Oh, GOD yes, they did. Me? I was annoyed at the atrocious acting and bad writing. The ship was just 'meh' for me at the time.
Ship sizes: ALL LIES! (big pics)
- Thread starter F. King Daniel
- Start date
Oh, GOD yes, they did. Me? I was annoyed at the atrocious acting and bad writing. The ship was just 'meh' for me at the time.
If that's what you took out of it, then I believe you missed the point, which was only to illustrate that the ship was obviously designed closer to the size of the original and then scaled up, and that the new scaling doesn't really work with the exterior of the ship.
Here's a quick comparison chart of the ships at my corrected sizes:
This is the "no fudge" scale. The Enterprise-D and NX-01 are their original/official sizes, the TOS Enterprise scaled up to match Drexler's scale redshirts and Exclesior to match the bridge dome. And please take all this with the pinch of salt it's intended.
Shit, I misspelled starship
.
This is the "no fudge" scale. The Enterprise-D and NX-01 are their original/official sizes, the TOS Enterprise scaled up to match Drexler's scale redshirts and Exclesior to match the bridge dome. And please take all this with the pinch of salt it's intended.
Shit, I misspelled starship
.
Last edited:
Daniel, people have been doing this for 40 years now. For you to come up and say "look how clever I am with PSP! I'm smarter than all of you combined and was able to make off of this work because I'm a super genius" is frankly pretty fucking insulting.
Past that point, the fact that your measurements are very off, ignores little tidbits like blurr lines, set reconstructions, statements by the people who made the models and sets, etc, proves your work as pointless and useless.
But, please, Daniel, please go on about how much better you are than the rest of us and how much we should take your half-assed job on pixel-bashing as the gospel truth. That'll really help the rest of us out. Thanks.
Past that point, the fact that your measurements are very off, ignores little tidbits like blurr lines, set reconstructions, statements by the people who made the models and sets, etc, proves your work as pointless and useless.
But, please, Daniel, please go on about how much better you are than the rest of us and how much we should take your half-assed job on pixel-bashing as the gospel truth. That'll really help the rest of us out. Thanks.
Did I offend you by challenging your preconceptions about Star Trek? Feel free to not post in the thread anymore. If you got "I'm better than you" from this thread, that's between you and your insecurities.
QED
ST-One
Vice Admiral
ST-One
Vice Admiral
You may think that it demonstrates what you say about him.
But you are just as wrong as you were before.
This seems to be how all threads end that have anything to do with the Abrams Enterprise size. This could have been avoided if someone took a few hours and scaled the ship properly. Yes, Star Trek is fiction, but at least the guys who designed the ships and technology from TOS to ST: Enterprise took pride and great care in the work they did and treated the audience with respect. I can't say the same about some of the stories the writers came up with 
I can't believe Mr. Abrams and company treated Star Trek this way. This is the show that was so popular that the US Government named a real spaceship, the first Space Shuttle, after the TOS Enterprise. When I watch the new movie I keep reminding myself this is a bizarro alternate universe.
I can't believe Mr. Abrams and company treated Star Trek this way. This is the show that was so popular that the US Government named a real spaceship, the first Space Shuttle, after the TOS Enterprise. When I watch the new movie I keep reminding myself this is a bizarro alternate universe.
I think that it's simpler than that. I think that there's a subset of NuTrek fans (illustrated in this thread) that honestly believe that the new movie is the 'right' Trek and that everything else should be changed to match the new movie.
And no level of personal attack, arrogance, or absurd petty hatred is too much for these fans to push forward.
All this is despite the word of Abrams that these very issues were deliberately ignored in the first place and no one should be looking to the new movie for Technical details.
Re-read the thread. You're the one making this a childish old vs. new Trek thing. I enjoy both.Vance said:
Are you serious? The only hatred in this thread is coming from you. It's a TV show in a fantasy universe, nothing more. If you can't cope with the discussing and questioning aspects of it, leave.
Yet some of us still enjoy speculating about it, and you saying "Stop talking about nuTrek tech!" isn't gonna change that.
Wait wait wait, let's back up and change topics here.
How, exactly, did we decide that the accepted scale for the E-D isn't a load of crap? I mean, shoving Ten Forward into the lower rim would scale up the crew quarters windows so much that they wouldn't really match the interior sets, right? Just curious, since looking at pictures of the six-footer, it doesn't seem to quite mesh.
