Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!
I miss the days when behind-the-scenes production photos involved people working with elaborate miniatures and puppets and glass paintings and cool toys like that. It used to be that the process of creating an FX scene was at least as interesting to watch as the final scene. Now it's all just people sitting in front of monitors, which isn't all that engaging.
I enjoy watching featurettes on how ILM or others like them do their work. There is a lot of creativity, art, hard work and cool stuff involved in making things work even with computers. It is still fascinating to watch.
I suppose you are generally right when it comes to still photos. Though what's shown in those monitors can still be interesting sometimes.
But things become more equal when watching a 20 minute video of how it is done.
I miss the days when behind-the-scenes production photos involved people working with elaborate miniatures and puppets and glass paintings and cool toys like that. It used to be that the process of creating an FX scene was at least as interesting to watch as the final scene. Now it's all just people sitting in front of monitors, which isn't all that engaging.
Here's an old HBO movie intro from 1983, done the old fashioned way: miniatures, stop-motion, optical effects. They had a short behind the scenes documentary back then that I must have watched a hundred times. Recorded it on my Beta machine, dontcha know.
As good as CGI is on screen, the sad thing is they'll never be anything to display in the Smithsonian (sigh).
A post-production picture and one movie photo may give away a bit of the sequence of events in the film. I'll put it in spoilers, just in case I'm right.
In the fist set of high resolution photos Salvor posted, the fourth one over is of Kirk and Marcus. Kirk is in uniform and has obvious cuts around his right eye. In the set of post-production pictures Salvor posted, the third picture over is of Kirk in his civvies with the same cuts. Could be that's from while he was on Kronos with Spock and Uhura. So, maybe Kirk gets his command back after losing it. Or he's at least back in service.
(The pink "beam" and other stuff in the shot on the big screen must be reflections -- note the pattern showing on the right side of the screen is the same as the pattern painted on the office wall. They're not in the shot on the smaller monitors.)
A post-production picture and one movie photo may give away a bit of the sequence of events in the film. I'll put it in spoilers, just in case I'm right.
In the fist set of high resolution photos Salvor posted, the fourth one over is of Kirk and Marcus. Kirk is in uniform and has obvious cuts around his right eye. In the set of post-production pictures Salvor posted, the third picture over is of Kirk in his civvies with the same cuts. Could be that's from while he was on Kronos with Spock and Uhura. So, maybe Kirk gets his command back after losing it. Or he's at least back in service.
(The pink "beam" and other stuff in the shot on the big screen must be reflections -- note the pattern showing on the right side of the screen is the same as the pattern painted on the office wall. They're not in the shot on the smaller monitors.)
I'd have to agree about the command thing. To copy/paste what I wrote in another thread a few days ago
They are at Nibiru doing their thing while Harrison is back on Earth blowing cities up.
Kirk and crew go back to Earth, there he loses command and they go rogue hunting Harrison on Qo'nos. They capture him, and then Kirk gets him in the brig of the Enterprise and somehow regains his command.
After that more things happen we are not yet aware of and haven't seen in the trailers.
I suppose so. I just read an article about 3D printers in The Washington Post, yesterday. Didn't know a thing about them before that. Fascinating and amazing technology.
Except 3D printing is more expensive and more time consuming. Plus, it's at a level so primitive that extensive detail can't be put in unless you have an insanely scaled up model, which then wouldn't be able to print because of size limitations. The colors on such prints don't come out reliably, the material is typically one type of material, and things like lights and glass would be much more difficult to achieve.
^The state of the art is advancing so quickly that I'm sure the problems you cite will be tackled within a few years, and the cost will also go down. I wasn't proposing something for next week, but just as a general thought for the future.
Besides -- "more time-consuming" than what? Building a physical model the old-fashioned way? I hardly think so. Just so we're clear, I was responding to the lament that with digital effects there was nothing physical to put on display in a museum. I was suggesting that a digitally rendered computer model could be "displayed" physically by 3D printing.
A big computer with a the original 3D mesh of the ship rendered in real-time (on the uber-computers of the future) where you can zoom right in, look all around and play animations of the phasers firing, the shuttlebay opening, the nacelles and deflector going to warp mode etc.
The dinosaur sculptures they display in museums are just replicas too. And there's a replica of the Wright Flyer on display at the preserved Wright Brothers' workshop in Detroit, with the real Flyer being in the Smithsonian. Plenty of things in museums are replicas. So it's not unprecedented.
Yeah, but wasn't the idea that it's cool that at the Smithsonian is an actual production model of the Enterprise? That's something that will never happen, and I doubt they'd care for a replica of something originally digital.
^All I'm saying is that there's precedent. I was responding to a specific post saying there'd be nothing to display in a museum with all-digital FX. I simply suggested a possible way in which a museum could have something to display if it wanted such a thing. I made no claims about the realistic likelihood of such an event.
