Set blueprint exchange
- Thread starter Redgeneral
- Start date
I had a look through screenshots of the movie's shuttle and I couldn't see any that were suitable to use with my methods. The set elements for the movies often appear only briefly with few camera angels. By contrast something like runabout interior is more feasible because it was repeatedly filmed over a long period with many different camera angles.
Time wise, a console can take a month to research, build in 3D and then blueprint. Its a bit of a slow process.
On the subject of Trek movies, I've been reading "Star Trek Phase II - The Lost Series", a behind the scenes book on the transition from being a new series to becoming The Motion Picture. One thing it mentioned was that NASA lent the full size mock up of the voyager probes to Paramount to be on set as V'ger.
This means we can reuse the voyager probe blueprints for V'ger. Note this blueprint also shows a propulsion engine - this is discarded after a one-time use and so the mock up does not have this feature.
Voyager probe blueprint: https://www.flickr.com/photos/99878876@N02/39239263634/
Image source
https://www.reddit.com/r/nasa/comments/7gyaws/voyager_1_fires_up_thrusters_after_37_years/
The original name for the Voyager Probes was "Mariner Jupiter-Saturn" and was only changed just before launch. This name can be seen on the blueprint. Just imagine what V'ger would have been called if NASA stuck to the original name...
Time wise, a console can take a month to research, build in 3D and then blueprint. Its a bit of a slow process.
On the subject of Trek movies, I've been reading "Star Trek Phase II - The Lost Series", a behind the scenes book on the transition from being a new series to becoming The Motion Picture. One thing it mentioned was that NASA lent the full size mock up of the voyager probes to Paramount to be on set as V'ger.
This means we can reuse the voyager probe blueprints for V'ger. Note this blueprint also shows a propulsion engine - this is discarded after a one-time use and so the mock up does not have this feature.
Voyager probe blueprint: https://www.flickr.com/photos/99878876@N02/39239263634/
Image source
https://www.reddit.com/r/nasa/comments/7gyaws/voyager_1_fires_up_thrusters_after_37_years/
The original name for the Voyager Probes was "Mariner Jupiter-Saturn" and was only changed just before launch. This name can be seen on the blueprint. Just imagine what V'ger would have been called if NASA stuck to the original name...
All I want is one of those sheets that give the measurements like you did for the holodeck and hallways. For the center part with the screen, when Kirk opens the draw to grab a phaser we see communicators. One of those communicator went up for auction and was said to be 4 inch by 2 and half inches. that should be enough to work out most of the measurements. Also remember they fit a standard Television, or monitor above the drawer? so that should help work out more.
In order to make those sheets he needs to make a 3d model, his process which he posted is dependent on having reference images to work from of the actual prop / set piece, if there is not many good reference shots there is not much to work from to build the 3d model off of, and with no 3d model there is nothing to generate the blueprint sheet.....
Can you even provide an image of what you are looking for? I don't recall the weapons thing you are speaking of. doing a quick look through of trekcore's screencaps I am not seeing it either...
EDIT:
Found it myself, its one of those blink and you miss shots that you see it, only once....
This looks like a basic standard drawer, nothing special... If you are just looking for a dawer, just go to ikea....
Can you even provide an image of what you are looking for? I don't recall the weapons thing you are speaking of. doing a quick look through of trekcore's screencaps I am not seeing it either...
EDIT:
Found it myself, its one of those blink and you miss shots that you see it, only once....
This looks like a basic standard drawer, nothing special... If you are just looking for a dawer, just go to ikea....
Last edited:
Also adding to the difficulty in recreating that console is the fact that when the ST5 shuttle was converted into TNG's Type 6 at the beginning of the 5th season, they reworked the interior; the TV monitor was removed and replaced with a static LCARS graphic, and the drawers are nowhere to be seen. So the only reference material is a literal "blink and you'll miss it" moment from one film.
well it is more then a drawer, it is also a matter of the monitor part. The shot you show is not the best frame to start from. But one could in theory work out the size with the communicator being 2 and half inches. The dimensions of the shuttle itself are also an important clue. So does he use some kind of Photogrammetry to make 3d models?
