What's this...? TOS.5.2

[Professor Moriarty]

Do you guys (and Deg in particular, of course) see what I'm getting at? Do you agree? Disagree?

I disagree. Looking at the clouds I can tell the sun must be behind, above and to port of the Enterprise, which is where the primary light source is obviously located. The only thing I'd concede is that the Enterprise probably would be more brightly light on top, with perhaps more bounce lighting from Earth below. But honestly, it's a gorgeous shot as it is.

 

[deg3D]

OOOOH, pretty!!!

(One small note: Are you "frosting" the translucency of the lower sensor dome on the primary hull and/or using a volumetric light for that large glowing object? If so, you might want to check your translucency and/or volumetric density settings, b/c I can see the outline of the other side of the dome on the "5.2" pic. Yeah, I'm that anal )

Edited to add: Here's what I'm referring to:

Good call I'll look into, Prof.

And thanks!

deg

 

[deg3D]

Next batch of previous TOS.5 shots (L) updated to the TOS.5.2 (R) E.







deg

Okay... the "wormhole" shot, I can't find any thing to comment on. Light, within a wormhole, is entirely subjective, since we don't know what a wormhole really looks like.

But... I'm "unconvinced" by the orbital shots. The reason is that the light source required to get that appearance for a planetary surface isn't the same as required to get that appearance for the ship.

In the first image, the sun would be "high, above your left shoulder" to get that lighting on the planet, I think. But the light for the ship seems to be coming from an entirely different direction. Also, I'm not really seeing "bounce" from the planetary surface.

Similarly, for the second "orbit" shot, to get that sort of lighting on the planet, the sun would be low and to the right... in front of you and well downwards. That means that the underside of the primary hull should be brilliantly illuminated, not "in shadow."

That's how it strikes me. Incompatible lighting for different elements of a shot is one of the first things that makes me react "ITS A FAAAAAKE!"

Do you guys (and Deg in particular, of course) see what I'm getting at? Do you agree? Disagree?

I completely disagree. I study backplates for long whiles while setting up matching lighting. There's an art to it actually and I feel I'm pretty darn good at it actually as well, and have been told so on multiple occasions by multiple pros working in the business for years (David Stipes, who was a lighting director on Star Trek for one), that my lighting, analysis/match and execution, is suburb.

As to getting green..., that planet shot throws less discerning peeps all the time, as they often mistake lakes and darker land bodies as cloud shadows and miss the real cloud shadows which are much more subtle to perceive.

As to brand new day..., there is blue bounce on the bottom of the hull (there is always planet bounce-light added in my work, it's just never overdone and blatantly obvious like most peeps do, IMO, as remember, I'm the king of less is more, eh). As to the sun's direction, it's obviously coming from aft port, just above the edge of horizon, just like it is casting on E.

Me feels you need to brush up on your plate analysis, Cary, eps. before yelling, "ITS A FAAAAAKE!". Offensive. Thanks for the input nevertheless.

deg

 

[deg3D]

I kind of like the bussard ramscoops on the first version a little better than the second...they're clearer and it looks like I can see swirling gas in there. But I do like the self-lighting on the second version of the ship. This is some great work here!

Thanks, JJohnson.

See to me, the .5 domes efx looked cartoonish and overdone. I never really cared for it myself. It was OK, but I was always settling for what I could get in modo. But glad you still like it, eh.

deg

 

[deg3D]

Do you guys (and Deg in particular, of course) see what I'm getting at? Do you agree? Disagree?

I disagree. Looking at the clouds I can tell the sun must be behind, above and to port of the Enterprise, which is where the primary light source is obviously located. The only thing I'd concede is that the Enterprise probably would be more brightly light on top, with perhaps more bounce lighting from Earth below. But honestly, it's a gorgeous shot as it is.

I believe you are speaking of BND...

Not given the low angle on the horizon that the sun is at, given the fall-off of light intensity going down the surface as it falls to the right. IMO, anywho.

deg

 

[JJohnson]

I just found out about some interesting space shots some MIT students did with a $150 camera....perhaps you could superimpose your Enterprise in these shots as a little easter egg

shot 1, shot 2, website

 

[deg3D]

OOOOH, pretty!!!

(One small note: Are you "frosting" the translucency of the lower sensor dome on the primary hull and/or using a volumetric light for that large glowing object? If so, you might want to check your translucency and/or volumetric density settings, b/c I can see the outline of the other side of the dome on the "5.2" pic. Yeah, I'm that anal )

Edited to add: Here's what I'm referring to:

Fixed!

