Aventine

[Rush Limborg]

I double majored in Political Science and Theatre Studies. I daresay I spent a fair amount of time studying art.

On that note, although I'm not double majoring, I have had a great deal of school drama-team experience, in high school (homeschool co-op, actually), and in college.

I don't mean to be in any way rude towards you, but that really isn't the same thing. I have extensive theatre experience at a university with a well-respected theatre program, studied it for four years, and worked in a professional theatre.

I'm not saying your experiences are invalid or disrespecting them. But, by the same token, there's a sort of attitude out there that anyone who's ever been on stage in high school or community theatre or did a few shows is as much of a theatre practitioner as someone who's dedicated years of their life to the thing. And I'm not as much of a theatre practitioner as, say, the graduate students who were getting MFAs in acting or dramaturgy -- I realized about mid-way through university that my talents were better suited towards political science and that my theatre training, though I'd spent years on it, would be better suited as a complement to my political science education than as a career in its own right.

Again, I'm not trying to disrespect your experiences, Rush -- I just think that the art and the craft of theatre and the expertise needed to become a professional theatre practitioner are often disrespected by equating them with amateur experiences, and I want to establish that the work I've done is quite a bit more extensive than that. I spent years on my Theatre Studies B.A.

Well, I admit my...education in those matters are not as extensive as yours.

I suppose I'm more of the "experience" mold. (To whit, I'll probably be working on political campaigns soon....)

However, as the lovely Nicole deBoer knows well, you can learn solely from the field, and still be superb....

(Ego moment. My apologies--but you gotta admit, Miss deBoer is a dang good actress. )

Sorry to put on my theatre snob hat, but no one who is serious about the theatre spells it ending with an "E-R." It's "R-E."

As you say. Fixed!

Thank you very much for your reply, Sci.

I'm not insulted at all. I can understand your point of view. I just don't agree.

That, indeed, is an excellent atitude to posses--and that's what makes our country so fantastic: the fact that we have the right to disagree--and indeed, agree to disagree.

It's part of what makes many countries so fantastic, not just the United States.

Aye, but you must admit, the USA was the first to do so on a full scale, paving the way for other nations to follow.

 

[Sci]

That, indeed, is an excellent atitude to posses--and that's what makes our country so fantastic: the fact that we have the right to disagree--and indeed, agree to disagree.

It's part of what makes many countries so fantastic, not just the United States.

Aye, but you must admit, the USA was the first to do so on a full scale, paving the way for other nations to follow.

Sure. I'm just sayin', let's not hog all the glory. Let's share in the glory of many states that allow freedom of expression and thought, and take pleasure in the knowledge that we're not the only ones who do that. No need to be U.S.-centric -- we can celebrate international freedom and celebrate the U.S.'s and other states' glories equally.

 

[Rosalind]

I'm almost finished with the Ringship

ooo.... very nice.

so in about 11 days from now I'm starting on the Aventine MKII version. I'm probably going to post "work in progress" images of the ship on my blog. (If allowed to.)

please do.

 

[Arpy]

I'm almost finished with the Ringship

ooo.... very nice.

so in about 11 days from now I'm starting on the Aventine MKII version. I'm probably going to post "work in progress" images of the ship on my blog. (If allowed to.)

please do.

Yeah, what he said.

One day, if I ever learn discipline, I'll get to my own version of the ringship. I imagine it very delicate, from a time when space was mostly empty and enemies similarly primitive.

I wonder if they'd ever have tried that secondary hull on ENT.

I'd follow your work-in-progress if you do.

 

[captcalhoun]

that he's a SHE...

 

[Christopher]

One day, if I ever learn discipline, I'll get to my own version of the ringship. I imagine it very delicate, from a time when space was mostly empty and enemies similarly primitive.

Which couldn't really be reconciled with canonical Trek history as ENT established it, since when humans got into space, they found themselves surrounded by more advanced, established powers.

(And really, what are the odds that every other species in this part of the galaxy would be at the same technological level at humanity? Even having them be just a few centuries ahead is a stretch. Statistically speaking, it's more likely that any aliens we met would be millions of years behind or ahead of us.)

I wonder if they'd ever have tried that secondary hull on ENT.

Doug Drexler answered that question in the comments on the post Clawhammer linked to. He said they wouldn't have gone for it, because it would've rendered all their stock footage of NX-01 unusable.

 

[kkozoriz1]

That's true. The "melting pot" ideal is a relic of a time when assimilation and uniformity were seen as a desirable goal. I like to think of America more as a tossed salad.

That's been said of Canada for decades.

