Galileo 7 TOS-R...simply glorious...

[RAMA]

http://trekmovie.com/2007/09/11/images-from-galileo-seven-remastered/#comments

 

[WalkinMan]

Wow that looks impressive, definitely catching this ep. Although I do remember the 'ground' action all too well.

 

[Alyssa]

WOW cool effect. Also a great Spock ep.
:thumbsup: :thumbsup:

 

[ancient]

Those clouds look pretty neat.

Not to nitpick, but I don't like the new hangar with the extra lights where the main cieling support used to be and the extra window thing.

 

[Christopher]

It's neat that they've actually made the "quasar" Murasaki 312 look somewhat like an actual microquasar might. It even looks as though they've included (in the upper portion of the cloud) the normal star providing the material accreting around the black hole. And yet they've managed to present a plausible depiction of the phenomenon in a way that still captures the flavor of the original swirly green cloud. Very well-done.

 

[Professor Moriarty]

ancient said:
Those clouds look pretty neat.

Not to nitpick, but I don't like the new hangar with the extra lights where the main cieling support used to be and the extra window thing.

I still think the aft control rooms look like they're melting.

 

[GodThingFormerly]

Professor Moriarty said:
I still think the aft control rooms look like they're melting.

Is that because CBS Digital fucked up the actual shuttlebay model or did they render it with the wrong virtual lens?

TGT

 

[Professor Moriarty]

This is pure speculation, but it looks to me like lens distortion caused by using a short focal length to make the shuttlebay seem larger. Everything has a slight "fish eye" look, imo.

 

[ancient]

Professor Moriarty said:
I still think the aft control rooms look like they're melting.

They are, it's not an illusion caused by the curvy room.

Regardless of the reason, it's pretty funny.

 

[ancient]

Professor Moriarty said:
This is pure speculation, but it looks to me like lens distortion caused by using a short focal length to make the shuttlebay seem larger. Everything has a slight "fish eye" look, imo.

I checked this, but none of the other straight lines in the images appear to curve at all. The beams and side booths are totally straight, as is the side of the Copernicus, the red square on the floor, etc.

 

[cooleddie74]

AWESOME new quasar and shuttle effects!

 

[Ronald Held]

Is there a VFX reel on Youtube?

 

[Mysterion]

ancient said:

Professor Moriarty said:
This is pure speculation, but it looks to me like lens distortion caused by using a short focal length to make the shuttlebay seem larger. Everything has a slight "fish eye" look, imo.

I checked this, but none of the other straight lines in the images appear to curve at all. The beams and side booths are totally straight, as is the side of the Copernicus, the red square on the floor, etc.

I think that they've just re-designed the observation windows onthe control booths. They were flat before, not affording the controller a side-view back to the other end of the bay.

 

[Outpost4]

Professor Moriarty said:
This is pure speculation, but it looks to me like lens distortion caused by using a short focal length to make the shuttlebay seem larger. Everything has a slight "fish eye" look, imo.

Wait...
...please pardon my ignorance...
...and forget this can't be true if all the other edges in the picture are straight, which another post points out...
...but this is a CGI shot. What do lenses have to do with anything?

 

[Christopher]

Outpost4 said:
Wait...
...please pardon my ignorance...
...and forget this can't be true if all the other edges in the picture are straight, which another post points out...
...but this is a CGI shot. What do lenses have to do with anything?

CGI shots are designed to appear as though they were physical scenes shot through camera lenses, so that they won't clash oddly with surrounding shots that actually are physical scenes shot through camera lenses. There's always a "virtual camera" that's part of the equations used in creating the shot, complete with lens type and focal length and exposure and all that. A lot of CG shots even introduce a simulated lens flare or other "flaws" to make them look more like the real thing.

 

[Outpost4]

Thank you for the explanation, Christopher.

 

[FalTorPan]

Professor Moriarty said:

ancient said:
Those clouds look pretty neat.

Not to nitpick, but I don't like the new hangar with the extra lights where the main cieling support used to be and the extra window thing.

I still think the aft control rooms look like they're melting.

I do not believe they realize the gravity of their situation.

 

[RAMA]

The God Thing said:

Professor Moriarty said:
I still think the aft control rooms look like they're melting.

Is that because CBS Digital fucked up the actual shuttlebay model or did they render it with the wrong virtual lens?

TGT

From what I understand, the original model of the shuttlebay in the orignal series didn't have the right perspective to begin with and was corrected in the CGI version.

RAMA

 

[Outpost4]

Professor Moriarty said:
I still think the aft control rooms look like they're melting.

After 41 years you'd be sagging, too.

 

[trevanian]

RAMA said:

The God Thing said:

Professor Moriarty said:
I still think the aft control rooms look like they're melting.

Is that because CBS Digital fucked up the actual shuttlebay model or did they render it with the wrong virtual lens?

TGT

From what I understand, the original model of the shuttlebay in the orignal series didn't have the right perspective to begin with and was corrected in the CGI version.

RAMA

Ass-backwards thinking, if true. When fx vendors created a cg e-e for INS, they made sure to include the tiny flaws in the ILM miniature structure to keep it from looking too CG like. Now they 'enhance' TOS by taking the opposite approach. Sounds a lil' wonky.