How, exactly, did we decide that the accepted scale for the E-D isn't a load of crap? I mean, shoving Ten Forward into the lower rim would scale up the crew quarters windows so much that they wouldn't really match the interior sets, right? Just curious, since looking at pictures of the six-footer, it doesn't seem to quite mesh.
Vance, I think you can dial back a bit. No need for a flame war to develop on this. Thanks.
I can speak only for myself, but one thing I've come to accept as a Trek fan (with no small amount of reluctance) is that in some instances, the production staff don't pay enough attention to the little details to keep everything as consistent as it should be. Sometimes it bothers the heck out of me that some things related to Treknology have become as inconsistently portrayed as they have (registries, for example), but there's nothing that can be done. * shrugs * The entertainment factor (and perhaps the profitability factor) always comes first.
There is a difference, however, with the occasional misstep due to the various pressures of producing a weekly television series, and not only deliberately ignoring anything resembling technical consistency, but bragging about deliberately ignoring technical consistency. Especially since maintaining a certain level of consistency and credibility was one of Star Trek's hallmarks back in the day.
ST-One
Vice Admiral
This seems to be how all threads end that have anything to do with the Abrams Enterprise size. This could have been avoided if someone took a few hours and scaled the ship properly. Yes, Star Trek is fiction, but at least the guys who designed the ships and technology from TOS to ST: Enterprise took pride and great care in the work they did and treated the audience with respect. I can't say the same about some of the stories the writers came up with
I can't believe Mr. Abrams and company treated Star Trek this way. This is the show that was so popular that the US Government named a real spaceship, the first Space Shuttle, after the TOS Enterprise. When I watch the new movie I keep reminding myself this is a bizarro alternate universe.
O for god's sake, get a grip!
Nothing really 'pressured' TNG's creative team to go over Probert's head to 'deliberately ignore' the layout of the ship and turn the saucer's one-deck rim into a two-deck rim.
They contradicted the ship's exterior with the Ten Forward set.
I think you got it backwards. Most of us just assumed that ten-forward itself was a load of crap, and therefore didn't have any bearing on the Enterprise model.
It's a sticky one. They not only introduced the 4-foot model of the Enterprise, altering the rim, but the deck layout of the ship differs between the TNG Technical Manual (as seen on the engine room wall, complete with ducky, Nomad, Rodenberry's plane and friends) and the later E-D floorplan blueprints.
Similarly, Voyager's scale is screwed up by it's magic shuttlebay (it's different in every episode) and the hanger door, which is too small to fit the Delta Flyer let alone the other ships seen parked somewhere inside in "Drive"
DS9's Defiant sprouts decks and shuttlebays at random.
Oh yay, another apocryphal half-reference with no source. How exciting.
Credibility.
Right...
DS9's Defiant sprouts decks and shuttlebays at random.
And also expands and shrinks three times an episode for no obvious reason. It was designed to be a specific scale, but was then changed for dramatic reasons by the production staff...
Which is... um... exactly why STXI sucked
Just throwing in another bit of guesstimation: The TOS Enterprise could be scaled up to 348m from reconstructing the shuttle and flight deck using the original FX.
Here's a quick comparison chart of the ships at my corrected sizes:
This is the "no fudge" scale. The Enterprise-D and NX-01 are their original/official sizes, the TOS Enterprise scaled up to match Drexler's scale redshirts and Exclesior to match the bridge dome. And please take all this with the pinch of salt it's intended.
Shit, I misspelled starship
Saquist
Commodore
Oh yay, another apocryphal half-reference with no source. How exciting.
Credibility.
Right...
DS9's Defiant sprouts decks and shuttlebays at random.
And also expands and shrinks three times an episode for no obvious reason. It was designed to be a specific scale, but was then changed for dramatic reasons by the production staff...
Which is... um... exactly why STXI sucked
Yeah when Defiant went up against the Klingons in Way of the Warrior Defiant is clearly a Good Chunk of a Vorcha.
Then we see Defiant fly under a Galor and it's as small as it was the Episode Defiant..
Yet we see Defiant is comparable to a Bird of Prey in Length and we see these tiny bird of prey along side the Vorcha in the Station battle.
DS9.
THE worse job ever of scaling in the known universe.
