Maverisms's WIPs

[Maverisms]

I decided to open up a thread for my stuff, as my favorite project, while related, isn't exactly on topic in the DNTE thread. Beyond that, my other works really don't deserve their own space. I'm still new and shiny.

As a quick rundown on what to expect, I'll be dropping updates on my USS Renown, inspired by Adam Ihle's winning Enterprise, my work on backstept's Carina Class, and what I've done for AzurianStarfyre's DNTE entry. Also on the table but not yet started; a light cruiser companion to the Renown, a possible Vulcan Starfleet design, and a version of Adam's design.

I've also been thinking about starfleet patrol ships for system defense but LordSarvain's design is so awesome I've tabled the notion until I have a lot more in the way of personal inspiration.

To start, Azurian's ship.

When I first saw this design I didn't like it much. It was a bit too TOS for my tastes. Not that being TOS is bad, just that Contest was to design the NEXT Enterprise.

With plenty of time to wait for the announcement, I got to kinda like the ship on it's own merits, but I was never sure it would transition nicely from line drawing to 3 dimensions. Personally, I think it came of quite well.

I'd break my arm patting myself on the back for that, if it we me. Very little in this is me. There are places, such as the the nacelle interface with the pylons, and the saucer's profile, where all of the plan views didn't match up, but in each case I let the original drawings act as decider--picking the solution that most of the drawings agreed with.

While the point of this thread is obviously to show my work, the point of this work is to test how accurately I can reproduce someone else's work. Seems like a handy skill to have, despite the fact that I probably won't use it much.

 

[aridas sofia]

I really like what you've done. It does capture an "evolved" TOS feeling, sharing that ship's multiple good viewing angles. And for what it's worth, I think being able to realize another's vision is just as creditable as coming up with one yourself. The contribution is the thing, whether you're the visionary or the realizer.

 

[JES]

New and shiny, perhaps, but capable. Your entry for the DTNE contest shows that you do have some skill.

 

[Wingsley]

I partially agree with Aridas. One thing that post-TOS / post-TMP starships have largely omitted was a thinner neck. The great thing about the "original" Matt Jefferies-designed starship was that you could see plenty of deep space background through the ship. I won't hide that my favorite TOS view of the Enterprise was the Year 2 / Year 3 aft angle, which gave the ship a special sense of realism.

With Excelsior, starship design seems to have drifted away from that, and that's a shame. The Galaxy-class Enterprise-D started to remedy this issue with a cobra-like neck, but that angle wasn't utilized enough. So it was no surprise when the Enterprise-E fattened up the neck and ruined that angle again.

 

[Maverisms]

I really like what you've done. It does capture an "evolved" TOS feeling, sharing that ship's multiple good viewing angles. And for what it's worth, I think being able to realize another's vision is just as creditable as coming up with one yourself. The contribution is the thing, whether you're the visionary or the realizer.

When I first saw the design I thought, "meh, too stretched, it won't work." But then I started imagining the angles, and I came to pretty much the same idea as you.. it might just have a lot of good poses.

And, in a not-so-rare moment of private humility, I asked, "who am I to judge, without putting in the effort?"

Then it kinda spiraled out of control. I've spent years developing my modeling skills, because I always wanted to draw, but I'm too perfectionist to take the time to learn. in 3d the curve from rank newbe to "that looks okay" is really quite short. Turns out the curve from there to really good is much steeper, but it fits my mentality. But the perfectionism hasn't gone away. I couldn't just do a model's shape and walk away, I have to take it as far as I can. I've never done an aztec pattern, or any real texture work, but for some reason I decided this ship had to have both.

New and shiny, perhaps, but capable. Your entry for the DTNE contest shows that you do have some skill.

Thanks. Really, and sincerely. Not placing was a real blow to my confidence, not to sound whiny. I didn't expect it, as I didn't enter based on the idea that I was a great artist, but on the basis that I'd be kicking myself if I didn't try. I was firmly convinced that the contest didn't matter, until I found out it.

