Jayru (JSnaith's) 3D Trek
- Thread starter JSnaith
- Start date
Thank you - may have an update for later today, but don't take that as a promise :-)
Tell me when you are going to christen the ship, and I will bring the champagne (Chateau Picard 2264)
I will let you know...
Small updates, still playing with the new texture maps -
Still work to do before I start on the new name and reg tags, thinking of changing the main deflector. Have some ideas. More, however, tomorrow :-)
Comments and thoughts welcome ;-)
Morning all,
updates - new deflector dish -
And the pylons are complete -
That marks the end of the rebuild phase, and I can now get the name on the ship...
I'm partial to a Chateau Picard 2200 ;-)
More later.
updates - new deflector dish -
And the pylons are complete -
That marks the end of the rebuild phase, and I can now get the name on the ship...
I'm partial to a Chateau Picard 2200 ;-)
More later.
Personally, I liked the deflector dish the way it was. But that’s just my opinion. Everything else looks amazing
The previous version gets my vote too, for what that's worth
Thank you both. It's something I'm still playing with, something I'm still refining.
More later.
IMO: The innermost part of the deflector looks undersized versus the overall size of the opening. The original had a much larger flat plane at the back, and IMO that looks better.Further refined -
comments, always welcome, more later :-)
I'll run out a side-by-side of the two together, but the inner "plane" is around the same size in both. Stylistically I'm echoing Andrew Probert's original design for the Ambassador Class.
From an in-universe perspective the Ranger Class (which this still is), sits between the Ambassador and Galaxy Class, so features ideas from both. The USS Ranger will stand as it is, whereas the USS Excalibur will exist as a variant, on the premise that no two ships are exactly the same (an idea from aridas sofia, and one I am happy to run with). The Ranger may well have been a test bed for the type of nav deflector the Galaxy Class would end up having, whereas the Excalibur was more about the nacelles. From an engineering POV, you don't put all your eggs in one basket, iterative designs and changes are very much the way things are done in the real world.
As for the actual deflector dish - this idea is more that, a dish, rather than a flat panel as used by the Galaxy Class. The actual evolution of navigational deflector dish design is interesting and rather inconsistent. My guess re all that, is that Starfleet uses different technologies when building some ships, so hence the various designs that exist at once. (See the evolution from Galaxy, Defiant, Intrepid, Sovereign for ref). Or that different hull shapes require different types of nav deflectors, which would explain the wildly different ideas that all co-exist.
It's interesting to think about.
As I say, I'll run up a side-by-side of the two deflector designs (Ranger and Excalibur) later. Dealing with burn-out at the moment after a hectic few days. Autism can be... "interesting" at times.
More later.
Yeah, I think I'm finding myself casting my hat in the ring on the side of the original one too (on the left), like some of the other folks here. The experiment of the new one is interesting, and it by no means looks bad, but I guess I'm something of a traditionalist when it comes to some of the design elements. It is what it is, I guess.
As I've always said, though, at the end of the day, it's your design. You do what you want with it.
As I've always said, though, at the end of the day, it's your design. You do what you want with it.
Tweaked the new one slightly to make the middle bigger
Comments welcome, more soon ;-)
Seeing them side-by-side it looks more like an optical illusion that is the problem. The original flat dish appears larger overall because the newer dish seems to focus on the small flat piece in the middle even though the entirety of the "dish" incorporates the entire cavity. Like 137th Gebirg says, it is your design and you can leave as-is as an evolution like you described earlier...
Seeing them side-by-side it looks more like an optical illusion that is the problem. The original flat dish appears larger overall because the newer dish seems to focus on the small flat piece in the middle even though the entirety of the "dish" incorporates the entire cavity. Like 137th Gebirg says, it is your design and you can leave as-is as an evolution like you described earlier...
It's not locked and is something I can come back to. For the moment however...
More later ;-)
^^^ Oh, I love that!
They would have a hell of a time reproducing that gradient fill on either a mission patch or challenge coin, though...
They would have a hell of a time reproducing that gradient fill on either a mission patch or challenge coin, though...
It was fun creating it.^^^ Oh, I love that!
They would have a hell of a time reproducing that gradient fill on either a mission patch or challenge coin, though...
I can tell. Looks professionally done.
I've made a few myself for my clients over the years (mostly challenge coins) and it's always a fun departure from my full-time coding job. Did you use Illustrator or Corel? I'm an Illustrator guy, myself.
I've made a few myself for my clients over the years (mostly challenge coins) and it's always a fun departure from my full-time coding job. Did you use Illustrator or Corel? I'm an Illustrator guy, myself.
