And is that angle a neutral angle or some weird underneath behind angle?
Have those who disliked the Abramsprise finally accepted design?
- Thread starter Chrisisall
- Start date
- Status
Semantics. Plenty of photographers will describe 'eye level' or there or thereabouts as neutral. You can disgree about the shot being roughly eye-level if you like, but it's not really that important now is it.
The point was it was the big reveal of the ship in space from a familiar (facepalm) angle and it looked like crap.
Last edited:
However you feel about the JJprise design, know that it could have been alot worse.
Worse? It looks much better that way! The third side view is almost perfect (the neck is too thin), and it even has red bussards and a golden deflector dish! I really dig the front view.
And that's obviously a matter of opinion. I thought it looked great - but far better when the same shot was actually seen moving in the film as opposed to that digital still.
Pretty much fooling yourself? Just because the camera makes a slight pan... the angle is still the same.
No, just stating his opinion. And the camera does a pan and push in, not just a pan.
Oh, and the new Enterprise is a nicely designed ship. I can't wait to get my hands on the new Art of the Film book, to see how much effort was put into designing her.
However you feel about the JJprise design, know that it could have been alot worse.
Worse? It looks much better that way! The third side view is almost perfect (the neck is too thin), and it even has red bussards and a golden deflector dish! I really dig the front view.
I'm quite keen on the middle design (the contours of the secondary hull scream 1960s retro-modern for me, if that's what powers that be really wanted), but I dig the front view, too.
That reminds me, despite the E-D/Galaxy being my favorite ship, I always thought it looked weird from an underneath-forward angle myself. The Intrepid is pretty sleek, but from some angles it looks like it's wearing an Asian farmer's straw hat (as opposed to the sombrero).
The Intrepid looks like a giant butt plug.
number6
Vice Admiral
And you know this because......
number6
Vice Admiral
As an unabashed connoiseur of porn, I have yet to see hot teen bitches shoving Voyager into an orafice.
No, coke spoon.
number6
Vice Admiral
You can't use a coke spoon as a butt plug.
You must have fallen asleep during the engineering scenes.
The passage of time is not going to change my opinion that the new design is butt ugly. That being said, we are stuck with Frankenprise until it's time to crash it into a planet.
Until then, the TOS refit remains the finest design.
However you feel about the JJprise design, know that it could have been alot worse.
You're Absolutely Right(TM). The final version is far, far more impressive and good-looking than these.
The STXI Enterprise is the "least ugly" Constitution for me. It's an alright design, but when your initial material is the TOS Ent, there's only so much you can do to try make it look good without radically changing it (which, personally, I would've been fine with...though I know it wasn't really possible).
What gets me is this bizarre dichotomy on the insides. The bridge and hallways have this very sharp, white,black, blue "future clean" look to them, which I've gotten used to. But the engineering looks like maybe 2 steps up from a 1940s submarine, just....really goddamn huge. Those two looks do NOT mesh. At all.
I love the nacelles (I think they're the best part of the redesign), but I think they should be farther apart in width, farther back (with the pylons more like the Ent-E's) and think the neck should be farther up the engineering hull. Additionally, I think the deflector should've had the TMP-TUC look instead of the silly-looking dish.
At the end of the day, I can take it or leave it. I don't hate it, it's definitely a massive step up design-wise from anything in TOS. But it still doesn't touch the better 24th-century designs. I mostly agree with Saito S when it comes to this ship.
What gets me is this bizarre dichotomy on the insides. The bridge and hallways have this very sharp, white,black, blue "future clean" look to them, which I've gotten used to. But the engineering looks like maybe 2 steps up from a 1940s submarine, just....really goddamn huge. Those two looks do NOT mesh. At all.
I love the nacelles (I think they're the best part of the redesign), but I think they should be farther apart in width, farther back (with the pylons more like the Ent-E's) and think the neck should be farther up the engineering hull. Additionally, I think the deflector should've had the TMP-TUC look instead of the silly-looking dish.
At the end of the day, I can take it or leave it. I don't hate it, it's definitely a massive step up design-wise from anything in TOS. But it still doesn't touch the better 24th-century designs. I mostly agree with Saito S when it comes to this ship.
I like it personally. Initially i was worried because it looked like there was no aft warp arc, but there is. The nacelles are too close together though and the placement of the secondary hull seems too far foward.
She's a beauty though, and seemingly tough as nails.
She's a beauty though, and seemingly tough as nails.
I'm fine with the outside...it's the inside, mostly the engineering areas, that I don't like.
I will always call the eningeering section in this one, the "Axis Chemicals Engineering".
I will always call the eningeering section in this one, the "Axis Chemicals Engineering".
- Status
Similar threads