The model is just terrible. I started with a shape and just dashed off improvements as they occurred to me. I didn't bother with best practices or model efficiency. I didn't feel I had time. Because of this, I haven't messed with it much since the contest entry period ended. It needs to be rebuilt from scratch. (it also takes 17+ minutes to render, where the current Renown takes about a minute twenty).

I figured the technical quality of the model didn't matter as long as it rendered well. Someday I'll get back to it and do it right.

As an additional thank you, I slogged through some new renders of the old model.

And here's the Renown. Not much changed since I last showed her, but I decided to eliminate the stepped bridge cake and do something more rounded. My original inspiration was along these lines. I also cut out the block shuttlebay on the saucer and smoothed that out and tweeked the geometry around the nacelles and the saucer/ring interface. There are too many lines around that interface now, which is sharpening it out. I see some edgesliding in my future.

 

[JES]

Your very much welcome. And yeah, I didn't place either. I was maybe a little depressed, but I shrugged it off quickly, and tried not to think of it as not being good enough to place, but that the judges sadly had to pass on my design for others that were a little more interesting. The worst part for me is that this means that I'm not going to be able to play STO without paying those monthly fees (which I don't want to pay, hence I haven't gotten the game).

And thank you for posting more renderings of your Enterprise. Looking at them reaffirms my notion that you are decent as a 3D modeler. What matters is that the model looks good enough for me to consider it worth spending time looking at it. Believe me when I say that I've looked at many 3D models, and I've found some that were poor enough for me to only spend a couple of seconds on each image before moving on. Your model might not look like something for a movie or television series, but if you told me that it was a WIP for a mod for something like ST Legacy, then I'd believe it, because it really does look decent, even if it is obviously unfinished. I don't know if you, or the equipment you are using. Perhaps it is both, but the way I see it, you are already decent, and I think you can only continue to improve. I hope to become as good as you relatively quickly when I finally take my own steps into 3D modeling.

 

[Starwolf]

Want to say thank you to Maverisms in being so kind in bringing my entry to life. It means a lot to me.

Azurian

 

[Maverisms]

I'd like to say I've been too busy with art to actually update, but I've really been too busy with life. I'd tell you all about it, but really, who besides me cares? ;D

Anyway, One of the things I have been working on consistently, has been figuring out how to get windows into the Renown. It's a tough one, and I've only narrowed it down to two possible approaches. Neither of which I've actually tried, because both require a fundamental rebuild of several parts of the model.

I've done most of the rebuilding, as means of controlling my sanity (wrt to the aforementioned busy state). Although I'm still pondering a major redo of the secondary hull. The only elements like to remain unchanged are the warp ring the pylons and most of the nacelles.

While I was doing that, I thought I'd play around with some of the suggestions I'd been given in DTNE thread. While these pics represent that, mostly, some of the changes I've made are also visible.

The nacelle shortening was one of those suggestions. It's not a change I'm going to make, but the look has been growing on me.

 

[publiusr]

I like the nacelle edges. Anything to keep the eye moving.

 

[Maverisms]

Some small updates to the Renown design. I've been itching to get to the detailing phase, but each time I think I'm ready for that, I find something else that needs doing.

The first thing I decided to "fix" was the major dorsal detailing on the battle hull. I'd started with a basic and kind of uninspired spinal ridge, but I'd never really meant for that to stand. At one point I'd built a full bridge cake into it, but I did not really like it.

I "upgraded" that to a dual spine along the lines of the Akira and Luna classes, which can be seen in the renders in my last post. I didn't really like that much, once I'd finished with it and I had the added problem of not know where the impulse engines should be mounted.

The final solution (The one I'm sticking to, anyway) was a more standard single spine, patterned after some of the details of the Sovereign class's saucer with a small bit inspired by the Oberth's saucer:

At about the same time I got tired of the red Bussard collectors. I haven't decided if that current color is permanent because I haven't done any lighting tests on the newest design. While I was changing the color, I changed the shape of the collectors as well. The battle head was originally going to have a duplicate of the main bridge--for in-universe design simplification sake--but I settled on a Defiant style "hardened" bridge module. I've got an in-universe reason for that, but the real explanation is that it visually identifies the battle section as a warship.

