I didn't bother to read. All I did was look, and you are you seriously trying to make a case for good 3D space ship, PROPERLY DEPICTED IN SPACE THAT LOOKS LIKE AN OBJECT, with an incomplete, flat, cartoony ship? And you know WHY!? Because as it is on the ground, with people walking around, and our brains are entirely geared toward dealing with pictures of stuff on the earth with people around them, any wrong lighting would be instantly noticeable and HEAVILY noticeable, so they automatically went to correct it until they had THE LIGHTING RIGHT! Hence why monsters, and dinosaurs and stuff that is walking around on the ground and interacting with people, have always looked so much better than ships in space. Because bad lighting of these, would become instantly visible and make it look worse than stop motion picture, so they spent their time on making the monster seamlessly blend into the picture. The do not have to do this with Starships. Since we've never been in space, and our brains are not geared toward dealing with things in space, and partially fool it by lighting the ship as if it's on the ground; you're brain doesn't automally go: "Wrong, wrong, wrong, eh, false information." It isn't until you notice that old visual effects like TOS, the ships looked much more like actual large objects in comparison to new shots, that your brain shifts gears and you start to notice how bad it really is. For those of us who grew with the model shots of TOS, it's been a lot easier to notice. Me on the other hand I'm of the previous group, I grew up on TNG, and DS9 and thought, "Looks so good." It wasn't until later age when I went to rewatch TOS, that the ship felt more like an object. And it wasn't after watching more episodes of TOS, and comparing it to the newer SFX - at first I didn't want to believe it - that my brain slowly got more and more trained into noticing the differences. And that what previously made it look good, now makes it look flat.