Sericali1 said:
Note, this is not the same as saying "reuse existing designs but make a few cosmetic changes." Most of the "kitbash" models I've seen out there are guilty of this... for instance, the "U.S.S. Centaur" is a massive kitbash... unforgivably so, IMHO. And if you look closely at the Stargazer, it's clear that it was kitbashed... though most of the parts make sense (the main exception being the presence of Constitution(refit) warp pylon halves sandwiched onto the primary hull).
It is LOGICAL for Sean's ship to use the same generation of engine as has been used on other ships. It's logical for design concepts and structures to be consistent... even logical for parts to be reused on different ships in some cases. If you were designing a ship... you would not design the engines to "look neato," you'd design them to do the job they need to do. You'd probably try to use existing ones, and if not, modify an existing design, keeping as much in common as possible. Why? Well... because to do otherwise would be inefficient, wasteful... illogical!
(FYI... this was not directed specifically to you... it's a general statement regarding other people talking about how it's unacceptable for a ship to have characteristics of some other ship.)
It's not unheard of for ships to have "laterally-mounted" nacelles. Stargazer, just for one example.
Bottom line... it just seems to make more sense to me. But it IS "different," and people tend to be most comfortable with the familiar.
I get a huge kick out of the reaction to my primary hull. Personally, I REALLY like the appearance of it. It really is consistent with prior designs, and it makes sense. But again, it seems to be rubbing people the wrong way. Honestly, I can't figure this one out. Half the people complain that it looks too much like an Excelsior hull (round, and with a convex top... that's about it for the similarities!), and the other half apparently think that it should look MORE like that!
The one thing you can all agree on, I think... is that no one has done one quite like this before. It IS unique. Had I won, I'm sure it would have grown on people quickly enough. As it is, it's just what it was before I sent it in to S&S... a hobby project to work on! I love my primary hull design, I know it's not a kitbash/copy/whatever... but since Sean's design is the winner, and not mine, the design ultimately only has to make ME happy now. And I am really taken by the design I've got... go figure, huh?
As I've said, I like Sean's ship. It definitely feels like "Trek" and is consistent. I only had two minor quibbles with it, and one is fixed already. It is NOT "overly derivative," it's just a logical extension of existing design. I just have a personal preference for the long, lean, stretched-out ships with nacelles on top rather than on bottom... the original and refit Constitutions, the Sovereign, etc... and I'd have preferred something down that line for a "leading man" design.
I'd be REALLY interested to see this rendered... with the "blue hemispheres" done as big glass domes (think "Silent Running" but with something besides trees and shrubberies). I think it could work, and look good... but there's a lot of room for translation from the painted image to a "real" ship.
By the way... I have a top and a side view of the Ariel which I'd like to post... but I can't. Anyone who wants to post them for me (and who already has more than 100 posts), feel free. The addresses are:
http://images.snapfish.com/3453797923232%7Ffp63%3Dot>2357%3D%3B2<%3D474%3DXROQDF>2323%3B95686%3B73ot1lsi
and
http://images.snapfish.com/3453797923232%7Ffp63%3Dot>2357%3D%3B2<%3D474%3DXROQDF>2323%3B95686%3B74ot1lsi
Yeah... let's be honest - in the real world, most designs DO resemble, to one extent or another, what came before. Of all the ship designs I've seen entered into this contest, not one was "derivative" any more than would make sense in a logical world. The science would be the same... the materials would be the same... the basic design concepts would be the same... so there SHOULD be commonality with "what's come before."
Note, this is not the same as saying "reuse existing designs but make a few cosmetic changes." Most of the "kitbash" models I've seen out there are guilty of this... for instance, the "U.S.S. Centaur" is a massive kitbash... unforgivably so, IMHO. And if you look closely at the Stargazer, it's clear that it was kitbashed... though most of the parts make sense (the main exception being the presence of Constitution(refit) warp pylon halves sandwiched onto the primary hull).
It is LOGICAL for Sean's ship to use the same generation of engine as has been used on other ships. It's logical for design concepts and structures to be consistent... even logical for parts to be reused on different ships in some cases. If you were designing a ship... you would not design the engines to "look neato," you'd design them to do the job they need to do. You'd probably try to use existing ones, and if not, modify an existing design, keeping as much in common as possible. Why? Well... because to do otherwise would be inefficient, wasteful... illogical!
(FYI... this was not directed specifically to you... it's a general statement regarding other people talking about how it's unacceptable for a ship to have characteristics of some other ship.)
Well, if you think about it, there's no such thing as "sideways" in space... and since you want a symmetrical warp field, it seems to me that having the engines mounted symmetrically in BOTH directions, not just around the vertical hull centerline, makes sense.
It's not unheard of for ships to have "laterally-mounted" nacelles. Stargazer, just for one example.
Bottom line... it just seems to make more sense to me. But it IS "different," and people tend to be most comfortable with the familiar.
I gotta tell you... you just cracked me up! I think they've learned now... never give Troi the keys!
I get a huge kick out of the reaction to my primary hull. Personally, I REALLY like the appearance of it. It really is consistent with prior designs, and it makes sense. But again, it seems to be rubbing people the wrong way. Honestly, I can't figure this one out. Half the people complain that it looks too much like an Excelsior hull (round, and with a convex top... that's about it for the similarities!), and the other half apparently think that it should look MORE like that!
The one thing you can all agree on, I think... is that no one has done one quite like this before. It IS unique. Had I won, I'm sure it would have grown on people quickly enough. As it is, it's just what it was before I sent it in to S&S... a hobby project to work on! I love my primary hull design, I know it's not a kitbash/copy/whatever... but since Sean's design is the winner, and not mine, the design ultimately only has to make ME happy now. And I am really taken by the design I've got... go figure, huh?
As I've said, I like Sean's ship. It definitely feels like "Trek" and is consistent. I only had two minor quibbles with it, and one is fixed already. It is NOT "overly derivative," it's just a logical extension of existing design. I just have a personal preference for the long, lean, stretched-out ships with nacelles on top rather than on bottom... the original and refit Constitutions, the Sovereign, etc... and I'd have preferred something down that line for a "leading man" design.
Yeah...
I'd be REALLY interested to see this rendered... with the "blue hemispheres" done as big glass domes (think "Silent Running" but with something besides trees and shrubberies). I think it could work, and look good... but there's a lot of room for translation from the painted image to a "real" ship.
Ya know, I got that same feeling. I've always sort of liked the Ariel-class Shuttlecarrier (the TOS/Movie-era design derived from the McQuarrie concept... again going back to the heyday of the "fan-driven" Trek era... late 70s to late 80s.) Except for the size of the saucer (Ariel's was much smaller in comparison), this design does have a similar feel. Not that this is a bad thing...
By the way... I have a top and a side view of the Ariel which I'd like to post... but I can't. Anyone who wants to post them for me (and who already has more than 100 posts), feel free. The addresses are:
http://images.snapfish.com/3453797923232%7Ffp63%3Dot>2357%3D%3B2<%3D474%3DXROQDF>2323%3B95686%3B73ot1lsi
and
http://images.snapfish.com/3453797923232%7Ffp63%3Dot>2357%3D%3B2<%3D474%3DXROQDF>2323%3B95686%3B74ot1lsi
Well, here we differ... I can see all variety of ship shapes, provided that they conform to the basic rules (and "pseudo-rules") of the Trek universe. My only minor beef with this one is the shape of the nacelles... otherwise, I like this design quite a bit. Again, it doesn't have the "leading man" vessel looks that catches my imagination... but as a background ship, it is far better than most of the "kitbashes" we saw in the Dominion War background, for instance!
