Size Of The New Enterprise (large images)

[Peter the Younger]

Damnit, I swore I wouldn't come back, but....

At this point, I find it easier to pretend the TOS Enterprise was 700 meters, than to pretend this new one is 300.

 

[Toruika]

Is it me, or did they place the bridge on the underside of the saucer section?

I'm going to try looking at the scene which zooms out from the bridge, tonight.

 

[Peter the Younger]

Is it me, or did they place the bridge on the underside of the saucer section?

I'm going to try looking at the scene which zooms out from the bridge, tonight.

I think this question was adressed somewhere around page... uh, looking... aw, screw it. The answer is no, it was a weird camera angle.

 

[Squiggy]

The camera came out and flipped upside down. The bridge is on top like it always has.

 

[Lt. Trull]

Is it me, or did they place the bridge on the underside of the saucer section?

I'm going to try looking at the scene which zooms out from the bridge, tonight.

I think this question was adressed somewhere around page... uh, looking... aw, screw it. The answer is no, it was a weird camera angle.

i posed this question around page four or so... and I still think that the bridge is on the bottom.... but after multiple viewings you can see the top of the saucer section out the viewport and visually see the markings on the top of the hull...

 

[Kpnuts]

Is it me, or did they place the bridge on the underside of the saucer section?

I'm going to try looking at the scene which zooms out from the bridge, tonight.

I think this question was adressed somewhere around page... uh, looking... aw, screw it. The answer is no, it was a weird camera angle.

i posed this question around page four or so... and I still think that the bridge is on the bottom.... but after multiple viewings you can see the top of the saucer section out the viewport and visually see the markings on the top of the hull...

WTF?

...Or you can just (easily) notice the camera tilt upside down as it pans away from the viewscreen window...

How can anyone still think the viewscreen is on the bottom?

 

[Lt. Trull]

optical illusion.... i thought the same thing till i saw it several times....
and realized... nope...still on top...

 

[Kpnuts]

optical illusion.... i thought the same thing till i saw it several times....
and realized... nope...still on top...

You call the camera spinning quite clearly upside down an optical illusion?

It's not an illusion, it's just the viewpoint going upside down. Rather slowly, and very obviously I might add.

 

[Lt. Trull]

i call it optical illusion when they create a effect that makes you think one thing when it is something else entirely.

 

[Squiggy]

Did didn't make you think if you paid attention.

 

[Praetor]

I swear, we could have just gotten a yardstick and all whipped 'em out and settled this 1410 posts ago. Am I the only one who has a feeling the size of the Enterprise is really of little actual relevance here?

The new Enterprise is 720+ meters long. The production started smaller, but changed their minds and made it bigger, presumably to fit the shuttlebay/brewery innards. That's why we have such contradictory size cues that started this argument. I, personally, think they made the wrong decision, but I don't consider it a deal-breaker. They could just as easily decide to make it smaller again in the next movie.

 

[SonicRanger]

Great.

Can we now discuss the size of the Enterprise-D based on visual cues?

Exhibit A:
http://tng.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/s1/1x10/battle186.jpg
http://tng.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/s1/1x10/battle200.jpg

Exhibit B:
http://tng.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/s1/1x02/farpoint2_012.jpg

Exhibit C:
http://tng.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/s1/1x26/neutralzone188.jpg

What about the size of the Defiant?

http://ex-astris-scientia.org/articles/defiant-problems.htm

What about the size of the Excelsior even?

http://ex-astris-scientia.org/articles/excelsior-size.htm

The Oberth?

http://ex-astris-scientia.org/articles/oberth-size.htm

The Akira?

http://ex-astris-scientia.org/articles/akira-size.htm

These aren't new issues!

 

[M'Sharak]

I swear, we could have just gotten a yardstick and all whipped 'em out and settled this 1410 posts ago. Am I the only one who has a feeling the size of the Enterprise is really of little actual relevance here?

No, not the only one.

There have been some entertaining moments, however.

(288)

 

[zenfakor]

I think it is only as big as your tv/comp, screen.

 

[Peter the Younger]

Great.

Can we now discuss the size of the Enterprise-D based on visual cues?

Exhibit A:
http://tng.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/s1/1x10/battle186.jpg
http://tng.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/s1/1x10/battle200.jpg

Exhibit B:
http://tng.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/s1/1x02/farpoint2_012.jpg

Exhibit C:
http://tng.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/s1/1x26/neutralzone188.jpg

What about the size of the Defiant?

http://ex-astris-scientia.org/articles/defiant-problems.htm

What about the size of the Excelsior even?

http://ex-astris-scientia.org/articles/excelsior-size.htm

The Oberth?

http://ex-astris-scientia.org/articles/oberth-size.htm

The Akira?

http://ex-astris-scientia.org/articles/akira-size.htm

These aren't new issues!

