The space station in "The Ultimate Computer", reamstered

[Timo]

The Enterprise is behind the station.
The Enterprise is in front of the station.

It's really pretty obvious.

You mean arbitrary?

Neither object obscures the other, for VFX-technical reasons. The lighting is all over the place. And we never witness anything suggesting a complete orbit. Indeed, shots from the station office suggest there is no orbit and no motion, as the Enterprise is visible through the office window every time the camera looks that way.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Marsden]

I find such retconning usually makes the ship look more cluttered and less advanced than it did originally.

I agree, just because some people couldn't envision a one piece hull or seamless hull doesn't mean it needs to have all those damn plates. It's a starship not a tramp steamer.

I hate it when some people say it looks more realistic.

Compared to all the other Starships you seen in person, right?

Then there's "The Corbomite Maneuver,"
And of course the TOS-R version doesn't fix the scale problems; the cube and the Fesarius appear at the same relative size in the new shots.

No, I think the cube scale especially is a bit worse in the remastered because it's clearly wrong. The original is wrong but harder to see because it's not so clear that it's wrong.

 

[Lance]

I can see why they went with the Vanguard station, and there's a part of me that digs the retro-TSFS-station-as-TOS asthetic of it.

What kills 'Starbase 6' for me isn't the concept, it's the render. TOS-R's cgi is terrible and doesn't do it justice.

 

[Christopher]

Then there's "The Corbomite Maneuver,"
And of course the TOS-R version doesn't fix the scale problems; the cube and the Fesarius appear at the same relative size in the new shots.

No, I think the cube scale especially is a bit worse in the remastered because it's clearly wrong. The original is wrong but harder to see because it's not so clear that it's wrong.

No, it's quite clear in both versions. Maybe you can't tell in the original, blurry shot whether it's, say, 8 meters or 15 meters across, but either way it's clearly an order of magnitude too small to be 107 meters across. That would make it taller than the Enterprise itself, and that's clearly not the case in either version.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

The Enterprise is behind the station.
The Enterprise is in front of the station.

It's really pretty obvious.

You mean arbitrary?

No.

Smaller, above, with little detail (because it's obviously not the same model as in the other shot; note the nacelles), and moving to one side means behind; larger, below, with regular detail, and moving to the other side means in front.

I meant what I said: obvious. Equally obvious is the intention that the ship is "orbiting" the station, since the shots reflect that to a tee.

As to why the model just hangs in the window of Lurry's office, the reason is super-obvious too: they didn't have the budget to do anything but simply fix the modified AMT model into place. Evidently, it caused enough of a production headache with respect to audio to do just that, as it was, as described at http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Constitution_class_model_(original)#AMT_filming_models.

 

[Maurice]

As to why the model just hangs in the window of Lurry's office, the reason is super-obvious too: they didn't have the budget to do anything but simply fix the modified AMT model into place. Evidently, it caused enough of a production headache with respect to audio to do just that, as it was, as described at http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Constitution_class_model_(original)#AMT_filming_models.

The source for this claim about the noise seems to be the Profiles In History auction description, but I remain dubious about this because flashing lights would not make noise and the auction description itself makes no mention of motors.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

As to why the model just hangs in the window of Lurry's office, the reason is super-obvious too: they didn't have the budget to do anything but simply fix the modified AMT model into place. Evidently, it caused enough of a production headache with respect to audio to do just that, as it was, as described at http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Constitution_class_model_(original)#AMT_filming_models.

The source for this claim about the noise seems to be the Profiles In History auction description, but I remain dubious about this because flashing lights would not make noise and the auction description itself makes no mention of motors.

Yeah, I was skeptical too actually, though I didn't have any specific reason to doubt it either. Could it have been simply electrical interference that noticeably impinged on an audio channel?

 

[Wingsley]

Reviewing some TrekCore stills of "The Trouble with Tribbles" for different thread in another forum, I discovered something I never noticed before about the remastered Space Station K-7: The central tower of the remastered station image is marked "K7" on the upper conical dome, and the outer domes of the extremity pods also have their own markings, such as the "KA" visible in this image. Were these markings on the original filming model, or is this another TOS-R retcon?

