, multiple "cooks" in the kitchen, and it was all done for a paycheck for a TV show... not to mention the rather significant limitation of having no access to modern design tools). I'd like to think that what I'm doing would have met with M.J's approval back in 1966, without him seeing it as "changing" his intent in any way.

That said... everyone has their own take on things. I love seeing everyone's versions of the TOS ship. I really wish that, SOMEDAY, we were able to see this design get the big-screen exposure it deserves.
Cary L. Brown is offline  
Old May 5 2009, 02:50 AM   #82
Cary L. Brown
Rear Admiral
 
Location: Austin, Texas
Re: Another take on the Original Enterprise...

ancient wrote: View Post
It's pretty cool that you're doing this in Pro-E, that's pretty much the only 3D program I'm any good at. Aside from some versions of CAD that are useless for doing art. Too bad I don't have Pro-E on my home computer.
Well, you can get a "learning edition" pretty cheaply, but those are (by intent) not file-compatible with any other versions. Annoying, but not a problem if you don't plan on sharing files with anyone. (You can still export to "neutral" formats like STEP and IGES and so forth, of course.)

The "sticker price" of a full seat of Pro/E is pretty high still, but nowhere near what it was a few years ago. I've got a full version, but I'm now two major released out of date, about to become three (when the current "prerelease" version of WF5 goes "official" in about a month). But it's working just fine for me so far... I'll upgrade when I have to, not before.
I think one of the first things I did with my ENT model (the physical one I bought, not a CG one) was see what it looked like in the dark lit up. The entire upper saucer is bathed in red light from the nacelles and the bridge & sensor domes are like headlights, hard to look at directly, under those conditions. So if the ship were real and in deep space it would look pretty different.
Yeah... I've got both all four of the really slick little (supposedly "snap-fit," prepainted version) Trek kits from Bandai. They're really fantastic... it's a shame that the line died. I was really looking forward to their next couple of releases. Is that the model you're referring to?

Regarding the "police siren" from a few posts back, by TIN_MAN, well... I don't see it on my copy, and I'm not sure what it is you're seeing. On the "real" model, these lamps were simply green and red tinted glass bulbs... spherical, of the sort used on Christmas trees of the era (before the mini-bulbs came along, and far before LED Christmas lights!) It's hard for me to imagine how you could get a "rotating" effect out of that. Is it possible that this is just a quirk of the video transfer service on the version of the disk you have?
Cary L. Brown is offline  
Old May 5 2009, 05:08 AM   #83
Cary L. Brown
Rear Admiral
 
Location: Austin, Texas
Re: Another take on the Original Enterprise...

This evening I did a little bit on the secondary hull.

First, I created the three "grips" around the resonator assembly. In my version, these are support hardware for the sensing functionality of the dish. Basically, the dish itself sends out energy, which interacts with whatever it impinges on. It pushes objects, mainly, but some of the energy reflects back. The resonator assembly absorbs and amplifies the energy return, and the three "grips" measure this amplified energy, converting it into useful (and interpretable) data.


Second, and in preparation for continuing the mechanical structure of the secondary hull, I've laid in windows. Note that I haven't actually "cut" them yet, only created the curves from which they will be created. I've tried to match the existing window (and sensor porthole) locations throughout the secondary hull as closely as possible, while still remaining "practical." I've left aside the windows adjacent to the landing bay for the time being, since they don't seem to line up to anything else, and since there are not really any other decks (per-se) inside the landing bay area other than the crawlway leading to the aft observation dome (if I leave it as an observation dome... which I'll only do if that seems like it's remotely practical, something which is definitely "suspect" for now, and which was never indicated by anything on-screen) and the observation gallery/control-room arrangement.

Things are pretty close, overall. Note that the little vertical lines are "stems" to help me locate my circular portholes (which are based upon rotational cuts normal to the surface, not on parallel surfaces to the hull - I don't want sensor windows to have curvature, after all, so they're perfectly flat!)

First, here's how it appears on the exterior hull at the moment.



