Is the bridge at a funny angle?

[Mres_was_framed!]

here was talk about Spock’s hand on a ledge (there for shooting film) but TAS had a doorway there too IIRC.

Could you explain this, please?

Sadly I've never seen it written anywhere and even the earliest drawings show the Bridge in the classic layout.
However it is a reasonable inference, a practical reality of filming which MJ would have been aware of from the start

with reverse decals applied to complete the illusion of traveling from right to left.

You know, something about this does not make sense to me. So this has been said:

-The ship was apparently most or entirely filmed from one side, and reverse decals were used so that flipped film could be used to show the ship flying the other direction.

-The model was modified prior to filming the series be removing the spikes, using a smaller defector dish and a smaller Bridge, etc.

Then how did "Mirror, Mirror" get a shot of the "pilot" version of the ship with the large deflector dish, bridge and spikes, from basically the exact same angle as an existing stock shot, with REVERSED DECALS, during the second season?

 

[CorporalCaptain]

TAS did not have a doorway beside Spock's science station.

 

[Maurice]

You know, something about this does not make sense to me. So this has been said:

-The ship was apparently most or entirely filmed from one side, and reverse decals were used so that flipped film could be used to show the ship flying the other direction.

The 11' model was exclusively filmed from the starboard side.

-The model was modified prior to filming the series be removing the spikes, using a smaller defector dish and a smaller Bridge, etc.

Then how did "Mirror, Mirror" get a shot of the "pilot" version of the ship with the large deflector dish, bridge and spikes, from basically the exact same angle as an existing stock shot, with REVERSED DECALS, during the second season?

Because those shots were made with the ship in its 2nd pilot configuration before Datin and Co. made the series changes.

 

[ZapBrannigan]

Then how did "Mirror, Mirror" get a shot of the "pilot" version of the ship with the large deflector dish, bridge and spikes, from basically the exact same angle as an existing stock shot, with REVERSED DECALS, during the second season?

Maurice must be right, the pilot-version shot was pre-existing footage that "Mirror, Mirror" made use of.

Also note, the pre-switcheroo ship was old footage of the pilot version, too. And that piece of left-to-right stock footage was of course seen throughout the series:

https://tos.trekcore.com/hd/albums/2x04hd/mirrormirrorhd0062.jpg
https://tos.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/2x04/TOS_2x10_MirrorMirror0021-Trekpulse.jpg
https://tos.trekcore.com/hd/albums/2x04hd/mirrormirrorhd0064.jpg

 

[Mytran]

Could you explain this, please?

The second exit in TAS was not on the same side of the Bridge as Spock's station. However, since the Bridge set was built to allow individual segments to be removed (to make filming easier) and several episodes show Spock with his hand curled around the edge of the console (showing that there's a gap in-universe) some fans have postulated that there might be an additional exit to the Bridge behind one of the lesser-used consoles. Here's how that might look in the TAs configuration, with both a full wedge removed (as on the filming set) and a theoretical half wedge removed which makes for a more normal sized doorway:

 

[UssGlenn]

(showing that there's a gap in-universe)

Yes, but it also shows the floor structure is made from wooden 2x4s.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

The shots in TAS that show the bridge with both exits visible at the same time, or on the same drawing in one panned shot, are rare. But here is one:

https://tas.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/blu-ray/101-BR/beyondthefartheststarhd0384.jpg
https://tas.trekcore.com/gallery/thumbnails.php?album=41&page=22

You can see that the half-station on that side is indeed eliminated, as indicated in @Mytran's plan. By the way, in the alternate configuration with only a half-wedge removed next to the science station, I'd propose combining the two half-stations on that side into a single station, and moving the chairs towards the science station. In other words, it would just eliminate the half-station, as on the engineering side.

P.S. At the beginning of "The Doomsday Machine," if you count the stations on the side of the bridge next to the science station as Kirk walks around the bridge, you can see it's the wrong number. They put the bridge back together incorrectly for that shot. There are other examples of the bridge having been put back together incorrectly in TOS, such as that relatively famous scene when Chekov is converted into a polyhedron in "By Any Other Name."

