The OFFICIAL STNG-R general discussion thread!

[22 Stars]

There are FOUR lights Sorry just had to. I am looking forward to this project and release as much as anyone!

 

[bobd]

Isn't there also the issue of the window(s) above the round docking port at the base of the neck?

Correct me if I'm wrong: the original 6-foot studio model has a series of pairs of windows above the docking port. Tobias's model AND the shots from the bluray that we THINK is a CGI 3D model both have a single window above the docking port, not 2 windows like the 6-footer.

To put it another way: as far as we know, the only version of the Enterprise D ever built (either in the real world or as a 3D model) which has the single window above the docking port, is Tobias's model. Is that right?

Doesn't that suggest very strong evidence that Tobias's 3D model IS in fact used in the bluray?

 

[Tosk]

Other 'quick ID' methods you can also use are: the secondary shuttlebays (light bleed = model) the saucer impulse engines (lit = CG) or the windows near the back of the neck. (The model has them right up to and across the corner, on the CG one the windows stop well before. See below.)

Those windows are there on the CG-model. The camera angle is slightly different but you can still see them.

I don't know which ones you're looking at, but I mean these ones:



The model has windows right up to the corner, and the CG one doesn't.

 

[sojourner]

If you read recent posts by Tobias on Scifi-meshes he is actually being very coy about the whole thing. I really think he is involved.

 

[GNDN]

Correct me if I'm wrong: the original 6-foot studio model has a series of pairs of windows above the docking port. Tobias's model AND the shots from the bluray that we THINK is a CGI 3D model both have a single window above the docking port, not 2 windows like the 6-footer.

To put it another way: as far as we know, the only version of the Enterprise D ever built (either in the real world or as a 3D model) which has the single window above the docking port, is Tobias's model. Is that right?

Doesn't that suggest very strong evidence that Tobias's 3D model IS in fact used in the bluray?

Close-up of the six-foot model in question, showing a single window.

 

[Trekker4747]

Oh my GOD?! What do I use D for?!

 

[Maxwell Everett]

Correct me if I'm wrong: the original 6-foot studio model has a series of pairs of windows above the docking port. Tobias's model AND the shots from the bluray that we THINK is a CGI 3D model both have a single window above the docking port, not 2 windows like the 6-footer.

To put it another way: as far as we know, the only version of the Enterprise D ever built (either in the real world or as a 3D model) which has the single window above the docking port, is Tobias's model. Is that right?

Doesn't that suggest very strong evidence that Tobias's 3D model IS in fact used in the bluray?

Close-up of the six-foot model in question, showing a single window.

In this shot, you can just faintly see where ILM filled in and painted over that window for Generations:

http://www.modelermagic.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/kg_1701d_studio_model-041.jpg

 

[GNDN]

Interesting tid-bit. Any idea why that window was painted out? But I thought we were talking about the single window directly above the docking ring, not 4 decks above it?

 

[bullethead]

Correct me if I'm wrong: the original 6-foot studio model has a series of pairs of windows above the docking port. Tobias's model AND the shots from the bluray that we THINK is a CGI 3D model both have a single window above the docking port, not 2 windows like the 6-footer.

To put it another way: as far as we know, the only version of the Enterprise D ever built (either in the real world or as a 3D model) which has the single window above the docking port, is Tobias's model. Is that right?

Doesn't that suggest very strong evidence that Tobias's 3D model IS in fact used in the bluray?

Close-up of the six-foot model in question, showing a single window.

In this shot, you can just faintly see where ILM filled in and painted over that window for Generations:

http://www.modelermagic.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/kg_1701d_studio_model-041.jpg

They did paint over a window, but it's way above the docking port.

 

[Maxwell Everett]

Close-up of the six-foot model in question, showing a single window.

In this shot, you can just faintly see where ILM filled in and painted over that window for Generations:

http://www.modelermagic.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/kg_1701d_studio_model-041.jpg

They did paint over a window, but it's way above the docking port.

 

[JJohnson]

With a bit of editing, you could show Picard and Riker jumping out of the way before the Admiral fires.

Oh come on George, now we know it's you.

While your comment made me burst out loud laughing, I guess I'm in the minority when I say that the original Star Wars trilogy came out great despite George's "vision", and that the new re-enhanced versions are actually closer to his original vision, despite not being to other people's standards. AND I think what the trilogy gained from the reimagining far outweight the little bit lost in certain parts, like Han shooting first.