And here's a wireframe-mode view, with datum planes (representing deck surfaces, floor and ceiling... even where they aren't physically modeled yet) and with the Sinclair starboard view (with windows) visible.



You can see what I've had to alter. Basically, I've got decks where they make the most sense, and the spacing is pretty much consistent with what would be required for the windows to be on the appropriate decks. However, the window locations specified on the drawing vary dramatically in terms of their height above deck level, and I've standardized on that.

Other than that, the only real change I've made is that I've relocated one window (on Deck 17, two decks above the landing bay and two decks down into the secondary hull) forward by approximately a window width. The reason for this is that the location where this window existed previously was in a location where I want a circumferential ring support.

As for what I'll do with the various portholes and the couple of windows adjacent to the landing bay... stay tuned. I haven't really thought that through yet.

Finally, you'll notice that I did end up going from a "three box" nacelle pylon beam to a four-box one. This does add a bit of strength, though the strength-to-added-weight ratio isn't sufficient to justify it as far as I'm concerned. It was just necessary in order to get the pylon windows to work correctly. I don't have a particular problem with it, but if I was designing the ship from scratch, well...
Cary L. Brown is offline  
Old May 5 2009, 03:26 PM   #84
ancient
Vice Admiral
 
ancient's Avatar
 
Location: United States
Re: Another take on the Original Enterprise...

Cary L. Brown wrote: View Post
As I mentioned earlier in the thread, I see this as the single weakest element of the ship, no matter what "magic" materials it's made out of. If I were designing the ship from scratch... I'd have made it like this (modified from the Casimiro drawing, just because that's what I had at hand at the moment I did this):

which would be a far more mechanically-robust solution, and actually looks pretty good as far as I'm concerned.
MJ made the pylons thin by design, to make the design more magical. He never specified exactly where the magic generator was or how it worked though. I suggest somewhere near engineering...


Cary L. Brown wrote: View Post
ancient wrote: View Post
It's pretty cool that you're doing this in Pro-E, that's pretty much the only 3D program I'm any good at. Aside from some versions of CAD that are useless for doing art. Too bad I don't have Pro-E on my home computer.
Well, you can get a "learning edition" pretty cheaply, but those are (by intent) not file-compatible with any other versions. Annoying, but not a problem if you don't plan on sharing files with anyone. (You can still export to "neutral" formats like STEP and IGES and so forth, of course.)
Yeah, I know. I think there are three versions, I had a chance to pick up the newest student version discounted last year but didn't go for it. It is a fraction of the pro version.

ETA: My ENT model is not snap-together. I don't have it with me and forget what it is, but it's a faily new release one for $30.
__________________
----------------------------
Time Travel was and will be confusing
ancient is offline  
Old May 5 2009, 04:51 PM   #85
Praetor
Vice Admiral
 
Praetor's Avatar
 
Location: The fine line between continuity and fanwank.
Re: Another take on the Original Enterprise...

Cary, I'm no engineer but the way you describe the structure functioning makes perfect common sense to my non-engineer brain, so that must mean you're doing it right.

I'm quite glad to hear that you're treating the 11-footer with such respect, also. And I quite like the way you imagine the sensor/deflector setup working, and I do like the four-section nacelle pylons for what it's worth, even though it was forced by the windows. My question (and you may have addressed it and I just missed it) is where/how will you fit the power transfer conduits? For that matter, have you yet decided how you are going to depict the ship's engineering/power generation setup?

Also, what are your plans with the weapons systems?
__________________
"If you can't take a little bloody nose, maybe you ought to go back home and crawl under your bed. It's not safe out here. It's wondrous, with treasures to satiate desires both subtle and gross; but it's not for the timid." - Q
Praetor is offline  
Old May 5 2009, 07:17 PM   #86
Cary L. Brown
Rear Admiral
 
Location: Austin, Texas
Re: Another take on the Original Enterprise...