“We have never been a melting pot. The fact is we are more like a tossed salad. We are green, some of us are oily and there's a little vinegar injected when you get up to Ottawa.”

Arnold Edinborough

 

[Paris]

^I prefer mine with syrup

 

[Rush Limborg]

^Same. Vinegar smells to High Heaven.

 

[Sci]

I wonder if they'd ever have tried that secondary hull on ENT.

Doug Drexler answered that question in the comments on the post Clawhammer linked to. He said they wouldn't have gone for it, because it would've rendered all their stock footage of NX-01 unusable.

And, for my money, it's just a bad idea. The NX-01 shouldn't look like a direct ancestor of the 1701; the NX-01 should look like it's only one of its ancestors, and, really, Vulcan, Andorian, and Tellarite ships should all look like they're the 1701's ancestors, too.

 

[Christopher]

And, for my money, it's just a bad idea. The NX-01 shouldn't look like a direct ancestor of the 1701; the NX-01 should look like it's only one of its ancestors, and, really, Vulcan, Andorian, and Tellarite ships should all look like they're the 1701's ancestors, too.

I agree with that. But this conjectural refit would take place after the formation of the Coalition of Planets, so it could be rationalized as the result of Starfleet engineers adopting ideas from the other members of the Coalition.

 

[Arpy]

One day, if I ever learn discipline, I'll get to my own version of the ringship. I imagine it very delicate, from a time when space was mostly empty and enemies similarly primitive.

Which couldn't really be reconciled with canonical Trek history as ENT established it, since when humans got into space, they found themselves surrounded by more advanced, established powers.

Don't care. It's my ringship. I've had this vague concept of it since before FC and think it'd really work in the Trek history as I saw/see it, and that's what I want to bring to life.

(And really, what are the odds that every other species in this part of the galaxy would be at the same technological level at humanity? Even having them be just a few centuries ahead is a stretch. Statistically speaking, it's more likely that any aliens we met would be millions of years behind or ahead of us.)

Preaching to the choir. That said, have you seen Trek? Or most sci-fi out there? Choosing to suspend disbelief here.

I wonder if they'd ever have tried that secondary hull on ENT.

Doug Drexler answered that question in the comments on the post Clawhammer linked to. He said they wouldn't have gone for it, because it would've rendered all their stock footage of NX-01 unusable.

Yup. But I find that reasoning a bit tedious given how inexpensive CGI's gotten and continues to get. Heck, they had multiple entirely CG characters/races on the show. It may not have been possible for VOY (battle damage, lost/replaced alien nacelle, etc) but...

 

[Arpy]

And, for my money, it's just a bad idea. The NX-01 shouldn't look like a direct ancestor of the 1701; the NX-01 should look like it's only one of its ancestors, and, really, Vulcan, Andorian, and Tellarite ships should all look like they're the 1701's ancestors, too.

Again, preaching to the choir, but the NX-01 was 24th C. in the 22nd from day one. ...I was going to end that with "IMO"
but no. Period.

And yeah, this:

I agree with that. But this conjectural refit would take place after the formation of the Coalition of Planets, so it could be rationalized as the result of Starfleet engineers adopting ideas from the other members of the Coalition.

 

[Christopher]

I wonder if they'd ever have tried that secondary hull on ENT.

Doug Drexler answered that question in the comments on the post Clawhammer linked to. He said they wouldn't have gone for it, because it would've rendered all their stock footage of NX-01 unusable.

Yup. But I find that reasoning a bit tedious given how inexpensive CGI's gotten and continues to get. Heck, they had multiple entirely CG characters/races on the show. It may not have been possible for VOY (battle damage, lost/replaced alien nacelle, etc) but...

Part of the reason they could afford to create those CG characters is because they were able to save money on FX by recycling stock shots. CG may be versatile, but it still costs time and money, and any savings a TV show can get are valuable. Stock footage is a resource, something you can use to fall back on when you need it, and it would be costly to toss it all aside.

More to the point, Berman & Braga didn't want a ship that looked like the original Enterprise. That's what Drexler and the other designers wanted, but they were given marching orders to base it on the Akira. This redesign is something that Drexler et al. are able to do now because it's for their own project, the calendar, and they're not answering to ENT's producers anymore. It's a direction the producers just didn't want to go.

 

[BrotherBenny]

I would have preferred the human ships to be what the Vulcan ring ships looked like, something quite radically different. It would have given Enterprise a very different feel to the other Trek shows.

