• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

"'STAR TREK' RETURNS" (spoilers) 'Post' Vis. FX magazine - technical

jefferiestubes8

jefferiestubes8

Commodore
Commodore
"'STAR TREK' RETURNS"
article is the cover story in this month's Post magazine.
http://www.postmagazine.com/ME2/dirmod.asp?sid=63930E9D02644EC9A127AF67602DA756&nm=E-Newsletters&type=Publishing&mod=Publications%3A%3AArticle&mid=8F3A7027421841978F18BE895F87F791&tier=4&id=C0928902C93D4F8682FB2117F7DD841F

(Spoilers)A Technical article about the visual effects in post production.

At the peak of production last year, ILM threw virtually its entire staff — 400 artists and technicians — at Star Trek shots.

ILM, the lead effects house, created about 789 VFX shots out of around 1,000 total,
Click to expand...
 
Re: "'STAR TREK' RETURNS" (spoilers) 'Post' Vis. FX magazine - technic

The Enterprise is 3000ft long...?
 
Re: "'STAR TREK' RETURNS" (spoilers) 'Post' Vis. FX magazine - technic

Pretty big. That's what 3 times an aircraft carrier? Sweet.
 
Re: "'STAR TREK' RETURNS" (spoilers) 'Post' Vis. FX magazine - technic

vice1986 said:
The Enterprise is 3000ft long...?
Click to expand...

Making it 914 meters long. The biggest starship starfleet has ever built in all of Star Trek History (save for the 2000 meter Enterprise J).

To put that in perspective the "Original" Constitution class is widely believed to be 289m long.

So its just a tiny bit bigger....ha.
 
Re: "'STAR TREK' RETURNS" (spoilers) 'Post' Vis. FX magazine - technic

I think thats wrong.
 
Re: "'STAR TREK' RETURNS" (spoilers) 'Post' Vis. FX magazine - technic

SalvorHardin said:
Flake said:
I think thats wrong.
Click to expand...

Wrong that they made it 3000 ft or the number 3000 is wrong, a mistake by the writer of the article ?
Click to expand...

Is this the first time a length has been mentioned? That first teaser started a big debate on these boards about whether or not it was bigger, because some thought it looked bigger then.

For those who have see the movie, when there are chances to get a sense of scale, does it seem that big? I mean for what it's worth, that's 1000 feet longer than Enterprise-D. The diameter of the saucer alone would be the length of TOS Enterprise. (Taking 327 feet x 3.)

And Nero's ship is five miles long? Geez. That's Red Dwarf big.
 
Re: "'STAR TREK' RETURNS" (spoilers) 'Post' Vis. FX magazine - technic

Franklin said:
SalvorHardin said:
Flake said:
I think thats wrong.
Click to expand...

Wrong that they made it 3000 ft or the number 3000 is wrong, a mistake by the writer of the article ?
Click to expand...

Is this the first time a length has been mentioned? That first teaser started a big debate on these boards about whether or not it was bigger, because some thought it looked bigger then.

For those who have see the movie, when there are chances to get a sense of scale, does it seem that big? I mean for what it's worth, that's 1000 feet longer than Enterprise-D. The diameter of the saucer alone would be the length of TOS Enterprise. (Taking 327 feet x 3.)

And Nero's ship is five miles long? Geez. That's Red Dwarf big.
Click to expand...

Hum. Having seen the film thats a difficult question. When looked on from the outside it does look roughly the same size as the TOS enterprise, but whenever the shuttlebay is open, the shuttlebay is enormous - BUT I wouldnt have said its any bigger than the Enterprise E (which is is by 300ish meters).

I dunno. I'd be willing to accept this new scaling (hey, its the future) but Im not completely sold on it being this big a scale.
 
Re: "'STAR TREK' RETURNS" (spoilers) 'Post' Vis. FX magazine - technic

SalvorHardin said:
Flake said:
I think thats wrong.
Click to expand...

Wrong that they made it 3000 ft or the number 3000 is wrong, a mistake by the writer of the article ?
Click to expand...