 

[Mytran]

Yes, but it also shows the floor structure is made from wooden 2x4s.

Nah, that's just the pattern on the carpet

You can see that the half-station on that side is indeed eliminated, as indicated in @Mytran's plan. By the way, in the alternate configuration with only a half-wedge removed next to the science station, I'd propose combining the two half-stations on that side into a single station, and moving the chairs towards the science station. In other words, it would just eliminate the half-station, as on the engineering side.

Nice idea, although we see in both TOS and TAS plenty of shots which show the consoles on the starboard side of the Bridge all in place. If I were redesigning the Bridge from scratch then there could be exits taking the place of both half-stations either side of the viewscreen. In fact, this is what the NX01 Bridge did, more or less!

P.S. At the beginning of "The Doomsday Machine," if you count the stations on the side of the bridge next to the science station as Kirk walks around the bridge, you can see it's the wrong number. They put the bridge back together incorrectly for that shot.

Good catch! I suppose the director just didn't want Kirk to have to walk too far to reach Spock's station. Or perhaps Spock was just conducting his scans from the Navigational Subsystems station?

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Nah, that's just the pattern on the carpet
Nice idea, although we see in both TOS and TAS plenty of shots which show the consoles on the starboard side of the Bridge all in place.

Totally.

If I were redesigning the Bridge from scratch then there could be exits taking the place of both half-stations either side of the viewscreen.

According to Sternbach's plans, the TNG bridge had six exits: three elevator exits (including one to a turbo dedicated for travel to the battle bridge), one to the ready room, one to a corridor that leads to the conference lounge, and one beside that exit to the head.

Oh, one other idea popped into my head that I may as well mention. An idea that might satisfy the literalists who need to take what's shown on screen literally would be that when Spock had his hand over "the ledge," the navigation sub-systems station was down and being swapped out for new components.

 

[plynch]

Anyone have a quick link to that Doomsday walk in screencaps?

 

[scotpens]

Yes, but it also shows the floor structure is made from wooden 2x4s.

Although that wouldn't have been nearly as noticeable back in the days of CRT TV overscan.

 

[ZapBrannigan]

Anyone have a quick link to that Doomsday walk in screencaps?

You can see it at the beginning and the end of the episode. Kirk walks by the main viewing screen and around to Spock, but he gets there one station too early. Spock is set up where the perimeter navigation station should be.

https://tos.trekcore.com/hd/albums/2x06hd/thedoomsdaymachinehd0050.jpg
https://tos.trekcore.com/hd/albums/2x06hd/thedoomsdaymachinehd0051.jpg
https://tos.trekcore.com/hd/albums/2x06hd/thedoomsdaymachinehd0053.jpg

It was probably just a lot easier to light the shot, to keep Kirk lit as he walked, if the trip was shorter. And if I didn't notice the cheat for decades as an obsessed fan, it's safe to say very few viewers did. In first run, almost nobody.

 

[plynch]

I LOVE when I get to see the other stations well (rare) -- and I never noticed this either. Too caught up in the story and acting: what a great show! My first love.

 

[J.T.B.]

And if I didn't notice the cheat for decades as an obsessed fan, it's safe to say very few viewers did. In first run, almost nobody.

"Hey, did it seem like there were some bridge sections missing there?"
"I don't know, I'll have to remember to look again in the summer!"

 

[Tallguy]

Then how did "Mirror, Mirror" get a shot of the "pilot" version of the ship with the large deflector dish, bridge and spikes, from basically the exact same angle as an existing stock shot, with REVERSED DECALS, during the second season?

This was already answered but to reiterate: It is astonishing how much ship footage from the pilot is used throughout the show. The very last shot of the series? From Where No Man Has Gone Before. The second and third season titles? Entirely from the two pilots.

 

[David cgc]

Although that wouldn't have been nearly as noticeable back in the days of CRT TV overscan.