Praetor wrote: View Post
My question (and you may have addressed it and I just missed it) is where/how will you fit the power transfer conduits?
Well, the term "power transfer conduits" was never used in TOS, so I'm not beholden to that term (and honestly, the term is somewhat nonsensical.. a conduit is, by definition, a holder for other things which do work. For instance, and electrical conduit is a "tunnel" through which you run wires... not the wiring itself. So, "technically," what we think of in Trekkian terms as "power transfer conduits" the equivalent of wires, and are thus not "conduits" at all.

Really, "conduits" are more like "Jefferies Tubes."

That said... what TNG-era "power transfer conduits" do is the same job that wires do in our contemporary world... transfer power from one point to another. And on my take on this ship, power is transferred, not through some nonsensical "plasma" system but rather through electromagnetics, much as we do today. The 1701 will have a much more efficient system than the copper wire we use today (though I'd be shocked of copper wasn't still in use in localized wiring!). I'm leaning towards the main power transfer medium being either a superconducting ceramic or a highly-ionized plasma (as a CONDUCTOR, not as the power-transfer mechanism itself). But the actual power being tranferred, in either case, will be simple electricity (albeit possibly in variations not in use today).

Where will these "wires" be? The big ones will be in Jefferies tubes. Smaller ones will diverge from there, typically in the interstitial wall spaces or occasionally in the interstitial deck space if there's no contiguous wall volume to pass through. Every so often, they will hit "termination" points (probably also within the wall structure) which will distribute the power to local systems through normal conductors. The only exception to this "step-down-to-normal-conductor" method would be for very-high-power systems... phasers, the main deflector, shield generators, etc.
For that matter, have you yet decided how you are going to depict the ship's engineering/power generation setup?
Largely, yes. There will be two "engineering rooms" in the primary hull, aligned tangentially rather than radially, on either side of the impulse deck, with each having an energizer set (the tubes) facing towards the impulse system. There will be three dual-fusion reactor sets, with two impulse thrust systems (based in some ways upon the "VASIMR" concept currently in development): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variabl...oplasma_rocket
One of these rooms will be "primary hull main engineering" while the other will be "impulse engineering control."

There will also be a single engine room in the secondary hull, with its own "energizer" tube set, linked into the engine pylon feeds. The energizer will be between the pylons, as high as practical, with Main engineering immediately forward of that point.

Central to my take on this is that the "tubes" are not, in fact, reactor elements at all. They are the devices which convert raw energetic reaction products into useable (aka "electrical") power. They do this through a complicated process including, among other things, sending the high-energy "particle beam" from the reaction through a set of second-periodic-table materials which are capable of withstanding the energy and, in the case of "dilithium" generates an intense electrical field as a result of this process, which in turn becomes useable power in the form of electricity. Make sense so far?

So, you have the matter-antimatter reaction in the nacelles. You have three sets of twin fusion reactors in the primary hull, and another three in the secondary hull (in that case, covered by the "T" shaped hatch on the underside). So there are two "matter/antimatter reactors" (one in each nacelle) and a total of twelve fusion reactors (in dual-reactor sets, three per hull) which make up the "auxiliary power system." All of which feed their power (in raw reaction-product form) to energizer assemblies, which then pass the "controlled" power through dilithium crystals to convert it to electrical power, which is then further altered by direction through large "transformers" which can be found in each of the engineering bays, and then distributed throughout the ship through the "high-tension line" system (plasma or superconductor based?) to various termination points, where it either gets used directly or gets converted to "safe" power levels for light usage.
Also, what are your plans with the weapons systems?
Well, main weapons control is Deck 10. There are a pair of forward facing launchers on that deck (hidden behind slide-away hull panels). There is a single ring corridor, which will be broken at the fore by the torpedo tubes, and with the lift to the aft. The starboard side of the region inside the ring corridor will be the phaser control room. The port side will be the torpedo control room. The outside "ring" (beyond the corridor) will have the carousel torpedo magazine, and the phaser capacitor bank below that. Phaser emitters will be below the deck, facing fwd and to either side (six total). All emitters are protected behind slide-away hull panels as well.

There may be other phaser emitters in other places. These will be controlled from main phaser control, however, and will have no localized controls. They will likely be in the shallow "wedge" regions in the upper primary hull (again, fwd, port, and stbd).

