Spoilers Starship Design in Star Trek: Picard

Maybe but the D looks far more advanced on its hull design. Sleek and elegant. The D is also much larger than the G. I wonder if families are no longer allowed on starships? It looks like the G when it was the Titan had none.
"

The E-E didn't have families.

The implication was that the 2360's "families on board" experiment didn't stand the test of time, which to be fair makes sense. The only time we've ever heard of ships offloading civilians and non-essential personell prior to a dangerous situation was when the Odyssey offloaded their civvies and non-combat needed folks on DS9 prior to going to the Gamma Quadrant (good call too). It appears that Riker and Troi had Thad aboard the Titan even after his birth and into infancy though.

Yamato presumably had families on board when she was lost. Saratoga had families on board at Wolf 359, its safe to assume she wasn't alone in that.
 
That's just streaming-era Trek though; a juvenile 'dark' tone to the storytelling, and the lights always turned down to hide the cheapness of the sets. :shrug:
The sets are hardly "cheap". They're one of the most expensive production costs.

Here's what they look like under more normal lighting.

awi3awwfv6l81.jpg
 
"

The E-E didn't have families.

The implication was that the 2360's "families on board" experiment didn't stand the test of time, which to be fair makes sense. The only time we've ever heard of ships offloading civilians and non-essential personell prior to a dangerous situation was when the Odyssey offloaded their civvies and non-combat needed folks on DS9 prior to going to the Gamma Quadrant (good call too). It appears that Riker and Troi had Thad aboard the Titan even after his birth and into infancy though.

Yamato presumably had families on board when she was lost. Saratoga had families on board at Wolf 359, its safe to assume she wasn't alone in that.

Yes. I feel the same way. To have families on board a starfleet vessel that does science, exploratory and mediation work between alien cultures is dangerous and the families on board ate in just as much danger and the crew when they encounter a dangerous species. Captain Picard in the first episode was not crazy about kids on his ship and it was obviously a new thing and as you say was probably an experiment which now obviously has been shelved. Really a good thing to be honest. Space is dangerous.
 
Oh please. The sets themselves across the board have been motion picture quality; they have to be because as of last season EVERYTHING is filmed in 4K resolution. You want to talk cheap sets, look at the first two seasons of TNG.

The lighting is low because if they go higher, you wouldn't be able to see the live and running computer displays the sets all use. You'd get massive reflective light from those screens.
Fun Fact: Human eyes can't actually see in 4k. It's a gimmick used to sell fancier tvs.

They COULD film at the light levels needed for the displays then tweak the levels in post. Or use the trick they used on the E-D set to cut bounceback on the recreated set. Apply a light, translucent layer of black ink to the parts of the displays not showing graphics.
 
Fun Fact: Human eyes can't actually see in 4k. It's a gimmick used to sell fancier tvs.

They COULD film at the light levels needed for the displays then tweak the levels in post. Or use the trick they used on the E-D set to cut bounceback on the recreated set. Apply a light, translucent layer of black ink to the parts of the displays not showing graphics.
Is that why the lighting on the redone Bridge set in PICARD was STILL at a way lower level then the original set was filmed during the series run in syndication.
 
I normally don't get involved in the whole "too dark" argument but his quarters are absolutely stupid looking. Where the hell is that light coming from and what has happened to the ship environmental systems. The whole room is full of dust or smoke or something.

Something that started in DSC season 2 that I don't love is the tendency to make space a featureless white void out the windows of the ship.

This is a big simplification but, at its best, human visual acuity can perceive detail that would compare with approximately 9K.

Yeah, the idea that the extra spatial resolution of 4K versus 2K is wasted depends on viewing on TVs that are the size and viewing distance that are ideal for 2K TVs. If you make the screens bigger or sit closer (for an extreme example, watching on a 5K computer screen on your desk instead of a TV across the living room), the difference is visible. And the difference in brightness/contrast with 4K is a major factor regardless of where you sit, and is probably a contributing factor to the show being so dark ("atmospheric" looks a lot different when you're mastering your picture off of a $50,000 screen in a pitch-black room and you can see the equivalent of a lit match at a thousand paces).
 
Last edited:
The lighting is low because if they go higher, you wouldn't be able to see the live and running computer displays the sets all use. You'd get massive reflective light from those screens.

If the technology to add live on-set displays doesn't allow lighting the scene properly, maybe don't use that technique? The ultimate purpose of TV and film is to s̶e̶l̶l̶ ̶a̶d̶s̶ m̶a̶k̶e̶ ̶m̶o̶n̶e̶y̶ entertain an audience, so production concerns should always, always be built around that consideration.
 
If the technology to add live on-set displays doesn't allow lighting the scene properly, maybe don't use that technique? The ultimate purpose of TV and film is to s̶e̶l̶l̶ ̶a̶d̶s̶ m̶a̶k̶e̶ ̶m̶o̶n̶e̶y̶ entertain an audience, so production concerns should always, always be built around that consideration.
Sure. But when you've already invested the money what then?
 
If the technology to add live on-set displays doesn't allow lighting the scene properly, maybe don't use that technique? The ultimate purpose of TV and film is to s̶e̶l̶l̶ ̶a̶d̶s̶ m̶a̶k̶e̶ ̶m̶o̶n̶e̶y̶ entertain an audience, so production concerns should always, always be built around that consideration.
I personally don't mind it. The flat bright lighting of TNG (and 2nd and 3rd season TOS) when compared to the often noir style lighting of TOS S1 really showed that later they didn't really care about creating an atmosphere. It was a bit too low for PICARD IMO - but I had no issues with how Discovery or Strange New Worlds have been lit. Take it up with Terry Matalas and his set design and cinematographers on PICARD.

They've made it work for the other streaming Trek shows.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Sci
I personally don't mind it. The flat bright lighting of TNG (and 2nd and 3rd season TOS) when compared to the often noir style lighting of TOS S1 really showed that later they didn't really car about creating an atmosphere. It was a bit too low for PICARD IMO - but I had no issues with how Discovery or Strange New Worlds have been lit. Take it up with Terry Matalas and his set design and cinematographers on PICARD.

They've made it work for the other streaming Trek shows.
The Enterprise-D too, some of those displays in Season 3 are live screens.
 
I can't help but wonder if they went through all the trouble of doing this because the E-F was supposed to have a bigger screen presence, maybe appearing earlier in the show?
Nah, the Titan (or at least her design) was meant to be the main hero ship from the start. Her later being renamed Enterprise was just icing on the cake, IMO.
 
The lighting in Picard didn’t bother me, but I had a chuckle when I caught “Basics Part 1” on TV the other night and when the Kazon take over Voyager’s bridge (which is at red alert), Cullah says “Why is it so dark in here? Someone turn on the lights”. :D
 
Back
Top