The OFFICIAL STNG-R general discussion thread!

I think you fudged something when you did your overlay. In the original ortho I linked to in Tobia's thread the neck does not cross the brass ring of the warp nacelles. In your overlay it suddenly does.

 

Since they're supposedly using the original film for the sfx shots, I don't see how this is related at all. There's also no indication that he did any work on a BoP, which we know the do have a CGI version of. (Note that any CG version they have from DS9 would be below the required quality for HD)

 

That's because I overlaid a picture of the physical model over top of Tobias's orthos. Tobias's ortho is sticking out in green. The red overlay is where the neck lines up on the physical 6 footer.

Tobias's nacelle's are slightly shorter...and the neck goes back a bit further to compensate. That's why when I overlay the 6 footer over his ortho, that the green neck in behind goes through the brass ring. The proportions are significantly different.

On page 2 of the thread you linked, someone posted reference links to the 6 footer for Tobias.

http://bruce-domain.blogspot.com/2011/02/part-1-uss-enterprise-ncc-1701-d-studio.html

That's why I'm hoping those orthos are wrong...because it would kind of suck if the model their using to replace shots in the remastering was that far off.

 

It's just nice to see the sharp, crisp, lines on the ship's hull, the actual rims of the windows. Wow.

On the 4' vs. 6' issue, I always thought the 4-footer's lines just looked too thick and not as crisp. I also thought the deflector "eye" had almost of a "frown" to it rather than a smile or at least a neutral look.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you're comparing Richter's orthos to a real world photograph, right? The photograph is probably distorting the proportions of the saucer due to the focal length of the lens. In order to get a proper ortho view, the photographer would have to back up really, really far away from the miniature and use a longer focal length lens.

 

Personally I have never been too bothered by the minor variances of some of the CGI work we have seen. After all its not like TNG didn't use models that were not exact copies of each other. Don't even the 6ft and 2ft models have some minor differences to them?

Let alone has anywhere compared the details of the larger Head of the Engineering hull?

And when we discuss lightning I think its funny because the shows FX supervisors had some very different styles for lightning.

Personally I really love Rob Legato's work on the show (and on first season DS9). Dan Curry not so much.

 

We already know that in some cases they are not using the original filmed shots, case in point the BOP shot you referenced. It stands to reason that they might have needed the other models just in case. That isn't to say that Tobias is the only artist they might have working for them. Someone else may have done the BOP.

New Horizon - see Maxwell Everett's post above re: photo vs. cgi.

 

Just because he's working on models, doesn't mean they're being created for TNG-R, look at his website, he's been creating great CG models of Star Trek ships for at least the last 10 years.

I'm not saying the model isn't his, in fact I think it's a good possibility since he has connections with Drexler and the SotL, but I think many people (yourself included) are assuming it's Tobias Richter's model, even though he's denied that he's working on the project and he's stated that the model isn't ready for some of the shots we've already seen. Also of note is that CBS is not listed on the clients page of his website (Paramount Home Video is, but it's been clearly stated that this is a CBS-D project)

The model wasn't animation ready until October. Remember, they've announced the sampler is September. I don't think they would have announced it and shown images footage without first knowing they'd be able to correctly replicate missing footage. So either the timeline of his progress as shown on the forum is skewed or it's unlikely it's his work.

There are also some differences between Richter's model and the model we've seen thus far, including window placement, lighting and (as mentioned above) scaling to the original model. So it's either NOT his model or it's been modified for use.

My point is, we won't know for sure until someone either confirms or denies it officially and we shouldn't make assumptions just because someone created a HQ CG model of the E-D.

 

The first part of a great new interview with the Okudas is up at trekmovie.com:

http://trekmovie.com/2012/01/24/interview-mike-denise-okuda-talk-star-trek-tng-the-next-level-part-1/

Some of the things we have been puzzled about are answered there.

 

I think the original version is far superior to the official "Special Edition" version. If you want a best-of-both-worlds version, you must see Adywan's "Revisited" version. If you have the DVD or BD and haven't seen Revisited, go to fanedit.info right now and download it! It's far and away the best version of ANH.

BTW,

Spoiler: political stuff about fan edits

If you like fan edits, download what you can, while you can. The fan edit communty is reeling from the megaupload.com shutdown, and the very survival of fan editing as an art form is in jeopardy.

Spoilerized because it's kind of political, and best reserved for TNZ. There's a thread about megaupload in TNZ if you want to discuss it.

 

I'm sure this kind of question has come up before but how many film elements do they have? Like do they have more than what ended up in the final episodes? Seems like there could be some interesting stuff there.

 

Oh, yeah. Pretty sure all 25,000 + reels are being scanned to digital files or put on HDCAM-SR tape. That includes bloopers, outtakes, deleted scenes, you name it.

 

From Play.com:

"To: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Your order for Star Trek: The Next Generation - The Next Level has been posted.

Delivery Option: Standard Delivery - Please allow 3-5 working days for delivery"

The longest 3-5 working days!

 

Curiouser and curiouser...

Seems to suggest no CGI Enterprise is used yet, which we know to be untrue. Could explain the weird-looking Enterprise firing the energy beam, though.

 

Excellent line of reasoning.

 

If Amazon.co.uk starts shipping today as well, I will receive the disc before the weekend. Can't wait!

 

Yeah, Okuda says the Enterprise/Bird of Prey shot is a matte and not CG:

 

Why create a matte, if you have a perfectly good CG model at your hands? This does not make sense...

And it is much harder and time consuming to make a matte, whereas rendering a CG sequence works really fast...

 

This project was started quite some time ago. It's possible that they did not have a usable / finished CGI Enterprise D at the time this shot was scheduled to be worked on. In fact it sounds like Tobias Richter (if he has indeed joined the project) came on board a bit late. If the CGI model wasn't being worked on yet, or simply unfinished then it would probably be much faster for an artist to create a digital matte with their design tools. For such a simple shot, the end result is the same...the matte looks lovely.

 

It's not.