08
Jul
09
Archives
Recent Posts
Recent Comments
- DeanneM on SOTL 2011 Is A Go!
- Ryan Cornelius on SOTL 2011 Is A Go!
- Matt Wright on SOTL 2011 Is A Go!
- Eric N. on SOTL 2011 Is A Go!
- Syd Hughes on SOTL 2011 Is A Go!
- James M. Busby on Space Shuttle 2.0 – The X37 Launches In April
- Rick Sternbach on DS9 Tech Manual – 03 – Weaponry
- Paul on SOTL 2011 Is A Go!
- David Gian-Cursio on SOTL 2011 Is A Go!
- ChristopherPike on SOTL 2011 Is A Go!
- ChristopherPike on SOTL 2011 Is A Go!
- Boris on DS9 Tech Manual – 03 – Weaponry
- CX on SOTL 2011 Is A Go!
- Matt Boardman on Calling Dick Tracy! – 93
- Dwight Williams on Enterprise 100% Honest Size Comparison
Categories
Abramsverse Aviation BSG Buckaroo Banzai Dan Curry Dick Tracy Drexler DS9 Eaves ENT Enterprise J Ent Tech Eye Candy General Sci-Fi General Trek Hollywood Hutzel Makeup NASA/Science Nostalgia NY World's Fair Okuda Panel Art Pierre Drolet Pocket Books Probert Retro Design Shenanigans Site News SOTL Closeup Sternbach Steve Canyon TMP TNG TOS Treknology Uncategorized Virtuality VOY Wardrobe
Where can I get a print of this?
JWSJr.
Wow she looks “fat” in the pic
I was always a fan of the Intrepid class and it always seemed so sleek ! Anyway it’s good to see all the details.
BTW are the textures of the interiors based on actual sets or just some random images ?
“Wow she looks “fat” in the pic”
Heh. That seems to be an attribute of the CG model. If you’ll notice, the phaser strips on the top of the saucer have a visible bow to them, whereas on photos of the miniature they lie along a flat line when viewed from the front. So the digital version appears to have a steeper slope to the sides of the saucer than the physical model.
That said it’s a darn nice picture. I just noticed it appears to be the same camera angle and lighting setup as the image on the front of the Ships of the Line book!
Yeah, the physical model…
http://techspecs.acalltoduty.com/images/intrepid/mod3.jpg
… doesn’t have that bowing of the phasers, deflector grid, lifeboats, etc.
I think it is a function of trying to make linear features look straight either from the top or from the sides but not being able to do both on such a complex surface.
Sonic, that’s exactly the set of images I was thinking of. It really does look thinner than the CG version.
I do like Voyager, but this isn’t my favorite angle. Thanks for this unadorned CG look at her!
You say it’s rollercoastering…I say she’s just got her eyes narrowed
All of these shots are details from the SOTL book cover. That’s the common thread. These are shot in the neighborhood of a 100mm lens, shot from a long distance. The cover was supposed to be a Bob McCall style mural in the lobby of Starfleet. Those murals are often shot with a big lens POV.
Ah, but the image of the Reliant is *not* from the same angle as on the book cover! Explain that!
That rollercoastering goes way back to the original texture maps shot off the five foot miniature, if I recall correctly (Santa Barbara Studios did those?). Always makes me wince to see that, in light of the pains Tony Meininger and Co. took to get the deck heights scribed into the model. Each horizontal defensive shield grid line describes a deck center, where it made sense to run the power conduits for the shield. On the five footer, those grid lines and the phaser strips are absolutely straight. In moving shots it’s not so bad, but in stills it’s plainly visible.
“Rollercoastering”–that’s a good term for it.
It’s unclear how you mean that the photographic sources for the maps are responsible for it, though. Did they not get good enough documentation of the shapes of the hull or something?
To be honest, I think the “rollercoastering” is more realistic for a large scale object. Have you ever stood next to the prow of an aircraft carrier? There is nothing clean about the lines of the plating. You can literally see the understructure from the beating it has taken.
The USS Muffintop!
You know, in all these years, I never noticed there was an airlock at the bow of the Voyager.
The Aerospace Designer in me just can’t help to think that’s trouble.
The main deflector disch resembles a really nice smile. Never noticed that before.
I think I’m in the minority, but the Intrepid has never been one of my favourite classes. I think it’s the flattened and stretched look. Plus I’ve never liked the cut-outs on the saucer.
The one thing that bugged me about Voyager, and ther other advanced forms of ST, is that in the the ST:TNG episode “Up the Long Ladder”, made it clear that maintainance (which goes from general clean up to repair/replacement) wasn’t carried to it logical conclusion.
That is, if damage occurs to a hull plate, then when there is power freed up, that hull plate would be beamed out, and a new one beamed in – all without the crew’s intervention.
In other words the damage done to the Voyager by the Caretaker, was no big deal. The ship’s coputer would have taken care of it. Maybe not all at once, but over a week or so.
This would have been a better explainition for why the replicators were to be operated in a reduced mode of operations.
The Enterprise-D should have had this system from the start.
The only time that this wouldn’t be done fast is if there were other priorities involved. Like an all out battle. This would be very rare. Fast is relative.
IMO Voyager should have been a wreck by the time it got back to Earth. It tells the story. There was only one reason that the ship stayed clean til the very end…$$$. They didn’t want to give up their flying left to right stock footage. For many of us involved with the show, what we really wanted to see was the Voyager holding on just long enough to get our people back, then giving up the ghost. Sort of like the Bluesmobile at the end of “The Blues Brothers”. We finally got to do that in the BSG finale. Galactica literally comes apart at the seams when it makes it’s final jump. It was a thrill.
