TOS Shuttlecraft Arrives, Placed Next to Enterprise Space Shuttle
- Thread starter spockboy
- Start date
Where did the picture with the sleeping bag come from?
Just stumbled on it somewhere on the interwebs. Would make a great bedroom.
Now that I think about it I think it was from one of the fan made productions. The Shuttlecraft was a set piece and someone crashed (slept) in it
Spockboy
I thought the shuttle was on permanent display in Houston... I don't know if I like it being trucked all over the country. Just Fong to risk damaging it at some point.
This was a "day one" photo. I'm sure they will be reattached.
What gets me is fans with little more than time and devotion are able to recreate these sets and models faithfully yet studios with far more resources and money often can't seem to get it right.
I'm not sure CBS Digital was entirely staffed by fans who knew and loved the show's details. Some of them were just professional CGI artists doing their thing on a limited schedule.
What gets me is fans with little more than time and devotion are able to recreate these sets and models faithfully yet studios with far more resources and money often can't seem to get it right.
Or they make bizarre choices like the shuttle drifting sideways as it takes off like a helicopter in a wind.
It's rather silly to suggest that those involved with Remastered TOS weren't fans or didn't respect the show.
It's also rather silly to compare a screen used cgi rendering to a photograph of the hangar deck maquette. A fairer comparison would be to a screencap.
https://getyarn.io/yarn-clip/7e3ec59d-12b6-4b49-b772-921919eafa34
It's also rather silly to compare a screen used cgi rendering to a photograph of the hangar deck maquette. A fairer comparison would be to a screencap.
https://getyarn.io/yarn-clip/7e3ec59d-12b6-4b49-b772-921919eafa34
Last edited:
First of all your link goes to a clip of Galaxy Quest.
Second I don't think anyone thinks that CBS Digital didn't have respect for the material, I think a lot of us agree that they didn't have the ability to pull it off.
Third, the picture below is not is a comparison of a model and CBS DIgital's Hangar Deck, it is a comparison of GOOD C.G.I. and LOUSY C.G.I.
You made the same mistake I did in assuming it was a photograph of the original model. That is precisely the point, they are BOTH CGI and he fact that a mere fan (Petri Bloomqvist) did a far superior job to CBS Digital's version is exactly the point.
Not only is the CBS Digital version flat, grey, cartoony and lifeless, they actually altered the design of the Hangar Deck!
What the hell gave CBS Digital the right to do that?
Here is the bottom line, which version it the most faithful to the original?
I mean no disrespect. As I said, I think you made the same mistake I did by thinking Bloomqvist's model was the real deal, but you have to admit that it's pretty sad when a fan does an infinitely better job than the very company that owns the property.
Spockboy
Last edited:
In principle they can do what they want. Fans doing s better job than CBS Digital does tell you something.
Actually I did not mistake Petri Blomqvist's rendering as the filming model and with all respect can't see how anyone could. A juxtaposition of the original hangar deck model as it actually appeared onscreen along with CGI versions (supposedly good and bad) only followed my last post. As for opinions offered, I won't rebut them because there's no point. It is a "purist" view and likely held by the majority here (just not by me). Doesn't mean it's the one and only correct view. As for the "what gives them the right" question (Kirk impression), already answered by someone else: they own it. As I've said, I like remastered TOS and recall enjoying the new effects when they first aired (and still do). It was exciting at the time they first aired to watch Trek and anticipate / see something new, and that is a big reason I started watching it again (I started watching for the first time in the early 70s). Like actually seeing the Columbus shuttle in "The Galileo Seven" (even if they got the number wrong). But if you really want to see the same old original effects, reused over and over because of budget and time limitations, the beauty of it is...you can. Oh, and when it came to budget and time, the remastered creators (including Petri Blomqvist by the way) had their own limitations to contend with. Just one man's opinions.
). But if you really want to see the same old original effects, reused over and over because of budget and time limitations, the beauty of it is...you can. Oh, and when it came to budget and time, the remastered creators (including Petri Blomqvist by the way) had their own limitations to contend with. Just one man's opinions.
Last edited:
Actually I did not mistake Petri Blomqvist's rendering as the filming model and with all respect can't see how anyone could. A juxtaposition of the original hangar deck model as it actually appeared onscreen along with CGI versions (supposedly good and bad) only followed my last post. As for opinions offered, I won't rebut them because there's no point. It is a "purist" view and likely held by the majority here (just not by me). Doesn't mean it's the one and only correct view. As for the "what gives them the right" question (Kirk impression), already answered by someone else: they own it. As I've said, I like remastered TOS and recall enjoying the new effects when they first aired (and still do). It was exciting at the time they first aired to watch Trek and anticipate / see something new, and that is a big reason I started watching it again (I started watching for the first time in the early 70s). Like actually seeing the Columbus shuttle in "The Galileo Seven" (even if they got the number wrong
Yes, but the difference is that they did very well with those limitations, including Bloomqvist.
The thing is you are completely wrong about me. The fact is I DON'T want to look at the same old dated effects. I want to see wondrous NEW effects, but more importantly I want to see Star Trek treated with the respect it deserves and a decent effects company like Eden FX or ILM hired to do the job.
I also think that the Big E should be a model.
The absolute ideal for me would be to build a new 11 footer from a 3D laser scan the original big E with a completed port side with everything else (planets etc) done in CG. Imagine what the 11 footer would look like with today's technology and motion control cameras?
I also think Star Trek TOS is a bit too analog for a digital Enterprise. I made this video too illustrate my point.
Perhaps when they release the 4K versions they will get it right
It's all about expectations and vision. When I heard the effects were being redone, I imagined this...
Not this...
As far as CBS Digital having the right to change things, your answer "they own it" made me laugh.
Perhaps I should have clarified what I thought was obvious. What gave them the "artistic" right to change it?
Having the right, is not the same thing as having the authority.
At best CBS D was inconsistent. There were some beautiful planets and some embarrassingly cartoony ones. The CG model for the first 8 or so episodes was terrible but then it got better. Some changes that were welcome, some ignored, and some completely unnecessary (like the Hangar Deck) and so it went...
Anyway I'm glad you enjoy the new effects and I have always been in favor of fixing them up but I know they can be done a hell of a lot better, and I know that when they finally DO fix them up properly, people will realize what they've been missing.
Just one man's opinion.
Spockboy
Last edited:
Nice--one of the images from the Star Trek Postcard Book. Great memories of that book!
Not only is the CBS Digital version flat, grey, cartoony and lifeless, they actually altered the design of the Hangar Deck!
What the hell gave CBS Digital the right to do that?
Here is the bottom line, which version it the most faithful to the original?
I mean no disrespect. As I said, I think you made the same mistake I did by thinking Bloomqvist's model was the real deal, but you have to admit that it's pretty sad when a fan does an infinitely better job than the very company that owns the property.
Bloomqvist's version is unquestionably superior to TOS-R's unrealistic rendering that has more in common with video games from 1999-2000, than appearing like any real environment. TOS deserves another "R"--this time, with truly professional FX artists who know how to create sets and vehicles that match the live action footage.
Similar threads
