That's fingerprints. Its not a full fingerprint scanner. Notice in the TNG example, and even the time on the Defiant when they ordered self destruct, their fingerprints were never fully down on the console. Just the points of their fingertips, and the computer still replied "Recognize Picard, Jean Luc.... Recognize Riker, William T."
I mean, it's possible that they aren't even doing a fingerprint scan, the computer is scanning the DNA in your hand, you just need to touch the screen so the computer knows "you" aren't just a jar of blood.
Perhaps we should take further discussion of the fingerprint scanner to Trek Tech. This is one of those cases where I think we're all going a little too far outside of the purposes of this thread. I don't mind casual discussion of a thing we see on the sets I replicate, but when we spend an entire page debating how a simple graphic works, it's a little too much. Thanks, everyone.
I just realized that unlike the TWOK-TVH versions, this version of the console couldn't be a simple "glue-on". The angle of the fingerprint scanner portion would have required that they cut a whole in the side of the set so that the console could recess properly - as well as to accomodate the backlighting for the displays. This may be why we don't see this appear on any of the standing sets used for TNG even if it would have made sense for them to.
For the simple reason that they added those panels for TFF; the movie bridge turbolift alcoves never appeared on any TNG set after "The Arsenal of Freedom" when we saw them on the Battle Bridge. And for a TV budget, it was probably just cheaper to make those static acrylic plant-on door controls they had all over the place. Donny established in his Enterprise-E thread that they made new 24th century LCARS for the panels, though nothing resembling the "fingerprint scanner" we see in TFF, TUC, and GEN.
I agree here. I'd like to see more of Donny's work on the TUC bridges rather than discuss biometrics. One thing to note is initially, they redressed the Enterprise-A bridge in TFF to become the Excelsior bridge in TUC for the Excelsior bridge shots before in turn adjusting it for the Enterprise-A bridge in the same movie! (they added the deck lighting ribs for the Ent-A when redressing).
Indeed. Also, of note. There were also some minor "upgrades" between the Excelsior shoot and the Enterprise-A shoot, other than the obvious room extension aft of the captain's chair and the unified helm station being replaced by TNG-style consoles: 1) The pinstriping on the Science and Communications consoles was extended to include the perimeter of those consoles' extensions: 2) Access panels being added to the front face of the aforementioned console extensions: 3) Canned spotlights added to the soffits above, as well as two addtiional light panels being added flanking the center light panel behind the captain, in place of the flanking unlit support braces: 4) And more of a "downgrade", but the structures to each side of the Excelsior viewscreen were removed to further differentiate the two bridges: Also, in addition to the viewscreen chronometer present above both ships' viewscreens, the Enterprise received two additional digital chronometers above the Science and Communication stations. It should be noted that for the Enterprise depiction, the set decorators added a lot of silver paint weathering and dirt and grime to the set to give some age to the Enterprise, even though it's debatable whether the Ent-A was actually older than the Excelsior. Or, rather, we can assume the Excelsior was given a minor refit/cleaning/polish before Sulu took command for it's 3 year cataloging assignment, and the Ent-A hadn't received the same treatment since that time, thus showing more age.
It's hard to say, because we're just talking bridge modules. E-A could be anything from a refitted TOS ship to a newbuild contemporary of the refit considering she has a modified version of the TMP bridge to start with. It's 6 years in between 5 and 6. My guess is the Enterprise's cushy next gen 5 bridge was completely torn up and rebuilt into it's skeletal version to fix a lot of the bugs. Excelsior was probably rocking the transwarp demo bridge until they gave that up later, and she got a copy of whatever bridge the Enterprise was using.