Oh brother. You know, all of that just makes me wonder why Bernd is so extra-super upset at the new movie. Then again, this bit about the Oberth is telling:

At 300m, finally, the design problems would be largely solved, but the ship wouldn't be anything like it was originally supposed to be. In particular, it seems unlikely that the Constitution refit, as the capital ship of those days, wouldn't be significantly larger than the Oberth.

The whole universe revolves around that all important - but never official - size of the Enterprise.

 

[Guartho]

Great.

Can we now discuss the size of the Enterprise-D based on visual cues?

Exhibit A:
http://tng.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/s1/1x10/battle186.jpg
http://tng.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/s1/1x10/battle200.jpg

Exhibit B:
http://tng.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/s1/1x02/farpoint2_012.jpg

Exhibit C:
http://tng.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/s1/1x26/neutralzone188.jpg

Ooh ooh! Exhibit D:
http://tng.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/s6/6x06/trueq219.jpg

My personal favorite.

 

[JuanBolio]

There is not a quote anywhere that nails down for sure what the FINAL size was...

It was posted about twelve pages ago. ILM sources give the length of the ship at EXACTLy 2357 feet. THAT is the final size, handed to us by the people who made the damn movie. Arguments against this size is a matter of personal preference and apparently boil down to three camps

1) TOS era ships shouldn't be this big, therefore, Enterprise shouldn't be this big.
2) TNG era ships were this big, therefore, Enterprise shouldn't be this big
3) It doesn't look this big, therefore, it shouldn't be this big.

We can argue in circles forever about what size the ship SHOULD be. But the production crew ultimately made the ship 718 meters long regardless of what anyone else thinks.

Well said. Totally agree

And as a side note, the under construction shot makes the Enterprise look around that long as well.

Case closed. The NuEnterprise is 718 metres long.

It was supposed to be smaller, but they made it bigger.

Case closed?

It'll be closed when they go back and re-do all the effects shots that make it out to be 366 meters, as well as confirm that all the Kelvin-era ships were enormous as well. Until then I'm perfectly valid in thinking its smaller, since it is clearly shown to be in most scenes (including the construction scene). You can think what you like, but the test of a great mind is being able to hold two opposing ideas at the same time. Your need to have this ship be ONLY the official and absurd length of 718 meters is curious and amusing.

 

[Mangledduk]

I can only see one clearly defined figure; the one on the gantry.

But regardless, it doesn't matter. Even if it's ~300m in that shot, it's final size is ~700m. Doesn't matter if it was ~300m, ~100m or ~1cm at first, it doesn't even matter had they scaled it to 700m, to 2km, to 10m, to 1 gazillion km, back to 2cm and then to 700m; the final size it what counts, or they wouldn't have upscaled it.

There is not a quote anywhere that nails down for sure what the FINAL size was...

It was posted about twelve pages ago. ILM sources give the length of the ship at EXACTLy 2357 feet. THAT is the final size, handed to us by the people who made the damn movie. Arguments against this size is a matter of personal preference and apparently boil down to three camps

1) TOS era ships shouldn't be this big, therefore, Enterprise shouldn't be this big.
2) TNG era ships were this big, therefore, Enterprise shouldn't be this big
3) It doesn't look this big, therefore, it shouldn't be this big.

We can argue in circles forever about what size the ship SHOULD be. But the production crew ultimately made the ship 718 meters long regardless of what anyone else thinks.

Alex Jeager ILM artist: "The actual length of the the new E from the film is Big... 2500 ft according to my chart, but that was early in production, I forget if we shrank it back down some. It was basically what ever looked good in the shot :-P"

Doesn't sound like they made any size final considering they changed it for whatever looked good in the shot. My comment had nothing to do with what I think it should be. At this point, I really don't give a crap

 

[ShamelessMcBundy]

I swear, we could have just gotten a yardstick and all whipped 'em out and settled this 1410 posts ago.

Sounds like my kind of thread.

 

[DiSiLLUSiON]

It'll be closed when they go back and re-do all the effects shots that make it out to be 366 meters, as well as confirm that all the Kelvin-era ships were enormous as well.

No, they don't. The ship is ~700m in those shots.

Until then I'm perfectly valid in thinking its smaller.

Yes you may believe it's smaller, but as already said, don't expect us to chant along with you.