The funny thing is, I think Screen Used bought a bunch of blueprints from an auction, I think I saw it once. But sold it to someone thus is now in the hands of a private collector.
I 3D model the sets in sketchup from scratch - there is no photogrammetry involved.
As mentioned above, I posted an overview of my methods earlier in this thread, but here is the link again: https://radishdalek.deviantart.com/art/Recreating-Studio-Sets-in-Sketchup-671775496
Photogrametry is not used in blueprinting
- Requires photos taken using a digital camera (it requires metadata on camera lens, focus length etc.)
- Screenshots and images from film cameras do not work as they do not have this information
- Photogrammetry usually requires at least 60 photos, each with a unique angel
- It generates a very noisy point cloud / mesh with wild variances in vertex position. A flat surface or edge will vary enormously making any measurements useless
- Photogrametry is not suitable for blueprinting projects
Time
- After telling you that a console with good reference (which this lacks) would take a month, you said: "All I want is one of those sheets that give the measurements like you did for the holodeck and hallways.". You implied that my work was actually far faster than I stated and that it would be no effort at all to draw up more pages
- All my blueprinting efforts take considerable time, even the last stage where I create the pages
- No stage can be omitted to speed this process - research and 3D modelling are essential
- When I state a console would take a month to blueprint, I speak from experience.
Reference
- This console appears briefly with few shots and fewer unique camera angles
- None of the available shots are suitable for my methods
- Most of the console details are obscured in shadow
- To blueprint the console, I would need better reference material than what is available
Communicator
- Using a tiny object as a scale produces massive cumulative errors
- When I blueprinted the TNG shuttlebay, I used the k-arch frame of the reinforced door for scale as it was large and had known dimensions
- “that should be enough to work out most of the measurements.”. Any blueprinting effort would require far more than this
- The communicator is not level in its compartment, it is tilted. This makes even more unusable as a scale
Television
- There is no such thing as a standard television size - there are standard screen ratios, but the size would be an unknown multiple of this ratio
- Without knowing the make and model (and thus screen size), I cannot use it as a scale
Shuttle size
- The canonical size and constructed size don't often match
- Having an exterior size doesn’t really help with the interior elements all that much
We now have multiple posts here stating why this can't be done - you need to accept that I can't help you on this.
Ultimately the decision of what I blueprint is up to me (it is my hobby). I am not prepared to spend a month or more of my spare time on a project without the reference or detail I need to do it.
As mentioned above, I posted an overview of my methods earlier in this thread, but here is the link again: https://radishdalek.deviantart.com/art/Recreating-Studio-Sets-in-Sketchup-671775496
Photogrametry is not used in blueprinting
- Requires photos taken using a digital camera (it requires metadata on camera lens, focus length etc.)
- Screenshots and images from film cameras do not work as they do not have this information
- Photogrammetry usually requires at least 60 photos, each with a unique angel
- It generates a very noisy point cloud / mesh with wild variances in vertex position. A flat surface or edge will vary enormously making any measurements useless
- Photogrametry is not suitable for blueprinting projects
Time
- After telling you that a console with good reference (which this lacks) would take a month, you said: "All I want is one of those sheets that give the measurements like you did for the holodeck and hallways.". You implied that my work was actually far faster than I stated and that it would be no effort at all to draw up more pages
- All my blueprinting efforts take considerable time, even the last stage where I create the pages
- No stage can be omitted to speed this process - research and 3D modelling are essential
- When I state a console would take a month to blueprint, I speak from experience.