As for secondary hull weapons, I've given that very little thought so far. We were never given any reason to assume that the TOS Enterprise had any weapons in that hull, until "In a Mirror Darkly" ("Enterprise," season IV). But I'm not necessarily opposed to having a single aft tube and a few phaser banks back there as well... the trick is to (1) not contradict anything seen on-screen in TOS, (2) have reasonable placements as you'd require for appropriate "360-degree fields of fire" for the ship, and (3) have them fit into reasonable locations in the structure I'm building.
Cary L. Brown is offline  
Old May 5 2009, 11:35 PM   #87
Praetor
Vice Admiral
 
Praetor's Avatar
 
Location: The fine line between continuity and fanwank.
Re: Another take on the Original Enterprise...

I thought you might not like the power transfer conduit terminology, and I feel you've adequately explained why other terms might be preferable. Your personal knowledge of engineering seems to be quite beneficial.

I was curious whether you would go with hidden weapons ports, or assign weapons firing abilities to something already visible. I'm rather glad you seem to have chosen the former. I might suggest you at least go with an aft phaser in the 'IaMD' Defiant location, to make the references to 'forward phaser' make sense.

Overall, I'm very excited to see what you're outlined above realized. I really applaud the fact that this is a very original take.
__________________
"If you can't take a little bloody nose, maybe you ought to go back home and crawl under your bed. It's not safe out here. It's wondrous, with treasures to satiate desires both subtle and gross; but it's not for the timid." - Q
Praetor is offline  
Old May 6 2009, 04:31 AM   #88
Wingsley
Commodore
 
Wingsley's Avatar
 
Location: Wingsley
Re: Another take on the Original Enterprise...

As I understood it, the EPS technology from TNG thru ENT was meant to suggest the conduits contained a fiery plasma medium which transferred the energy from one part of the ship to another; this might explain the illuminated panels suspended above the corridors: these are exposed EPS conduits, with the plasma visible inside.
__________________
"The way that you wander is the way that you choose. / The day that you tarry is the day that you lose. / Sunshine or thunder, a man will always wonder / Where the fair wind blows ..."
-- Lyrics, Jeremiah Johnson's theme.
Wingsley is offline  
Old May 6 2009, 06:50 AM   #89
Cary L. Brown
Rear Admiral
 
Location: Austin, Texas
Re: Another take on the Original Enterprise...

A bit more progress this evening...

The rectangular windows on the starboard side of the secondary hull are in place (less the ones adjacent to the observation gallery), and with that I was confident to do some more internal layout.





Another image, allowing you to see some of the internal windows, plus you can better see the overall arrangement of the landing bay (realize that there will be an inner set of walls, inset from the outer hull by at least a meter and probably more like two meters in most places). You can also more clearly make out the eventual location of "main engineering" (and the energizer "tube set" which will be between the nacelle pylons).

This is still incomplete, but it's coming together pretty quickly now.



By the way, I did a little experiment last night, and exported to an OBJ file, then imported into Lightwave, 3DSMax, and Maya. The model came in flawlessly in all cases. Note that the native file isn't polygonal at all, so the triangle count is entirely dependent on the export settings I choose. To be "safe" I chose a pretty dense mesh, but plan to experiment with some lower-res versions as well as time goes on. I mention this because I'm considering making this available. Again, note that there are better versions out there for rendering... this is not intended for that purpose. But it does have the advantage of being "walkable." I won't just "put it on the 'net" but I might share with people who I trust to treat it with appropriate respect (and give credit where credit is due).

Here's the OBJ file, exported and imported into Maya, and rendered in Mental Ray with some very basic lighting.



Cary L. Brown is offline  
Old May 6 2009, 06:58 AM   #90
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: Another take on the Original Enterprise...

So in its polygonal form, will people be able to carve big holes in it to show all the nuts-and-bolts goodness?
__________________
"From the darkness you must fall, failed and weak, to darkness all."
-Kataris
Gep Malakai is offline  
Closed Thread

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 05:34 AM.

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