Reminds me of an old post I just saw yesterday, screencaps from the Netflix stream of "Malcolm in the Middle," which was put up in 16x9 even though the show was shot for 4x3: There's no such thing as "the safe area." If it hits the sensor (or film, in this case) there's a chance the audience will see it.

 

[Mytran]

Although that wouldn't have been nearly as noticeable back in the days of CRT TV overscan.

That overscan hides many sins, but not the fact that the handrail is one section too short

 

[yotsuya]

These are the reasons I don't take what we see on screen too literally. Inconsistencies and shortcuts and other issues. We have plenty of wide shots of the bridge from nearly every angle where we can see what the bridge is supposed to look like. These short clips where things are odd don't match what we see elsewhere or the plans we have. I'll stick to the plans and the shots that match the plans.

 

[ZapBrannigan]

There's no such thing as "the safe area." If it hits the sensor (or film, in this case) there's a chance the audience will see it.

Back in the days of actual film reels being shipped to theaters (before digital projectors), the projector had a little plate that could be inserted in front of the film, with a slot in it the shape of the intended wide-screen image. This tiny plate covered the top and bottom of each film frame, so only the middle of the image would shine through the slot.

And that's how some wide-screen formats were projected. The whole frame was exposed during production, but the finished film was projected such that you would only see that middle slot, within which the movie was composed.

If a projectionist took the plate out, or just looked at the film frames outside the projector, he could see the top and bottom of the frame. The example I heard about was a movie in which Julia Roberts takes a shower. A projectionist felt compelled to look at the whole frame, and he saw that below the wide screen image, she was actually wearing a tube top. And that's something outside "the safe zone" better left unseen.

A few years ago people were yucking it up on the Internet about what an incompetent director Ed Wood was, because one of his films had a scene in an airliner cockpit and you could plainly see the overhead microphone in that shot, just hanging there in plain view for the whole scene. Ha ha. But the film had been shot for wide screen, and the theater projector would have covered up the top and bottom of the frame. The 4:3 TV version wasn't a proper pan and scan job; they just showed the whole frame, a slapdash decision that destroyed the composition of the whole movie.

 

[scotpens]

Back in the days of actual film reels being shipped to theaters (before digital projectors), the projector had a little plate that could be inserted in front of the film, with a slot in it the shape of the intended wide-screen image. This tiny plate covered the top and bottom of each film frame, so only the middle of the image would shine through the slot.

And that's how some wide-screen formats were projected. The whole frame was exposed during production, but the finished film was projected such that you would only see that middle slot, within which the movie was composed.

That's called "open matte," and it's how most American movies were composed starting around 1954 (other than movies made in wide film formats like 70mm or anamorphic widescreen like CinemaScope).

If a projectionist took the plate out, or just looked at the film frames outside the projector, he could see the top and bottom of the frame. The example I heard about was a movie in which Julia Roberts takes a shower. A projectionist felt compelled to look at the whole frame, and he saw that below the wide screen image, she was actually wearing a tube top. And that's something outside "the safe zone" better left unseen.

Something similar happened in the opening scene of Bonnie and Clyde, in which Faye Dunaway is supposedly nude. In the full-frame image, Ms. Dunaway's 1960s-style bikini panties are visible at the bottom of the frame. Kind of spoils the illusion.

A few years ago people were yucking it up on the Internet about what an incompetent director Ed Wood was, because one of his films had a scene in an airliner cockpit and you could plainly see the overhead microphone in that shot, just hanging there in plain view for the whole scene. Ha ha. But the film had been shot for wide screen, and the theater projector would have covered up the top and bottom of the frame. The 4:3 TV version wasn't a proper pan and scan job; they just showed the whole frame, a slapdash decision that destroyed the composition of the whole movie.

That was S.O.P. before modern digital HDTV. In the days of CRT television screens with their 1.33:1 aspect ratio, nearly all movies were shown full-frame on TV. Pan-and-scan was used for films shot in anamorphic widescreen (e.g. CinemaScope) or wide film formats. The alternative was "letterboxing," which shrunk down the wide image and had black bars at the top and bottom of the screen.