So what's up with the trailer Enterprise proportions?

[Son_of_Soong]

I can see the starboard pylon that holds up the nacelles, not the port

You can also clearly see that the nacelles are lying on some sort of structure thats holding them in place. The pylons might be there but it doesn't look like they have been connected yet.

If their not yet connected then chances are they arnt in their proper position. Which could greatly effect how large or small they appear to be in the trailer.

 

[ancient]

I think it may have been crammed together that way to make it readable. In any case, it's much further down that it traditionally would be, which could be to, again, keep it readable. There seems to be a big hole in the hull where it should traditionally go.

 

[Kinnison]

SPOILER WARNING. Don't follow my link if you don't wanna get spoiled.

Huh, if these pictures are for real, it would explain a few things. Anybody recognize these? I've been out of the loop for a while, so I guess they could just be fan art.

 

[Son_of_Soong]

I saw these and thought they looked awesome, didn't know myself if they were real or not tho. The site said they were.

 

[EliyahuQeoni]

Isn't that Gabe Koerner's Enterprise?

 

[Son_of_Soong]

Googled his name that that ship came up.. guess so.

 

[Kinnison]

Okay, never mind. Sorry about that. Scoop of the month? Not this time!

 

[Son_of_Soong]

I still enjoyed looking at it agian :-p

 

[Cary L. Brown]

Arlo said:
^ As has been discussed to death in other threads, it is generally agreed that that is looking *forward* up a nacelle; it's not the secondary hull.

Fair enough, it's generally assumed... yet it's not DEMONSTRATED. Just agreed.

The scale of the part is all whacked up if you consider that to be the nacelle... and that makes for some damned silly looking (ie, non-functional) intercoolers. I also assumed, at first, that I was looking at a nacelle. But I'm not 100% convinced anymore.

The reason is pretty simple. If that's really a nacelle... the size of the ship is going to end up being larger than the Galaxy class, assuming similar proportions. (Maybe not more MASSIVE, but longer overall, I mean).

On the other hand, if that IS the secondary hull strongback... those look very similar to what you'd expect for the nacelle pylon placements, and the scale is very close to being "correct" for the overall ship design.

I thought I saw nacelles there before... but I'm 50/50 on whether that's a nacelle or the secondary hull at this point.

I'm still piqued about the whacky bridge layout seen in the trailer (I've downloaded it in 1080p and checked it out that way several times now... and I'm still not sure what I'm seeing in most views. BY DESIGN, I think, too!). But although my "warning" sense is going off based upon this, I'm not jumping to the conclusion that we're seeing anything more or less than a purely figurative presentation. We may be... we won't know for a while, still.

 

[Arlo]

Oh for chrissake...how many times a week is the frikkin' Gabe Enterprise trotted out by someone? It's getting annoying.

 

[Son_of_Soong]

He said he was out of the loop for a while so clearly didn't know itd been previously discussed, heck its the first time I've seen it discussed since Im still quite new here... leave him alone.

Go 'for chrissake' someone who does stuff like this on purpose, leave the accidental ones alone.

 

[Patrickivan]

Topics get recycled on this site- people miss some things too- it's no big deal. If someone doesn't want to discuss something that's been seen or done to death, there's no need to reply. It's really no big deal.

 

[Jackson_Roykirk]

Ancient --

Can you do one more photo-investigation? I'm convinced that the nacelles look huge in that saucer/nacelle front view due to Perspective Distortion.
See: (Perspective Distortion Wikipedia).

Perpective distortion occurs when the camera is set a relatively long distance from the subject, then is zoomed-in using a zoom or telephoto lens. A picture taken like this will have a totally different perpective than one taken up-close to the subject with no zoom lens.

Ancient -- do you have a camera with a powerful zoom or telephoto lens? I would do this, but I don't have a model of the Enterprise. Maybe I will try it in AutoCAD. The camera location, zoom, and perspective can be manipulated in AutoCAD's 3D rendering software.

 

[Son_of_Soong]

Great idea, more practical theory :-) Id do it myself but I dont have any models.

 

[debush24]

ok,i dont mean 2 boast,but i saw the enterprise at toy fair,its correct in its size and has the grace of the original,there doesnt need 2 b a topic on this any more because the ship was being constructed,so all the parts were not together,just think if the tv 60s enterprise had a one nite stand with st tmp enterprise=then had a baby!that would be it!

 

[Son_of_Soong]

Sadly unless you can prove what you saw... the discussion will continue :-P

 

[Arlo]

^ Yup, this won't rest till we see the girl in her entirety.

btw SoS, any chance you can kill the animation in your avatar? I swear it's giving me an epileptic seizure...

 

[Son_of_Soong]

Your the second person to say that :-S

I've changed it for the time being, tomorrow I will recreate the Demon Hunter one but with less 'movement'

 

[debush24]

ok,ok i respect what ur saying,was not aloud to take pictures,it was in a private booth,with door closed,warp nacelles do not have warp drive glow,they are like 60s in style,the distance between the saucer section is exactly like st tmp,think about it,when ur building a car,do u put the radio in first followed by the tires?!no,its built in pieces!anyways i saw it u didnt!liked transporter room playset,quite a clever idea making it for the 4 inch range,I remember the 1701 d bridge playset was cool but realy big to move around and store!these playset are about 1 sq foot in diameter.

 

[Vektor]

Here's my best attempt to match the camera distance and focal length using my own 3D model of the TOS Enterprise. This is my modified version, but the proportions are nearly identical to the original.

First, the teaser image:

Then the rendering of my model:

And then a composite of the two:

It's possible the camera in the teaser could be even further back but I doubt it. Certain features like the slight curvature of the saucer's leading edge and the projected width of the inboard sides of the nacelles become less and less of a match to the teaser image the further back you go.

I'm absolutely convinced that the size of the nacelles cannot be explained by focal length alone. Either they really are a lot bigger or their relative size was fudged for dramatic effect.