Eh, there are too many aesthetic differences between the interiors of the TFF Ent-A and the TUC Ent-A that go beyond the bridge. Metal deck plating replacing carpet throughout, overhead pipes in the corridors, the light grey walls replaced by a darker, bluer battleship grey. It's not just limited to a swap out of bridge modules. I can't sleep at night thinking that in TFF, the parts of the Enterprise we didn't see look like their darker, harder-edged counterparts in TUC. I have a few theories: 1) There was an extensive refit of the A after returning home from the Barrier. 2) There were so many issues with the A we saw in TFF, that after returning home from the Barrier, it was scrapped for parts, and another Connie that was in production was christened as the Enterprise-A for the crew to immediately transfer to. This newer Connie had the newer, more hard-edged aesthetic we see in TUC. 3) The TFF Enterprise-A and the TUC Enterprise-A exist in two completely separate parallel universes I have been debating all this in my head because I want to do two series of renders of other areas of the ship besides the bridge, but want to maintain the aesthetics of both films for each series. I want to visualize what a full sized engineering set would look like in the TFF aesthetic (light grey walls, wooden hand railing around the warpcore, minimalist detailing!) and also want to do the version of the engineering set we see in TUC (battleship grey walls, red hand railing, more visual interest!). 'm just trying to figure out the best way to justify the fact that there will be such a stark difference between the two to the people that will no doubt point out that inconsistency
I kind of like this theory the best. They tried a bridge module swap (which explains the change from TVH to TFF, which I guess is supposed to be a few weeks later, though it's never really made clear), and when it turned out that the whole ship was a lemon, they did what you're suggesting.
This would also explain the entirely different dedication plaques we see between the two films. If it was the same ship, why two different plaques?
So what are the differences between the one you made here and the one in TUC (other than the placement and the fact there's now just one)?
The coloring. In TFF it’s obviously copper-ish, whereas the one in TUC is more a good color with black lettering, matching the Excelsior plaque save for the border around the lower text. Unless there is a border on the TUC A plaque as well? It’s hard to make out due to resolution. God, if only that recent 4K box set was six movies instead of four
Ugh, you're right I forgot about all that. On the other hand, a casual glance at TUC screencaps makes it look like TNG/TFF corridors were retrofitted, so I think you're on to something with option 1. Problems do arise trying to match the TMP corridors out of 4 with TFF/TUC corridors though, unless that was also a complete tear-down and rebuild as extensive as the 18 month refit of the Enterprise in the first place. Or you can just believe all the unseen sets out of the 4 refit never happened...
All of The Motion Picture sets were repainted for Star Trek 4, but it's very distinct. There was evidently red carpeting as part of the addition. The corridors, engineering, and the bridge received upgrades at least- all of them based on The Motion Picture sets and equipment.
Did they, though? The sets as they appeared in both Roddenberry's intro for "The Cage" and the Good Morning America stuff filmed to promote TVH didn't look like they'd had much work done. The red carpet may have just been put down to cover up some of the wear and tear.
Well, also keep in mind that there is a six year gap between TFF and TUC. A lot can happen in six years. It's possible the changes happened a bit more gradually than usual.
I’ve never bought this. The difference in aesthetic between the two films is stark and each look is unified within itself. Not “well let’s rip up the carpet and add metal plating this year, paint the walls battleship grey next year, then add all this extra lighting and piping and red vinyl the next, and oh look! It just happens to look dark and militaristic now rather than the bright and warm starship we began with.” This is more “Starfleet has come up with a new interior scheme for its starship interiors going forward. All new ships constructed and chosen ships receiving a refit this year will get the new scheme”. In the case of the Enterprise-A, whether we believe it was part of a refit or another ship altogether is the question. I think we need to remember that there is a place for artistry in starship interior design. It doesn’t always look one way or change to a different way due to function, but because someone designed it to look a way. In my head canon, these changes are part of a unified aesthetic direction mandated by Starfleet, with perhaps some options chosen by the commanding officer or some designated person in the ship’s crew to handle such matters. Kirk may have gotten to choose red vinyl for his bridge, while Sulu chose blue. Anyone with Navy experience have any knowledge on such matters as decor/aesthetics on a ship and if they happen to change through a ship’s lifetime?
I wonder who thought those giant foot/castor covers on the Excelsior bridge chairs was a good idea. Also, I always thought the TFF bridge aesthetic (as far as real-world production) was due to Shatner liking the updated TNG look and, of course, using Zimmerman to do the sets, but it just occurred to me that if they wanted to use all the other TNG sets without dramatically changing their look, for budget or because TNG didn't want their sets messed with too much, then they'd have to bring the bridge in line with the overall look to some degree. So they embraced it and really went with it. But then again, we don't actually see the slightly modified sets that much in the film. Just some of the corridors and sickbay, etc. They did do-over the transporter room fairly significantly.