A mistake by the VFX guy/writer of the article

I don't mind a 3000ft ship but the shot of a constitution class ship at IOWA made me believe it is similar in scale to the original.
 
Re: "'STAR TREK' RETURNS" (spoilers) 'Post' Vis. FX magazine - technic

Flake said:
SalvorHardin said:
Flake said:
I think thats wrong.
Click to expand...

Wrong that they made it 3000 ft or the number 3000 is wrong, a mistake by the writer of the article ?
Click to expand...

A mistake by the VFX guy/writer of the article

I don't mind a 3000ft ship but the shot of a constitution class ship at IOWA made me believe it is similar in scale to the original.
Click to expand...

That could be the case.

Besides, if one can judge by the toys of the same scale, the old and the new Enterprise looked just about the same size when compared.



I don't know how valid this comparison is though.
 
Re: "'STAR TREK' RETURNS" (spoilers) 'Post' Vis. FX magazine - technic

I've been saying since trailer 2 that the Enterprise is FAR bigger than the TOS version, but everyone argued that it's dimensions looked perfectly right.

I'm not surprised it's 914 metres long.
 
Re: "'STAR TREK' RETURNS" (spoilers) 'Post' Vis. FX magazine - technic

I don't recall in the movie anyone stating the size of the Enterprise, but it did feel a lot bigger. Engineering was huge, and the shuttlebay was huge too. The only things you see next to the Enterprise are the Narada, which was much larger than the Enterprise, and shuttles, which gave me the sense that the Enterprise was bigger.

The picture above with the TOS Enterprise between the nacelles of the NuTrek Enterprise looks about right to me.
 
Re: "'STAR TREK' RETURNS" (spoilers) 'Post' Vis. FX magazine - technic

3000 feet long!! I wouldn't have guessed that. I guess a mile mile ship will make you look tiny..
 
Re: "'STAR TREK' RETURNS" (spoilers) 'Post' Vis. FX magazine - technic

Oh come on... there's no way it's THAT big. Watching the shuttle leaving dock in one of the clips I couldn't detect any radical difference in size. However, if I'm wrong then even if this ship is half that size it's still a radical change!
 
Re: "'STAR TREK' RETURNS" (spoilers) 'Post' Vis. FX magazine - technic

well, given how huge engineering is, which is housed in the secondary hull, and how big the shuttlebay is as evidenced in the below shots, this ship must be bigger than the original?

bay1.jpg


bay3.jpg


bay2y.jpg
 
Re: "'STAR TREK' RETURNS" (spoilers) 'Post' Vis. FX magazine - technic

So if the ship really is 3000 feet long, I wonder how many decks those windows on the saucer rim would have to span. Two? Three?
 
Re: "'STAR TREK' RETURNS" (spoilers) 'Post' Vis. FX magazine - technic

Gep Malakai said:
So if the ship really is 3000 feet long, I wonder how many decks those windows on the saucer rim would have to span. Two? Three?
Click to expand...

Yeah you'd think they would have made the windows a lot smaller if they were increasing the size THAT much.

And jeez, if the original E is going to be that big, I'd hate to think how much bigger the new Ent-D will be in the 24th century! lol
 
Re: "'STAR TREK' RETURNS" (spoilers) 'Post' Vis. FX magazine - technic

davejames said:
Gep Malakai said:
So if the ship really is 3000 feet long, I wonder how many decks those windows on the saucer rim would have to span. Two? Three?
Click to expand...

Yeah you'd think they would have made the windows a lot smaller if they were increasing the size THAT much.

And jeez, if the original E is going to be that big, I'd hate to think how much bigger the new Ent-D will be in the 24th century! lol
Click to expand...

Part of it may be budget-driven. We're finally seeing things the size they should be. Think of the shots with Chekov on an airccraft carrier in TVH. Lot's of open space on the deck below the flight deck. Compare that with the starship Enterprise. We're finally seeing just how much space would be on a starship of TOS size. Especially if it's only a crew of 430.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top