I’m with you about replicator technology keeping the ship repaired, but story-wise it hurts. One of these days I will show you what we did to the Galactica over four years, side, by side, by side, by side… it’s everything we wanted to do to Voyager but weren’t allowed to.
“Shining Voyager far from home.” I wonder what it would have been like if the ship had appeared all battered and partially functioning in the later seasons. I think it was never a problem for me that the ship always (well, nearly always) appeared so pristine. It was a symbol of clean Federation/Starfleet technology in the far way Delta Quadrant and certainly helped finding allies and trading partners in various episodes. I wonder how the Qomar would have reacted if they had been rescued by a nearly non-functioning Voyager, lots of bitching, I guess
Doug, here’s an idea for some future blog entries: Both Voyager and Enterprise were seen in several states of disrepair and modifications over the years. Similar to the Columbia orthoss that showed the ship half finished, maybe you still have some similar orthos of Voyager and Enterprise? What comes to mind:
USS Voyager:
- several stages of disrepair from “Year of hell”
- enhanced with Borg technology from “Scorpion II-The gift”
- evil fictional Voyager with additional weaponry from “Living witness”
- Voyager with ablative armor generators (armor not deployed)
Enterprise NX-01:
- large hole in hull from “Minefield/Dead stop”
- covered with space debris “Similitude”
- several stages of disrepair from second half of season 3
- future/past Enterprise from E2 (E squared – that would be great!)
There was some variation, but not as much as in BSG, poor Galactica!
“One of these days I will show you what we did to the Galactica over four years, side, by side, by side, by side… it’s everything we wanted to do to Voyager but weren’t allowed to.”
And one of the (many) things I was so awed by while watching BSG. I could see the damage being added, and I’d just giggle while my wife rolled her eyes.
“Year of Hell” is my favorite VOY episode, if only because of the damage taken that it SHOULD have taken over 7 years.
Most excellent point Jorg, Thanks for recalling that!’Year In Hell’ one of my all time favorite epi’s!
~Mark~
Interesting discussion on the differences between the physical and CG models. It’s a shame there are a few inaccuracies, but I don’t think they show up too much when the ship’s whizzing past the camera. It’s still a very nice model. Must be getting on in years now?
It was nice to see Voyager bent and broken and even blown up, but then everything got reset, of course. “Year of Hell” was the most extreme example, with “Unimatrix Zero” coming in a close second.
As to transporters and replicators automatically fixing the hull, I’m sure there could be some elements of both related technologies to fuse parts together, but even in Voyager’s time it would probably not be extensive due to the power requirements. I did a sequence of three drawings showing the hull being repaired in layers, mostly by EVA pods. I’m sure some robotic surface crawlers would be involved as well.
You mentioned the impact perspective has on larger objects; studio cameras are often employed to negate this effect, though what you showed with Voyager would be accurate for a fixed lens board. Appropriate modification of the angle of the lens board to the film plane will remove most ‘bowing’ or ‘fanning.’
Of course, these cameras are not being employed as much, given the tendency to photoshop the final image for corrections. Shame, because rail camera provide amazing perspective correction without distorting the original image.
On the note bout the pristine ship, from series beginning to end, the explanation of $$ makes sense, though the artistic aspect of showing the ship struggle through the wear and tear of the dangers of space would have been more emotionally potent. Imagine the conversation of examining the hull, three years into the show, like the conversation Sisko began about a spent phaser cell “Take a good look at this, people. It says something about this ship. It says that we will fight, and we will keep on fighting, until we can’t fight any more!”
Sometimes scars can be worn with pride.
The DC
Interesting comparision between the CGI and the physical model.
I too liked the damage done to the Voyager on occasion, yet I imagine an in-universe reason for keeping the ship in a top condition – crew morale and disciplin. Living in a clean and tidy environment is usually always prefered and keeping the ship from looking worn out maybe helps keeping the people from losing the edge, losing the pride to be a Starfleet officer. In keeping with the “wearing scars with pride” they could have included some sort of graphic like “XX days without warp core breach” or ripped out hull pieces with the names of all the shuttles go destroyed.
Cheers
Thorsten
Very nice! I love the cool lighting (cool as in temperature, but I suppose it works both ways in this case!) used for the shot as the light sort of just spills over the ships curves.
I agree that we should have seen Voyager a little more beaten and battered when she finally made it back to the Alpha quadrant. Or at least it would have been nice to see them stopping and maybe getting help for repairs at times because the ship and crew really took a beating at times.
Beautiful shot of Voyager. I don’t think I ever noticed those arrows around the deflector before, interesting.
Yeah, we should’ve seen Voyager in worse shape a lot more often. I kind of see it as being in a constant state of overhaul, the ‘they never stop painting the Golden Gate Bridge’ principle — as soon as they finish working, they have to start all over again.
Beyond that, I think the show should’ve focused a bit more on the ship and the crew itself and how they manage to stay alive and far less on the anomaly/alien/planet of the week. They’re essentially an isolated little community out in the middle of nowhere, sort of their own society and I’d have liked to have seen how the crew adjusted to that and the uncertainty they faced — everyone would have to know it would be a minor miracle if they ever made it home, how did that effect the crew’s psyche? Morale? This is of course some of the stuff they did brilliantly on BSG…and perhaps not coincidentally, I’m reminded of something Ronald D. Moore said about DS9 — that the show being set around a stationary point made it more suitable to story arcs and reoccurring characters. Well I think Voyager could have lent itself to that kind of thing as well since the ship and the crew were the only constants. It would’ve been nice to have several reoccurring characters too — that was something that always bothered me, the crew is like 150 or less but other than the main crew we rarely saw any familiar faces…of course I’m sure it’s much cheaper to put extras in the background than otherwise. Still… Not that I’m a Voyager hater by the way, I often enjoyed it but there were just a lot of missed opportunities.