I proudly have the Blue-Ray set and watch it regularly (I did loathe the added Jabba scenes in "A New Hope", and the "Noooooooo!!!!" from Darth Vader in ROTJ, but I'll take them if I get to see more Millenium Falcon and more Cloud City)

I can't be called a Star Wars fan by any stretch, but I would say that their remastering was well done - they removed the lens smudge from the air skiff thing on Jabba's planet digitally, made the cities come alive, and cleaned up the picture a lot. The planets looked a lot better in the newer versions, as did a lot of the space shots.

 

[bullethead]

In this shot, you can just faintly see where ILM filled in and painted over that window for Generations:

http://www.modelermagic.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/kg_1701d_studio_model-041.jpg

They did paint over a window, but it's way above the docking port.

While it's at the right height to be the bottom of a window, it's far too narrow and there isn't the same kind of overt disruption to the paint like there was with the other painted window. If anything, it looks like someone nicked the model while painting it or moving it.

 

[Trekker4747]

I'm getting a headache.

 

[RAMA]

Gone for almost a day and everyone is splitting hairs about missing a few windows, and who worked on what. Doesn't really matter that much to me. Some things will be revealed in time. Meanwhile, I changed my shipping on my order for faster delivery.

 

[22 Stars]

New Okuda interview part II now up:

http://trekmovie.com/2012/01/25/int...a-talk-star-trek-–-tng-the-next-level-part-2/

 

[RAMA]

http://www.imagebanana.com/view/x5ue7lsm/tngent_ortho_small_side1.jpg

How can anyone say that's not a beautiful ship???

RAMA

 

[Maxwell Everett]

While it's at the right height to be the bottom of a window, it's far too narrow and there isn't the same kind of overt disruption to the paint like there was with the other painted window. If anything, it looks like someone nicked the model while painting it or moving it.

Look, bullethead... it's the same exact miniature! The window was just filled in and painted over better:

http://tng.trekcore.com/bluray/exclusive_images/Farpoint/Farpoint10a.jpg

These two are the same physical model. There was only one six-footer.

 

[Trekker4747]

Gone for almost a day and everyone is splitting hairs about missing a few windows, and who worked on what. Doesn't really matter that much to me. Some things will be revealed in time. Meanwhile, I changed my shipping on my order for faster delivery.

With the shipping on my order I should get it on Tuesday, anyway, yeah there seems to be a lot of squabbling over what version of the ship is being used for the CGI, or the model, or whatever.

Who. Cares.

If the appearance or disappearance of a tiny window is going to make or break this for you then... I don't know what to say, honestly.

The ship looks good whether it's person A's CGI work, person B's CGI work, film of the 6' Model, film of the 4' model (though that model has a lot of problems), a CGI rendering of a specific model, or whatever... BAHH!!!!!

I mean, to liken this to TOS where the end-caps of the warp nacelles constantly changed inside episodes I can see the arguments on squabbling on that stuff and the choices the TOS-R people made to "fix" it. That's something rather major (and I really don't remember if they made the necessary fixes in TOS-R, and what they went with.)

But this?! You people are squabbling over tiny windows on a model! Something that you're not going to notice or really see in the grand scheme of things. Hell, I could see this argument making an ounce of sense if it was over the placement of the registry badge, the docking port, which side of the dorsal the narrower shuttle bay was placed on, etc.

This. Is. A. WINDOW!

A certain SNL sketch featuring William Shatner is coming to mind....

 

[RAMA]

Never saw this vid before:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QETWFk4MPo&feature=related

Slightly different perspective in motion.

 

[bullethead]

While it's at the right height to be the bottom of a window, it's far too narrow and there isn't the same kind of overt disruption to the paint like there was with the other painted window. If anything, it looks like someone nicked the model while painting it or moving it.

Look, bullethead... it's the same exact miniature! The window was just filled in and painted over better:

http://tng.trekcore.com/bluray/exclusive_images/Farpoint/Farpoint10a.jpg

These two are the same physical model. There was only one six-footer.

Why didn't you show that one earlier with the one with the barely visible nick in the paint? The picture you posted earlier was hardly conclusive evidence of a window being painted over.