Thanks, again, Prof. Good eye!

deg

 

[deg3D]

I just found out about some interesting space shots some MIT students did with a $150 camera....perhaps you could superimpose your Enterprise in these shots as a little easter egg

shot 1, shot 2, website

Thanks, JJohnson, but I could not use those legally, thus in good conscious. Those shots were taken by the private sector, and fall under the artist's intellectual property rights. Permission would have to be granted or paid for before they could be used.

NASA shots are paid for by American tax dollars, thus belong to the American public as paid for public domain to use any way they wish.

Thanks anywho, it's the thought that counts, eh.

Those are very nice shots though.

deg

 

[Cary L. Brown]

I completely disagree. I study backplates for long whiles while setting up matching lighting. There's an art to it actually and I feel I'm pretty darn good at it actually, and have been told so on many occasions by multiple pros working in the business for years, that my lighting, analysis/match and execution is suburb.

As to getting green..., that planet shot throws less discerning peeps all the time, as they often mistake lakes and darker land bodies as cloud shadows and miss the real cloud shadows which are much more subtle to perceive.

As to brand new day..., there is blue bounce on the bottom of the hull (there is always planet bounce-light added in my work, it's just never overdone and blatantly obvious like most peeps do, IMO, as remember, I'm the king of less is more, eh). As to the sun's direction, it's obviously coming from aft port, just above the edge of horizon, just like it is casting on E.

Me feels you need to brush up on your plate analysis, Cary, eps. before yelling, "ITS A FAAAAAKE!". Offensive. Thanks for the input nevertheless.

Oh, C'mon, now... nothing offensive about it.

I'm "unconvinced" ...
...I think...
...seems to be coming from an entirely different direction...
...I'm not really seeing...
...That's how it strikes me...
...is one of the first things that makes me react...
Do you guys (and Deg in particular, of course) see what I'm getting at? Do you agree? Disagree?

I don't know how I could have been any more clear about the fact that I was describing MY REACTION, and that I wasn't 100% convinced that MY REACTION was "correct."

 

[deg3D]

I completely disagree. I study backplates for long whiles while setting up matching lighting. There's an art to it actually and I feel I'm pretty darn good at it actually, and have been told so on many occasions by multiple pros working in the business for years, that my lighting, analysis/match and execution is suburb.

As to getting green..., that planet shot throws less discerning peeps all the time, as they often mistake lakes and darker land bodies as cloud shadows and miss the real cloud shadows which are much more subtle to perceive.

As to brand new day..., there is blue bounce on the bottom of the hull (there is always planet bounce-light added in my work, it's just never overdone and blatantly obvious like most peeps do, IMO, as remember, I'm the king of less is more, eh). As to the sun's direction, it's obviously coming from aft port, just above the edge of horizon, just like it is casting on E.

Me feels you need to brush up on your plate analysis, Cary, eps. before yelling, "ITS A FAAAAAKE!". Offensive. Thanks for the input nevertheless.

Oh, C'mon, now... nothing offensive about it.

I'm "unconvinced" ...
...I think...
...seems to be coming from an entirely different direction...
...I'm not really seeing...
...That's how it strikes me...
...is one of the first things that makes me react...
Do you guys (and Deg in particular, of course) see what I'm getting at? Do you agree? Disagree?

I don't know how I could have been any more clear about the fact that I was describing MY REACTION, and that I wasn't 100% convinced that MY REACTION was "correct."

Oh, I got that, my friend. Just sharing my POV back with ya, eh.

As for the offensive part, I guess it depends on how one sees it. I feel there are more tactful ways of sharing opinions than (including) screaming such things. But that's just me. Actually, I rarely take offense, and didn't this time. I was merely trying to point out the lack of tact in regard to screaming such a statement. Esp. when you are incorrect, LOL.

deg

 

[Psion]

I completely disagree. I study backplates for long whiles while setting up matching lighting. There's an art to it actually and I feel I'm pretty darn good at it actually, and have been told so on many occasions by multiple pros working in the business for years, that my lighting, analysis/match and execution is suburb.

As to getting green..., that planet shot throws less discerning peeps all the time, as they often mistake lakes and darker land bodies as cloud shadows and miss the real cloud shadows which are much more subtle to perceive.