The Renown class is meant to be a long duration deep space explorer, so I have no real intent to overgun the battle section. Right now I'm thinking along the lines of about 2 times the Defiant's main armament, which is somewhat undergunned compared to the final stats for the Enterprise-E.

Visible here, on either side of the bridge cake, are the pulse phaser emplacements. They are accidentally exaggerated by a scaling operation I'd done on the saucer. I managed to fix that, but it took a while.

The last major operation for the Battle section was putting the final nav deflector housing. I haven't done the detailing for the dish, but it won't change much from the current shape, I think--other than getting concave.

Just before I finalized the deflector, I built and designed the materials for the blue glow-y bits on the warp nacelles. I'm kinda fond of the results but I honestly don't know if they are any good.

I had thought I'd developed the final primary hull bridge cake in the last series I'd posted, but after developing the battle hull's theme, I decided to carry that over to the saucer section. In this case, I stayed with the base design for the bridge I'd already developed while adding the recessed dome feature. I'm a bit torn here, as I don't think this is the absolute best look for the saucer section. I do think it better than where I was going, but the dome isn't quite right, here. On the other hand, I feel that thematically connecting the hulls in this way off sets some of the problem.

Shuttle bays. These are heavily influenced by Vector's work on the Grandeur. The TOS/TMP flair he put into the Grandeur's aft shuttle bay is pretty much THE way shuttle bay doors should look IMO, so I figured it wasn't worth trying to reinvent the wheel. I let the flow of the hull define the shape of the bays to avoid the temptation to copy Vector's efforts.

The battle hull shuttle bay doors have gotten their major detailing, but the main shuttle bay on the saucer hasn't. There's a bit more major detailing to do around both door sets but that won't change the look, except in extreme close ups.

At this point, I'm hoping to get some feedback. I know, in the grand scale of things, she hasn't really changed that much, but I'd like to know what you think of the the things that have changed. At the top of the list is what I've done with the nacelles, but I'll take any feedback under consideration. I keep finding bits I need to work one, and they do need to be done, but in the end, I know I'm just putting off committing to the next stage because I'm not sure of what I've already done. Some criticism would help. More, I think, than praise

 

[sojourner]

I like the top of the primary the best so far. I have to admit, as an overall design I am not a fan of overly organic shapes. But that's just me. The nacelle pylons/wings seem a little thin to my eye.

I know what you mean about being inspired with Vektor's work with out overstepping into "copying". I find myself walking that line all too often. The shape of the main shuttle bay on your primary hull evokes the Grandeur's bay in overall shape. It's the details that will give it life of it's own.

 

[Maverisms]

The nacelle pylons are definitely the most common sticking point with this design, and I understand it. I've stuck to my guns about it because I wanted it to be that way.

With the original Enterprise Jefferies wanted the nacelles to look impossibly attached. When I did my Enterprise-F I was shooting for the same thing, and I carried that over to the Renown. I've always taken the observations that the pylons look too thin as a sign that I got that much right.

On the other hand, I am not against beefing them up. I'm just not certain a beefed up attachment would work with rest of the ship's "flow."

Here's a sample. I've increased the width of the pylon base by 27% (just about the max I can do without re-engineering the model).

From the stand point of "in universe reasons" to do something like this, it doesn't seem to make much of difference. Visually, it does kind of look more substantial but it also makes the ship look smaller to me. I could probably fix that by shortening the nacelles--I know they are one of the features that tends to make her look smaller than she's supposed to be--but then we'd be talking about dumping one detail I like in order to offset the dumping of yet another detail I like. Somewhere in there, she'd stop being my ship.

But all that's just my opinion. My opinion might mean a bit more, as I'm the guy building the thing, but it still needs the support of about 5 dollars to buy a cup of overly sweetened coffee.

I think I get your meaning about the organic design aesthetic. I'm a fan, personally, but I don't really see the different versions of Starfleet chic as being competitive. TOS is great. TMP, also great. TNG, great. DS9, great. VOY, great. ENT...now that pisses me off, but not because the design is bad. It's just far too "modern."

I'll admit I'm not a fan of the Enterprise-E, but I think she's a fine ship. I just don't think she's an Enterprise. Still, I was able to put up with her.

