Sequencer? I don't know what you mean. Unless you mean render engine, I use Cycles.
By dimension, I only mean that I have a bit of "thickness" to the object, it's not just a series of flat faces. There's an inside like there is with a real piece of glass.
In the Render Properties under Color Management you can change 'Display Device', 'View Transform' and 'Sequencer'
I use 'AgX' 'cause it promises a more realistic depiction of light. And in the most cases I'm pretty satisfied with the render results but if it comes to artificial, coloured light sources - like in the case of the bussards - I find it hard to achieve a certain look. I was just curious if you achieved your look under the same conditions.
And as for the dimension: that's what I assumed, just wasn't sure. My objects have this thickness, too
If I compare the first and last image of your latest post it seems like you are facing the same issues like me. Your hull material looks much more defined and vibrant with the new settings but if I look at the glowing parts like the bussard collectors and the warp grills the default settings look way better. I wish there would be a way to get 'the best of both worlds'.
If I compare the first and last image of your latest post it seems like you are facing the same issues like me. Your hull material looks much more defined and vibrant with the new settings but if I look at the glowing parts like the bussard collectors and the warp grills the default settings look way better. I wish there would be a way to get 'the best of both worlds'.
The roughness setting seems to help somewhat. I messed around with that and got some better results. But, the issue you're having is due to using high contrast mode. That's why you're getting the highs and lows on your glowy bits.
Anywho, I'm rendering something right now. I've been pulling my hair out (just kidding, it's really short, so I can't get a hold of it) trying to render an image with a freaking pre-rendered background image. But, I can't get it to show up in the render. So, I'm rendering the ship with no background and then I'll just composite it together in GIMP.
Here's an art render. I rendered the planet and stars separately so I could use heavier glare settings on the planet to make it glow a bit in the lighter areas. Using those settings on the ship would have looked horrendous. Then began the "fun" of just trying to render with a background in Blender. Ugh. Anyway, I did a composite image and I think it looks OK.
Incidentally, I was trying to make a nebula using procedurals in the background like I used to do in Lightwave. I never achieved that goal, but totally by accident, I figured out how to make my starfield multicolor. So, rather than just plain white stars, I have a variety of colors of stars, which is more realistic.
I had to think a minute where "Artsy Fartsy" came from. I believe it's from the film "Risky Business" with a very young Tom Cruise.
Your last composite image really shows the paneling on the saucer nicely. Subtle and not overbearing. Exactly as I like it. It also shows a nice angle on the ship we haven't seen before. I guess to some degree all three images do. I really like the planet image on the first one.
All in all, the fine work of an evil genius. Very nice.
Your last composite image really shows the paneling on the saucer nicely. Subtle and not overbearing. Exactly as I like it. It also shows a nice angle on the ship we haven't seen before. I guess to some degree all three images do. I really like the planet image on the first one.
All in all, the fine work of an evil genius. Very nice.
Thanks. The paneling shows up better because I'm using those render settings that @wibble posted. I usually have to do a bunch of stuff in post using GIMP, but those render settings saved me a lot of time.
She came out great. That detailing work really paid off. She feels like she could be on the show as a ship of the week instead of reusing the Oberth model.
Looking forward to seeing what you build next.
I did a few "beauty" renders with the Enterprise model.
The only one that's not a composite is the bottom one. That's because I had to render the ship and planet together, due to the planet being in a position to cast light back onto the underside of the ship. Due to this, I wasn't able to give the planet much help with the glare composite node without stuff on the ship like the bussards being blown out and unrealistic looking. Still, I think it looks OK, at least it fits my vision for the image. That's not a view I do very often, but it's one that got used a lot on TOS as a re-use of a stock shot from "Where No Man Has Gone Before."
Also, I released this model in both its original Lightwave and Blender formats:
She came out great. That detailing work really paid off. She feels like she could be on the show as a ship of the week instead of reusing the Oberth model.
Looking forward to seeing what you build next.