 

[HarryM]

Looks to me like it's on the original, the lights kind of defeat the purpose though.

http://tos.trekcore.com/hd/albums/2x15hd/thetroublewithtribbleshd0382.jpg

 

[plynch]

Like you'd need to paint big markings on a thing in space. Wouldn't your sensors/nav things tell you it's the only space station around where the K7 is sposed to be?

It's not like 17 gray ships on the sea and some dude with binoculars has to puzzle out which is which.

 

[Wingsley]

Well, those markings could be ceremonial, a matter of pride. Every ship-of-the-line, and even major space stations, would carry dedication plaques on their bridge/control center and markings on the outer hull. Enterprise doesn't "need" them either, but they're there.

 

[plynch]

I've thought before that a deep-space starship really has no need for them either. But maybe at spacedock it's handy for people using visual to be able to tell 'em apart. I love how the typefaces are very Cold War military. The E's name and number look like they're from a battleship. The movie typefaces are not so period-looking, though I love the originals, b/c they're what I grew up with.

 

[Wingsley]

^ Agreed.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

^ Well, we never see the Klingon ship under original recipe anyway.

I would hope not. It could never fit in the fryer.

 

[spockboy]

The Enterprise is behind the station.
The Enterprise is in front of the station.

It's really pretty obvious.

You mean arbitrary?

Neither object obscures the other, for VFX-technical reasons. The lighting is all over the place. And we never witness anything suggesting a complete orbit. Indeed, shots from the station office suggest there is no orbit and no motion, as the Enterprise is visible through the office window every time the camera looks that way.

Timo Saloniemi

I never understood why they used the awful Catspaw Enterprise when all they had to do was flip the Enterprise they had already shot. (budget probably)

Spockboy

 

[CorporalCaptain]

I never understood why they used the awful Catspaw Enterprise when all they had to do was flip the Enterprise they had already shot. (budget probably)

Probably not budget since what you propose would have involved the re-use of existing footage and would have cost less. They did it on purpose for a reason.

How about so it would appear farther away.

 

[Metryq]

I never understood why they used the awful Catspaw Enterprise when all they had to do was flip the Enterprise they had already shot. (budget probably)

Probably not budget since what you propose would have involved the re-use of existing footage and would have cost less. They did it on purpose for a reason.

How about so it would appear farther away.

That and saving money could have been done with stills on an animation stand. Not everything has to go through an optical printer.

 

[ZapBrannigan]

I never understood why they used the awful Catspaw Enterprise when all they had to do was flip the Enterprise they had already shot.

I thought it was an AMT model kit behind K-7. The show acquired two of them, distressed one for the Constellation and used the other in "Tribbles."

 

[LMFAOschwarz]

I never understood why they used the awful Catspaw Enterprise when all they had to do was flip the Enterprise they had already shot. (budget probably)
Spockboy

Hmm. They used a large, 11 foot model to simulate a sense of large size, maybe a small one (in this case the smallest one they had) was used to simulate great distance instead?

 

[MGagen]

Neither object obscures the other, for VFX-technical reasons. The lighting is all over the place. And we never witness anything suggesting a complete orbit. Indeed, shots from the station office suggest there is no orbit and no motion, as the Enterprise is visible through the office window every time the camera looks that way.

Timo Saloniemi

I quite agree that the Enterprise isn't orbiting the station. The very idea shows a complete ignorance of physics. The station hasn't nearly enough mass for anything to orbit it. It seems more likely that the motion visible in the scenes was intended to be apparent motion due to a moving viewpoint/camera. The effect isn't perfect, but the stationary star field and Enterprise visible outside the window of Lurry's office indicates that it must be so.

Here's a crude animation I put together to illustrate how the remastered series could have handled the scenes without introducing the absurdity of an orbit. It shows the same K-7 and Enterprise models shown in my post above as viewed from a moving camera.