What are your controversial Star Trek opinions?

[Bad Thoughts]

Why? Because the actors can actually see what's there?

Where are you seeing this? Most of the bridge is a physical set, isn't it? The only regular set that is probably more virtual than not would be engineering, right? And whatever I think of how it fits in the ship, it's gorgeous. (Just looked. There's rather a lot of "real" on the engineering set as well.)

Now a brewery. THAT was a physical location and the actors were totally believable there.

There are two different, but related issues: the bridge designs and the wrap around screen. The bridges have functional flaws. The wrap around screens exchanges one problem for another, asking actors to focus on things farther away. And they do use those screens a lot.

Finally, I never wrote that they use the screens for the bridge. Please correct yourself.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

A $640,000 budget in 1964 bought a one-hour science fiction pilot a lot of fun trinkets and props.

Interesting that $640k in 1964 = $6,636,696.77 in 2025

 

[Tallguy]

Finally, I never wrote that they use the screens for the bridge. Please correct yourself.

OK. Sure. Done.

Now we've eliminated which sets you are not talking about. What sets are you talking about?

 

[Bad Thoughts]

The first paragraph was

OK. Sure. Done.

Now we've eliminated which sets you are not talking about. What sets are you talking about?

The key term is in the first sentence "bridge sets". Diagramming the sentence will make this clear.

 

[fireproof78]

Finally! After 30 years someone has asked me to diagram a sentence. I was just remarking at work that I haven't used that skill!

 

[Tallguy]

I find that the big wrap-around screen they use now for sets to be a detriment. All the actors look like they are trying to find their car after a ball game.

Finally, I never wrote that they use the screens for the bridge. Please correct yourself.

OK. Sure. Done.

Now we've eliminated which sets you are not talking about. What sets are you talking about?

The key term is in the first sentence "bridge sets". Diagramming the sentence will make this clear.

Sentence 1:
  I
   \
   find
      \
      that
         \
      [the big wrap-around screen]--(they use now for sets)
               \
                to be
                    \
                   a detriment

Sentence 2:
  All the actors
          \
          look
            \
             like
                \
             they
               \
            are trying
                 \
                  to find
                     \
                     their car
                           \
                         after a ball game

So, which sets that are NOT the bridge do you feel are not convincing? The lounge? The quarters? Engineering? The corridors?

 

[Bad Thoughts]

Sentence 1:
  I
   \
   find
      \
      that
         \
      [the big wrap-around screen]--(they use now for sets)
               \
                to be
                    \
                   a detriment

Sentence 2:
  All the actors
          \
          look
            \
             like
                \
             they
               \
            are trying
                 \
                  to find
                     \
                     their car
                           \
                         after a ball game

So, which sets that are NOT the bridge do you feel are not convincing? The lounge? The quarters? Engineering? The corridors?

The ones using the big wrap around screen, generally. If you need an example, the Breen sets.
ETA: second example: J'Gal.

 

[Richard S. Ta]

Sentence 1:
  I
   \
   find
      \
      that
         \
      [the big wrap-around screen]--(they use now for sets)
               \
                to be
                    \
                   a detriment

Sentence 2:
  All the actors
          \
          look
            \
             like
                \
             they
               \
            are trying
                 \
                  to find
                     \
                     their car
                           \
                         after a ball game

So, which sets that are NOT the bridge do you feel are not convincing? The lounge? The quarters? Engineering? The corridors?

I believe said poster is referencing what's referred to as an AR Wall.

 

[Nerys Myk]

The ones using the big wrap around screen, generally. If you need an example, the Breen sets.
ETA: second example: J'Gal.

J'Gal looked great. A wonderful combination of the VR wall and props.

 

[korblborp]

never seen them referred to as an "AR (augmented reality, i assume? doesn't really... fit.. to me, if so) wall", but as "volumes" but i think that's a trademarked one. it's rear projection for the modern age, and much, if not most, of the stuff shot using them just... don't look like people in an environment. it looks like a sequence from Phantasmagoria or similar.

 

[fireproof78]

J'Gal looked great. A wonderful combination of the VR wall and props.

Call me blind but the wall rarely stands out to me, vs. rear projection. But, I'm also not hunting for it to fail either.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Call me blind but the wall rarely stands out to me, vs. rear projection. But, I'm also not hunting for it to fail either.

It's jut a fancier high tech version of backdrops and matte paintings.

 

[cooleddie74]

Lucasfilm calls its version "The Volume."

 

[Nerys Myk]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Tallguy]

I knew the tech that @Bad Thoughts was referencing. I just didn't know what uses of it he didn't like.

I've commented on similar problems in more Star Wars-y places: I think that (for instance) the first season on The Mandalorian did some mind blowing things with this methodology. Probably because they didn't even know if it would work at all, so they were tighter in how varied the application would be. Since then (SKELETON CREW!) many uses have gotten very underlit and kind of blobby looking. There's not much light and what there is is coming from everywhere.

I think that for outdoors locations that SNW has been hit and miss. I actually think J'Gall was one of the more successful uses because the environment itself was not providing much light. So you had appropriate practical light sources

The comet in season 1 and the cartoon time travel planet are (to me) notable fails. (See above: The light is coming from everywhere.) Lost Memory Planet (OH! Rigel! I knew that one!) wasn't great either. They keep going for this "a few minutes past sunset" look. It's the anti-magic hour.

None of that had to do with how the actors were acting.

Call me blind but the wall rarely stands out to me, vs. rear projection. But, I'm also not hunting for it to fail either.

The wall pretty much never fails. That's the magic of it. What fails is that they rely on it to light the set to one degree or another and (at least the way it's been used in many things) it's a serious limitation. Some directors apparently realize it more than others.

There is also what I call "Moria syndrome". (Nobody else calls it that, but please, be my guest.) It's where the environment is huge but everyone is clumped together in a suspiciously medium sized sound stage sized area.

 

[fireproof78]

What fails is that they rely on it to light the set to one degree or another and (at least the way it's been used in many things) it's a serious limitation. Some directors apparently realize it more than others.

All tools are. As Phil Tippett would say "the computer wants to fuck you."

where the environment is huge but everyone is clumped together in a suspiciously medium sized sound stage sized area

I guess my background leads me to be less worried about this.

 

[cooleddie74]

Damn, more than 60 years later the very first Enterprise bridge design from the first pilot still looks damn good. In some ways better than the regular series TOS bridge. The metallic and grey colors work so well with the vibrant, colorful console displays.

The gooseneck viewers in the two TOS pilots returned aboard the U.S.S. Farragut in "A Quality of Mercy(SNW)." You can see them on the consoles directly behind Kirk's Captain's chair.

 

[Firebird]

Call me blind but the wall rarely stands out to me, vs. rear projection. But, I'm also not hunting for it to fail either.

I thought Discovery never implemented the AR Wall in a way that wasn't obvious if you look how the sets are all laid out in a circular pattern, but that was the franchise's first use of the technology, so it makes sense that there would be a learning period. Not that it's wrong artistically, it's just the new version of the painted backdrop on interior planet surface sets.

SNW has been better about integrating the live action set components with the background projection into a cohesive whole.

 

[TheAdmiralty]

I've felt that the bridge sets on Disco and SNW, not to mention all the sets, were ridiculously large.

I've thought this as well, just doesn't seem functional at all for the bridge, what would the practical reason be for spreading people out like that.

A really cavernous engineering set with an absolutely massive core would be cool though.

 

[CoveTom]

TNG and DS9 had better sets than SNW and Disco and even Picard. Yeah, come at me all you want. It's true.