Don't forget the Miranda class and Excelsior class. Before they could afford to build a few more models, every guest ship was either the Excelsior, Reliant or Grissom. Even ships that were intended to get new models in later seasons (like the Bozeman and Pegasus) wound up using the old models for budget reasons. Then they went and made CGI models and those ship models continued to show up on DS9, Voyager and in the movies. Yet, somehow, the Ambassador class, which represented a much newer design, got no CGI model and basically disappeared after early DS9. (in case you can't tell, I've put a lot of thought into this)
Totally off topic (again) but I got myself a 17" square monitor off of Ebay. It was only $35, free shipping. It's an Acer, not too bad at all. So, I got my Windows 98 setup all dialed in:
And, of course, if you're going to do a Win98 computer, some classic gaming is a must. So, we have some Rogue Squadron 3D:
Such a fun game. That game was the reason I did my first ever PC upgrade back in the day, which was a 3D graphics card. Nowadays you get 3D graphics even with an APU, but 3D cards weren't a given back in the late 90s and early 2000s. So, in 1999 or so, I bought a 3D graphics card so that I could play Rogue Squadron on my PC. Now I can play it on a PC with less power than my cell phone and a square LCD monitor. Incidentally, the Microsoft Sidewinder Plug and Play isn't the best controller for that game, but I'm limited by what Windows 98 will actually recognize.
I don't mind the Excelsior in TNG. It was a successful class so it makes sense there'd still be some in service. I personally think it looks great next to the Galaxy, far better than it does next to the Constitution. They could have put some phaser strips on the CG versions though. At least try and make them look contemporary.
Rogue Squadron was a great game series. They don't make them like that anymore.
I don't mind the Excelsior in TNG. It was a successful class so it makes sense there'd still be some in service. I personally think it looks great next to the Galaxy, far better than it does next to the Constitution. They could have put some phaser strips on the CG versions though. At least try and make them look contemporary.
Rogue Squadron was a great game series. They don't make them like that anymore.
Actually, the Excelsior makes a lot of sense to be seen on TNG. When the Constitution class was removed from exploration duty, it was the Excelsior that replaced them. Then the Excelsior was replaced by the Ambassador class. When the old ships were removed from exploration duty, they would have been moved to other fleet duties. We saw them a lot as Admirals' personal ships and as ships that were seen doing transport missions and other duties. They would have naturally been "about" in Federation space. Then, as the Galaxy class became the new class of explorer, the same would have happened with the Ambassador class.
As for the Oberth, we actually saw a number of them in civilian use, as if they were decommissioned Starfleet ships that were being used by civilians, much like how people can buy military surplus vehicles today.
The Miranda class never really struck me as a ship that was a "front line" ship, as it were. It seemed to be more of a utility ship to me. The first one we saw was the Reliant, on loan to a group of civilians to scout planets in explored space. Not exactly glamorous. You can tell by the dialog that the crew was weary of the assignment. Then we saw the Saratoga on what looked like a routine patrol. In TNG, we saw them doing a lot of cargo duties and scientific missions. Those types of vessels (and planes) tend to have longer service than ships that do more "front line" duties. They also made good cannon fodder in the DS9 battles. But, Starfleet was scraping together whatever ships they had available for the Dominion war, so it makes sense that a lot of older ships like the Miranda and Excelsior would be there. In fact, the Mirandas in the battle scenes sported glowing nacelles, indicating that they may have been older ships, perhaps even previously decommissioned ones, that were refitted to fight the war.
Of course, the real answer is that ILM had made a few nice models for the movies, and TNG needed ships that they couldn't afford to build. So, ships in scripts became familiar classes. Hell, the Enterprise model almost made an appearance as the Stargazer. But, Rick Sternbach and Andrew Probert fought for their design to be used, plus nobody wanted to work with the refit Constitution due to how big and heavy it was, and the SFX shots for TNG were shot on the cheap, allowing room in the budget for more models.
Yeah, Rogue Squadron is still fun. I've also been playing some OG RollCoaster Tycoon and Age of Empires. Of course, I can play any of those games on modern systems. RollerCoaster Tycoon and AOE even have newer releases specifically for modern computers. But, that's not the point.
Usually, I don't show anything at this stage, but there's so much work involved in getting these shapes even close. Also, for people who don't know, I don't concern myself with ultra accuracy when I make models. I just have fun. The Stargazer 4-foot miniature was almost entirely scratch built by Greg Jein because, unlike the ready room model, there was no model to kitbash. Thus, its shapes are slightly different than the Enterprise refit. Also, there are no accurate schematics for this ship. Most are either just plain wrong, or seem to be based on the ready room model. I think it's likely that Andrew Probert or Rick Sternbach drew some schematics for their creation, and that's what they're based on. I'm also basing these shapes more on my own earlier work, which in turn was based on the old Fact Files schematics. If anyone is wondering how accurate those are, those schematics label the rear shuttlebays as impulse engines:
And, for some of the shapes, I'm basing them on screenshots and photos of the model, so you get my interpretation of an object that I have "meh" references of.