As to brand new day..., there is blue bounce on the bottom of the hull (there is always planet bounce-light added in my work, it's just never overdone and blatantly obvious like most peeps do, IMO, as remember, I'm the king of less is more, eh). As to the sun's direction, it's obviously coming from aft port, just above the edge of horizon, just like it is casting on E.

Me feels you need to brush up on your plate analysis, Cary, eps. before yelling, "ITS A FAAAAAKE!". Offensive. Thanks for the input nevertheless.

Oh, C'mon, now... nothing offensive about it.

I'm "unconvinced" ...
...I think...
...seems to be coming from an entirely different direction...
...I'm not really seeing...
...That's how it strikes me...
...is one of the first things that makes me react...
Do you guys (and Deg in particular, of course) see what I'm getting at? Do you agree? Disagree?

I don't know how I could have been any more clear about the fact that I was describing MY REACTION, and that I wasn't 100% convinced that MY REACTION was "correct."

Oh, I got that, my friend. Just sharing my POV back with ya, eh.

As for the offensive part, I guess it depends on how one sees it. I feel there are more tactful ways of sharing opinions than (including) screaming such things. But that's just me. Actually, I rarely take offense, and didn't this time. I was merely trying to point out the lack of tact in regard to screaming such a statement. Esp. when you are incorrect, LOL.

deg

But wasn't he just using an amusing quote from DS9's episode "In the Pale Moonlight" wherein Senator Vreenak discovers a bit of subterfuge on the part of Sisko and Garak? In fact, someone around here had that very image as their avatar for a while.

In that same vein, and with absolutely no pertinence to the current discussion, I feel compelled to yell, "KHAAAAAAANNNNN!"

Hey! That felt great! And all my co-workers are staring. Everyone who feel's Deg's work is amazing, post a loud "KHAAAAAANNNNN!"

 

[Herkimer Jitty]

How KHAAAAAAAAAN you be so awesome, Deg?

 

[deg3D]

But wasn't he just using an amusing quote from DS9's episode "In the Pale Moonlight" wherein Senator Vreenak discovers a bit of subterfuge on the part of Sisko and Garak? In fact, someone around here had that very image as their avatar for a while.

Ahhh, sure sure.

In that same vein, and with absolutely no pertinence to the current discussion, I feel compelled to yell, "KHAAAAAAANNNNN!"

Hey! That felt great! And all my co-workers are staring. Everyone who feel's Deg's work is amazing, post a loud "KHAAAAAANNNNN!"

How KHAAAAAAAAAN you be so awesome, Deg?

You guys crack me up, thanks!

Think I'll give it a go as well... KHAAAAAAAAAANNNNN!

Yeah, that did feel pretty good, always does, eh.

deg

 

[Disillusioned]

KHAAAAAAAAAN you post any more up?

 

[deg3D]

KHAAAAAAAAAN you post any more up?

Working on the orthos as well. Will try to have them up tonight, as I am flying to Philly for the weekend.

deg

 

[RyanKCR]

First I must say that is excellent work.

Second about a few pages back there was a discussion about the refit Enterprise and its self-illumination. On the TMP and only in TMP is every spot light accounted for by either a source light on the model or on places where a source light could be. For example the inner nacell registry some suggested the back of the saucer but if you look at the distortion of the light shape it looks more like coming from the secondary hull near the fantail above the hanger doors. The Delta shield is comming from one of the two spotlights on the bottom front of the nacelles.

 

[Kaiser]

KHAAAAAAAAAN you post any more up?

Working on the orthos as well. Will try to have them up tonight, as I am flying to Philly for the weekend.

deg

awesome work

 

[MadMan1701A]

This keeps getting better. I think the new Nacelle Domes and the deflector, along with the self-illumination, makes this thing just about perfect.

 

[Professor Moriarty]

Thanks, again, Prof. Good eye!

You're welcome. When you've been staring at the Enterprise for forty-odd years you pick up on things pretty quick.

 

[I-Am-Zim]

awesome.

and, as it seems we're obliged to comment on it now, i also like the XI Enterprise and believe that trekdom is richer for having it than not.?

I have to disagree. The Trek universe could have done very well without the Abramsprise. But that's just my opinion.

how long until someone does a 'phantom edit' of STXI and puts in the TOS Enterprise?
including, presumably, a scene of a young james kirk seeing the vessel under construction, in orbit, while dying of asphyxiation?

And, believe it or not, I'm actually working on that right now.