 

[sojourner]

Actually, when I said "thin" I was referring to the cross-section. They don't look thick enough to have any meaningful machinery in them connecting to the warp nacelles.

 

[Maverisms]

Oh, that! Well, that's kind of illusory. The pylons are one deck high from the bottom and bit taller just bellow the nacelles. I'd guess they look thinner due to the fact that they to get taller as they get further out.

One deck is kinda narrow, but they have about the same proportional vertical clearance as the Enterprise-D's pylons, and the Renown's decks are slightly higher (by about one foot).

From Deck 1 to the bottom of the battle hull, Renown is 44 decks. There are an additional 7 decks in the mission pod. There is roughly one deck gap between the top of battle hull and the bottom of the saucer, in fore/aft plan view (the actual gap is larger). The gap wasn't counted as a deck, so the total distance from bridge dome to deck 44 is 45 decks.

As of now, I'm using a 3.5 meter deck to deck height, but that might go up, depending on how the final volume analysis compares to Galaxy class. One ironclad goal I had for the Renown was that she would be bigger than the Galaxy, not just longer. Partly because everything is bigger in the future, but also because unlike the Galaxy she is 2 complete starships, and the saucer section has to accommodate its own reactor mass and warp core.

 

[Maverisms]

Aaaaannd, double checking, I see the Galaxy is a deck and third high at the pylons. Looks like deck 32 just gained another 2 meters' headroom

 

[JES]

I like her better with the thicker (width wise) nacelle pylons.

I wouldn't worry too much about the scale the length of the nacelles gives her just yet. I think that once you start to give her windows, she will give a better sense of her size.

 

[Herkimer Jitty]

I personally disagree. I've found, with my own illustrations being relatively undetailed, that shapes have a huge effect on the apparent scale of a ship. Thinner shapes would need to be bigger to work with crew and mechanical spaces, and thus say "bigger". Bulking something up brings its size down.

Compare Voyager to the Ent-D, for reference.

 

[Maverisms]

That is about the place I'm coming from. Compare the Enterprise-D to the Enterprise-E, for example. The windows don't really help to define the scale between the two, because they aren't the same size. The squat and compact design, combined with the broad base on the nacelle pylons and the gianormous impulse deck, make the E look much smaller (to me) than it is compared to the D.

As I go through the various development versions of the Renown I see similar problems crop up. Renown's nacelles aren't just long, they are bulky, which contributes to the "this looks small factor." OTOH, they also makes the pylon bases look tiny contributing to the "Those can't possibly stay on" factor. One of those factors is part of the plan. The other is not. The fact that the nacelles make her look smaller is a penalty I have to pay for the "floaty" look. I'm hoping that the detail and window phase will help solve the problem and give her a good sense of scale.

I am thinking I might borrow a page from Vektor, and put in some objects of known scale into a render or two, but I doubt I'll be doing that soon. Part of the reason (I am assuming) that works is because his WIP images have enough mid to high level detail to really orient the viewer and provide perspective, while the Renown is still very blank.

And she needs to be rebuilt yet again. Right now she's running just under 100,000 faces. She's still mirrored, so there are only about 50,000 "real" faces. In the renders about she's running about 174,000 faces. At minimal render quality, she's at 672,000.

I keep saying "faces" and not polys. Blender deals in squares and count in them as well. It does handle tris, but squares are its base method. I'm sure there's the odd triangle in the base mesh, but she's mostly squares, so to get Renown's "polygon" count you have to, essentially, double the face count. WHile I don't mind the final "render level" model having around 2 million faces, at this rate, I'll be closer to 4 million by the time I've cut in all of the windows. I need to cut her up a bit more than I have already, so I expect a bit more in way of base modeling.

On the upside, it should be relatively quick, compared to what I've been doing. I intend to go ahead an add the mid-level details to the current mess, and then build a more sectional base mesh around it. That way I can preserve the current shape and add the necessary landmarks in a package with fewer actual edges.

 

[Maverisms]

double post.

 

[Starship]

I liked, and I´m waiting for updates.