Also noticed the Red Dragon speakers. I had a keyboard failure recently and now have a Red Dragon Keyboard. I really like it.
Yeah, Red Dragon is a semi big name in budget computer accessories. Though, you can find those same speakers on sites like AliExpress, Amazon, etc. under a bunch of different brand names. But, I've had them a few years now and they sound nice and have never failed me. I got another pair of unbranded speakers that are very similar to them from Amazon yesterday for my other computers. Similar design, same controls. Probably from the same factory in China.
With the exception of the paneling pattern, stripes and registries that will be added later, I'm done with the nacelle.
The etched in lines aren't actually on the 4-foot filming miniature, but they are on the schematics. Since they don't necessarily represent anything on the ready room model, save for one decal, I don't know what they are supposed to represent. One towards the back lines up with a decal on the ready room model, but the rest are just lines that don't even begin to show all of the etched lines on the ready room model. The TMP-style RCS thrusters were my own addition, for the sake of reality.
Incidentally, those "inaccurate" schematics are canon. They appear as Okudagrams in the episode "Peak Performance."
This lends itself to my theory that they were either drawn by Probert or Sternbach. Just as an educated guess, I'm going to say Sternbach. If they originated in pre-production for "Peak Performance" to use as bridge displays, then they're from well after Probert left the show.
Incidentally, the assets used on screen to represent the Constellation class in general and the Stargazer specifically don't necessarily line up with the 4-foot filming miniature, and all are technically canon. That's why I'm not overly concerned with accuracy.
CGI model of the Hathaway used in TNG Remastered to replace a lost shot. It's not close to being accurate.
Plaque from Star Trek: Picard's second season showing the Stargazer, at Starfleet Academy. This appears to be the Eaglemoss version, which itself is Doug Drexler's model that he hastily kitbashed together years prior for a book cover. He also used it on the Ships of the Line calendar, and possibly in the book as well. I like Drexler, so I'm not going to be too harsh on this version, but it does keep popping up. He even said on his old blog years ago how quickly and less than accurately he put that model together. I think he literally just kitbashed the Foundation Imaging Enterprise model.
This is the cover for which he made that model.
And then there's this, possibly the same model, from Picard's memorabilia vault in the first episode of Picard.
Somehow, in my haste to get the nacelle done, I forgot the little bits on the back of the nacelle:
You can see what's there pretty clearly in this SD screenshot:
That's the shot where they redid it with CGI ships. Fortunately, the nacelle end bits are pretty clear, even in SD. This also illustrates just how wrong that CGI model is, but I digress.
I also did the paneling on the nacelle:
I haven't decided if I'm going to weather this ship or not. I generally don't do that anymore because it's just not realistic to weather a ship that only travels through space. There aren't many opportunities to get it dirty. There's also a deflector field around all Starfleet ships that prevents small dust and debris from contacting the hull. The reason the Stargazer was made to look so bad was due to the battle it had been in.
I actually figured out a few years ago that you can't properly build the Constellation class by making Refit parts and using them. The Constellation is just different enough that it won't look right and the parts don't scale properly. As I said previously, Greg Jein scratch built the filming miniature. That introduced variables into the familiar formula. This is true of the Reliant too. Those three models were made at different times by different people and in different sizes. While they look the same at a glance, a closer inspection reveals a lot of differences.
Yeah, the more you know about the old models, the more you realize how impossible it is to make an exact duplicate mesh. Especially when they make a big one and a smaller one that of course, can't possibly match, even though it is the same ship.
That's a great way to look at it. I'm having that issue with the Luna Class Titan. So many different Ortho Drawings and some who have done meshes with their own interpretation. I tried to follow the dimensions and original drawings, but some details are so small you can't really see what was going on. So you improvise.
Posts
In the Render Properties under Color Management you can change 'Display Device', 'View Transform' and 'Sequencer'
I use 'AgX' 'cause it promises a more realistic depiction of light. And in the most cases I'm pretty satisfied with the render results but if it comes to artificial, coloured light sources - like in the case of the bussards - I find it hard to achieve a certain look. I was just curious if you achieved your look under the same conditions.
And as for the dimension: that's what I assumed, just wasn't sure. My objects have this thickness, too
Though, now that I know they exist, those are some settings I will be playing with.
Speaking of playing, I'm done playing with this one. I'm moving it into the finished pile.
Here's a render I did using those settings @wibble was talking about.
I think with a bit of tweaking I could make it work.