Reference
- This console appears briefly with few shots and fewer unique camera angles
- None of the available shots are suitable for my methods
- Most of the console details are obscured in shadow
- To blueprint the console, I would need better reference material than what is available
Communicator
- Using a tiny object as a scale produces massive cumulative errors
- When I blueprinted the TNG shuttlebay, I used the k-arch frame of the reinforced door for scale as it was large and had known dimensions
- “that should be enough to work out most of the measurements.”. Any blueprinting effort would require far more than this
- The communicator is not level in its compartment, it is tilted. This makes even more unusable as a scale
Television
- There is no such thing as a standard television size - there are standard screen ratios, but the size would be an unknown multiple of this ratio
- Without knowing the make and model (and thus screen size), I cannot use it as a scale
Shuttle size
- The canonical size and constructed size don't often match
- Having an exterior size doesn’t really help with the interior elements all that much
We now have multiple posts here stating why this can't be done - you need to accept that I can't help you on this.
Ultimately the decision of what I blueprint is up to me (it is my hobby). I am not prepared to spend a month or more of my spare time on a project without the reference or detail I need to do it.
...unless he says, "pretty please!"
He should suggest the subject to someone who's building CG models in that era or subject matter. A guess of its full nature and rough estimate of size would be necessary though. I'm curious why he wants it...is he building one?
He should suggest the subject to someone who's building CG models in that era or subject matter. A guess of its full nature and rough estimate of size would be necessary though. I'm curious why he wants it...is he building one?
Well thank you for explaining it to me. I will have to eyeball this project I guess.
One thing to note, it is true the communicator is not in the hole straight, but I am sure the hole is the same size.
^Still not going to change the inability to create this particular blueprint..... Also Redgeneral has already told you that he was not going to make this for you, he is currently working on his own projects, and is doing a really awesome job with them.
I think there are more people who are excited over his Voyager prints, and thrilled to see more, compared to one person asking for a drawer, which could easily be purchased at ikea.
I think there are more people who are excited over his Voyager prints, and thrilled to see more, compared to one person asking for a drawer, which could easily be purchased at ikea.
I know, I was just wanted to point that out. Also I did not know they sold Star Trek 5 props at Ikea. Do you have any item numbers?
Not at all what I said.
Please stop trying to make this drawer happen, you have already been told no by redgeneral twice, with the reasonings explained by several people. If you are this passionate about a drawer, perhaps you should think about expanding your skillset, and taking a crack at designing it yourself.
Okay, that's enough of that tangent. @batboy853 and @Star Trek Apolgist, let's give it a rest. A question was asked and answered. There's no reason for this kind of back and forth. Thank you.
Lighting design plan from ST: Discovery
https://www.flickr.com/photos/99878876@N02/38419753510/in/dateposted-public/
Source: https://twitter.com/abaiers/status/962863565940998144
https://www.flickr.com/photos/99878876@N02/38419753510/in/dateposted-public/
Source: https://twitter.com/abaiers/status/962863565940998144
Last edited:
I have already give up on Red Gens help for that, follow the thread. I am just asking questions. Also Red Gen, have you seen the decaying photo of the ST5 shuttle on Memory Alpha? I know you probably don't have time to do it, but do you think that could be 3d modeled? Just curious.
And here I thought I was pretty clear and straight forward in what I said about this. @Star Trek Apolgist, you can of course discuss the shuttle set plans, but refrain from referencing the issue of anyone here making or not making them for you. @Everyone else, it's not open season on @Star Trek Apolgist. Just let it rest already. I will not look kindly upon any further slight directed his way.
If you feel anything about this is up for debate, please comment via PM.
And now back to your regularly scheduled discussions about set blueprints.
If you feel anything about this is up for debate, please comment via PM.
And now back to your regularly scheduled discussions about set blueprints.
"Green Harvest"? "Tennessee Honey"? Interesting names there.Lighting design plan from STiscovery
https://www.flickr.com/photos/99878876@N02/38419753510/in/dateposted-public/
Source: https://twitter.com/abaiers/status/962863565940998144
Similar threads