Here's my take on an alternative history to the traditional Federation ship design:

Spoiler: Alternative history

By the time we get to the 4th/5th season we would learn that the reason Vulcans had the saucer-twin-nacelle design was because it didn't damage space as much as the ring-design did and then Starfleet begins designing the Daedalus-class which uses technology learned/shared from what would be the founding races of the Federation.

 

[David cgc]

I wonder if they'd ever have tried that secondary hull on ENT.

Doug Drexler answered that question in the comments on the post Clawhammer linked to. He said they wouldn't have gone for it, because it would've rendered all their stock footage of NX-01 unusable.

Yup. But I find that reasoning a bit tedious given how inexpensive CGI's gotten and continues to get. Heck, they had multiple entirely CG characters/races on the show. It may not have been possible for VOY (battle damage, lost/replaced alien nacelle, etc) but...

Battlestar Galactica replaced all of their stock shots after the beginning of the third season to reflect the damage Galactica had taken, and replaced or revised them all again later to account for further damage in the fourth season premiere.

 

[Christopher]

^Well, Doug Drexler was the CG supervisor for Battlestar Galactica as well as the designer of NX-01. He would've been the one responsible for the replacements and revisions you're referring to. So I think it's safe to say he knows what he's talking about. Just because BSG's producers were able and willing to do it, that doesn't automatically mean the same conditions would've applied on ENT.

 

[Dayton Ward]

Battlestar Galactica replaced all of their stock shots after the beginning of the third season to reflect the damage Galactica had taken, and replaced or revised them all again later to account for further damage in the fourth season premiere.

Yeah, but didn't that really just require adding detail to an existing model? Holes, scars, etc.?

In contrast, wouldn't adding the secondary hull to the NX-01, along with all the "little extras" to integrate it into the overall design, essentially mean rendering a new model?

I'm not attempting to be argumentative; I'm asking because I'm genuinely curious, and want to hear from the folks who have knowledge/experience with this stuff.

 

[Christopher]

That's a good point. The changes to the Galactica model would probably have been largely cosmetic, altering the "skin" over the same basic model as before. With 3D computer models, as I understand it, the basic "footage" is raw geometry and movement, with the textures and shading added later. So changing the surface appearance would be a minor alteration. The conjectural NX-01 refit, on the other hand, has a significantly changed geometry and apparently required building an entirely new digital model. So it would be a more difficult and expensive change to make. It wouldn't be just a matter of reusing old animation with altered surface detail; it would require starting over again from scratch.

 

[David cgc]

Well, how it works computationally, Christopher, but practically, geometry and texturing go together pretty tightly when the final render comes out. And the weathered Galactica had modeled damage as well as textured, so it wasn't just a new paint-job. Honestly, I think it'd be a little simpler to just attach a new, pristine part to a starship than it would be to weather the whole thing and make it look plausible, but I'm speaking artistically, from my own skill-set and experience.

In Lightwave, the program both Enterprise and BSG use, each model is it's own object file (including both the geometry and the texturing information, but no lights or motion). To modify the Galactica into a damaged version or the NX-01 into a refit, they'd take the original, and then save a new copy and modify that one to add battle damage, or remove struts and add a secondary hull, or change the nameplates and hull color to represent another ship, or whatever. The actual shots are separate scene files, which don't actually contain any model data at all. They just have information on what objects are in the scene, as well as cameras and lights, and where they are and what they're doing.

Because of that, it's simply a matter of opening the scene file, and replacing the Galactica or NX-01 object with the new, revised version (there are a few things that can make it a little less straightforward, but we're talking the difference between five seconds of work and a full minute, so they aren't worth going into). Or, if you wanted, you could replace those ships with any other model you had on-hand, preserving the same cinematography, animation, lighting, and so on. On Galactica, I'm pretty sure they only did that for one shot from the first two seasons (possibly because the effects were done by a different company by then, so that might've been the only one they had available or liked enough to recreate), and they just made new stock shots as they went, starting with a clean slate in season 3.

I don't have any idea if they'd choose to just bring in a refitted NX-01 model into their old scene files and render out the exact same shots but with the new ship if they had decided to make that kind of major change to the ship. I suppose we could get a bit of a clue based on how they handled stock flybys in the closing episodes of season 3, shots of the Colombia, and from the Mirror Universe two-parter, but it's been so long since I saw the show, I can't recall. I have a vague feeling that there were some standard stock shots at the end of the Xindi arc that were identical to the old ones except they had swapped in the damaged Enterprise model, but I'm not sure.

In either case, though, the lion's share of the effort would be in modifying a new version of the model, either to add the new section or to dress it with damage. No matter how different the changed version is, though, it's trivial to swap it into the place of the original in a given shot.