The roughness setting seems to help somewhat. I messed around with that and got some better results. But, the issue you're having is due to using high contrast mode. That's why you're getting the highs and lows on your glowy bits.
Anywho, I'm rendering something right now. I've been pulling my hair out (just kidding, it's really short, so I can't get a hold of it) trying to render an image with a freaking pre-rendered background image. But, I can't get it to show up in the render. So, I'm rendering the ship with no background and then I'll just composite it together in GIMP.
Thanks a lot.
Here's an art render. I rendered the planet and stars separately so I could use heavier glare settings on the planet to make it glow a bit in the lighter areas. Using those settings on the ship would have looked horrendous. Then began the "fun" of just trying to render with a background in Blender.
Incidentally, I was trying to make a nebula using procedurals in the background like I used to do in Lightwave. I never achieved that goal, but totally by accident, I figured out how to make my starfield multicolor. So, rather than just plain white stars, I have a variety of colors of stars, which is more realistic.
https://forums.scifi-meshes.com/discussion/10001480/uss-rycon
Your last composite image really shows the paneling on the saucer nicely. Subtle and not overbearing. Exactly as I like it. It also shows a nice angle on the ship we haven't seen before. I guess to some degree all three images do. I really like the planet image on the first one.
All in all, the fine work of an evil genius. Very nice.
Thanks. The paneling shows up better because I'm using those render settings that @wibble posted. I usually have to do a bunch of stuff in post using GIMP, but those render settings saved me a lot of time.
Looking forward to seeing what you build next.
The only one that's not a composite is the bottom one. That's because I had to render the ship and planet together, due to the planet being in a position to cast light back onto the underside of the ship. Due to this, I wasn't able to give the planet much help with the glare composite node without stuff on the ship like the bussards being blown out and unrealistic looking. Still, I think it looks OK, at least it fits my vision for the image. That's not a view I do very often, but it's one that got used a lot on TOS as a re-use of a stock shot from "Where No Man Has Gone Before."
Also, I released this model in both its original Lightwave and Blender formats:
https://forums.scifi-meshes.com/discussion/10001481/enterprise-model
Though, if you grab the Lightwave version, it doesn't have spot lights for the running lights and the shaders need some love.
Don't forget the Miranda class and Excelsior class. Before they could afford to build a few more models, every guest ship was either the Excelsior, Reliant or Grissom. Even ships that were intended to get new models in later seasons (like the Bozeman and Pegasus) wound up using the old models for budget reasons. Then they went and made CGI models and those ship models continued to show up on DS9, Voyager and in the movies. Yet, somehow, the Ambassador class, which represented a much newer design, got no CGI model and basically disappeared after early DS9.
And, of course, if you're going to do a Win98 computer, some classic gaming is a must. So, we have some Rogue Squadron 3D:
Such a fun game. That game was the reason I did my first ever PC upgrade back in the day, which was a 3D graphics card. Nowadays you get 3D graphics even with an APU, but 3D cards weren't a given back in the late 90s and early 2000s. So, in 1999 or so, I bought a 3D graphics card so that I could play Rogue Squadron on my PC. Now I can play it on a PC with less power than my cell phone and a square LCD monitor.
Rogue Squadron was a great game series. They don't make them like that anymore.
Actually, the Excelsior makes a lot of sense to be seen on TNG. When the Constitution class was removed from exploration duty, it was the Excelsior that replaced them. Then the Excelsior was replaced by the Ambassador class. When the old ships were removed from exploration duty, they would have been moved to other fleet duties. We saw them a lot as Admirals' personal ships and as ships that were seen doing transport missions and other duties. They would have naturally been "about" in Federation space. Then, as the Galaxy class became the new class of explorer, the same would have happened with the Ambassador class.
As for the Oberth, we actually saw a number of them in civilian use, as if they were decommissioned Starfleet ships that were being used by civilians, much like how people can buy military surplus vehicles today.
The Miranda class never really struck me as a ship that was a "front line" ship, as it were. It seemed to be more of a utility ship to me. The first one we saw was the Reliant, on loan to a group of civilians to scout planets in explored space. Not exactly glamorous. You can tell by the dialog that the crew was weary of the assignment. Then we saw the Saratoga on what looked like a routine patrol. In TNG, we saw them doing a lot of cargo duties and scientific missions. Those types of vessels (and planes) tend to have longer service than ships that do more "front line" duties. They also made good cannon fodder in the DS9 battles. But, Starfleet was scraping together whatever ships they had available for the Dominion war, so it makes sense that a lot of older ships like the Miranda and Excelsior would be there. In fact, the Mirandas in the battle scenes sported glowing nacelles, indicating that they may have been older ships, perhaps even previously decommissioned ones, that were refitted to fight the war.
Of course, the real answer is that ILM had made a few nice models for the movies, and TNG needed ships that they couldn't afford to build. So, ships in scripts became familiar classes. Hell, the Enterprise model almost made an appearance as the Stargazer. But, Rick Sternbach and Andrew Probert fought for their design to be used, plus nobody wanted to work with the refit Constitution due to how big and heavy it was, and the SFX shots for TNG were shot on the cheap, allowing room in the budget for more models.
Yeah, Rogue Squadron is still fun. I've also been playing some OG RollCoaster Tycoon and Age of Empires.
Usually, I don't show anything at this stage, but there's so much work involved in getting these shapes even close. Also, for people who don't know, I don't concern myself with ultra accuracy when I make models. I just have fun. The Stargazer 4-foot miniature was almost entirely scratch built by Greg Jein because, unlike the ready room model, there was no model to kitbash. Thus, its shapes are slightly different than the Enterprise refit. Also, there are no accurate schematics for this ship. Most are either just plain wrong, or seem to be based on the ready room model. I think it's likely that Andrew Probert or Rick Sternbach drew some schematics for their creation, and that's what they're based on. I'm also basing these shapes more on my own earlier work, which in turn was based on the old Fact Files schematics. If anyone is wondering how accurate those are, those schematics label the rear shuttlebays as impulse engines:
And, for some of the shapes, I'm basing them on screenshots and photos of the model, so you get my interpretation of an object that I have "meh" references of.
It's sitting on top of my Keurig in the photos. Gotta have my coffee.
Yeah, Red Dragon is a semi big name in budget computer accessories. Though, you can find those same speakers on sites like AliExpress, Amazon, etc. under a bunch of different brand names. But, I've had them a few years now and they sound nice and have never failed me. I got another pair of unbranded speakers that are very similar to them from Amazon yesterday for my other computers. Similar design, same controls. Probably from the same factory in China.
Not that I needed an excuse, but it's still welcome.
The etched in lines aren't actually on the 4-foot filming miniature, but they are on the schematics. Since they don't necessarily represent anything on the ready room model, save for one decal, I don't know what they are supposed to represent. One towards the back lines up with a decal on the ready room model, but the rest are just lines that don't even begin to show all of the etched lines on the ready room model. The TMP-style RCS thrusters were my own addition, for the sake of reality.
Incidentally, those "inaccurate" schematics are canon. They appear as Okudagrams in the episode "Peak Performance."
This lends itself to my theory that they were either drawn by Probert or Sternbach. Just as an educated guess, I'm going to say Sternbach. If they originated in pre-production for "Peak Performance" to use as bridge displays, then they're from well after Probert left the show.
CGI model of the Hathaway used in TNG Remastered to replace a lost shot. It's not close to being accurate.
Plaque from Star Trek: Picard's second season showing the Stargazer, at Starfleet Academy. This appears to be the Eaglemoss version, which itself is Doug Drexler's model that he hastily kitbashed together years prior for a book cover. He also used it on the Ships of the Line calendar, and possibly in the book as well. I like Drexler, so I'm not going to be too harsh on this version, but it does keep popping up. He even said on his old blog years ago how quickly and less than accurately he put that model together. I think he literally just kitbashed the Foundation Imaging Enterprise model.
This is the cover for which he made that model.
And then there's this, possibly the same model, from Picard's memorabilia vault in the first episode of Picard.
All of these versions of the ship are canon.
You can see what's there pretty clearly in this SD screenshot:
That's the shot where they redid it with CGI ships. Fortunately, the nacelle end bits are pretty clear, even in SD. This also illustrates just how wrong that CGI model is, but I digress.
I also did the paneling on the nacelle:
I haven't decided if I'm going to weather this ship or not. I generally don't do that anymore because it's just not realistic to weather a ship that only travels through space. There aren't many opportunities to get it dirty. There's also a deflector field around all Starfleet ships that prevents small dust and debris from contacting the hull. The reason the Stargazer was made to look so bad was due to the battle it had been in.
That's a great way to look at it. I'm having that issue with the Luna Class Titan. So many different Ortho Drawings and some who have done meshes with their own interpretation. I tried to follow the dimensions and original drawings, but some details are so small you can't really see what was going on. So you improvise.