Hmm...I'm not such a huge fan of those cutouts on the primary hull, or that flare on the superstructure aft of the bridge. Those really serve to beak up her lines. However, it's a beautiful design otherwise, quite nicely balanced.
Hmmm the shield layout does that indicate that Starfleet in your time has gone away from the shield bubble effect and back to close to the skin of the hull?
Hmm...I'm not such a huge fan of those cutouts on the primary hull, or that flare on the superstructure aft of the bridge. Those really serve to beak up her lines. However, it's a beautiful design otherwise, quite nicely balanced.
On the contrary, it serves to highlight her lines. The ship's design is all about forward motion from the side. The top view lacks any indicator of that motion with regards to the saucer area - consequently the cutouts and the impulse array help. Also its placement keeps means it doesn't interrupt the flow from the saucer to the nacelle.
Opinions are opinions though but I designed that element with the flow of the ship in mind.
Hmmm the shield layout does that indicate that Starfleet in your time has gone away from the shield bubble effect and back to close to the skin of the hull?
Yup. I'm personally more of a fan of that look. Mind you this sort of shielding wouldn't look like the one in the movie (like it wasn't there and the hull was constantly exploding) - I envision it with more of the bubble shield texture and effect but simply hugging close to the hull.
How does breaking up lines highlight them? That seems rather contrary.
At any rate, a taper to the superstructure would lend itself to the sense of forward motion you're trying to achieve with this ship much better than the flare you've got now. Just a thought.
I like the overall design, but there's a few points I see. The main thing is the size of the secondary hull. I think you could widen it just a little bit. I know you're going for the JJ-ish design with a HUGE primary hull and a relatively small secondary hull, but I've always prefered the proportions of the 1701-A where the secondary hull is a bit larger.
Also, I think the 2 planned dorsal phaser strips on the secondary hull could probably be condensed to 1 and maintain the same coverage.
I DO like the second battery of phasers near the bridge, although I personally would have moved them just ever-so farther out (maybe just outboard of that hull line it's above). I hope to see an updated side profile to include them.
How does breaking up lines highlight them? That seems rather contrary.
At any rate, a taper to the superstructure would lend itself to the sense of forward motion you're trying to achieve with this ship much better than the flare you've got now. Just a thought.
It isn't breaking up lines. Its using protrusions and separations to highlight an axis or an element. Below are just two examples of where this same technique has been used.
-Excelsior (same exact place as on Venture)
-Sovereign(Impulse Elements, shuttlebay, etc - all used to imply forward motion and all "breaking up her lines" from the top view)
Furthermore as I said before it doesn't mess with the lines as they travel from her saucer to the engines, your eyes still make the jump.
At the end of the day what this boils down to though isn't anything of better or worse design but simply a matter of opinion which we don't agree on. You feel it breaks it up and I feel it doesn't. Though I do appreciate the discussion and the viewpoint I personally am extremely happy with how the impulse flare looks.
Oh, I know. I'm sure you understand there's no maliciousness at all in my posts, I'm just curious. All that really matters is that you're happy with your design, we spectators be damned.
Edit: I just realized one thing. I think you may be confusing what I mean by "superstructure" to be the impulse engines, yes? Please correct me if I'm wrong on that point. But at any rate, when I say superstructure I mean deck 2, although it slopes downward toward the impulse engines and doesn't stay as deck 2. Anyway, I love the impulse design, the whole Excelsior throwback you've got going there. I meant the section with the dark grey paneling on the sides. That's the flare I was talking about. It looks kind of like the shuttle bay on the Galaxy. That's the section that I think would look better as either tapered or just straight, rather than flared out.
I've seen your other stuffs here, madeinjapan, but this shape is the most beautiful one. I think it's a very believable evolution of the Enterprise 2009's design.
Wow that's really cool design - it looks really futuristic and graceful ! :thumb:
BTW there's a 1-pixel-wide gap in the shields at the rear of the ship :rolleyes:
Been thinking about the dorsal view and I have a suggestion. Rather than have the two forward banks of three turrets, why not set them up in 5 pairs, much like the phasers on the Excelsior class?
The concept design and thought put into this Venture-Class is absolutely great!! Your design from what I have read, in your technical discussion, surely does exceed the Perception, as you say. Aesthetically though, I think your, design parallels too close of that of the Perception. Yes, I can discern the secondary from primary better, but like you said you .. to form a triangle for better drive performance. But for me that is the main difference from a distance. I guess as a FAN of yours, (I hope you consider), I was looking for something physically different in the design, .. a WOW factor, the next major vessel look.
Anyway, a couple of questions;
Is hull separation is any of your thoughts?
I do not see thrusters, as part of this preliminary design. Any thoughts.
The concept design and thought put into this Venture-Class is absolutely great!! Your design from what I have read, in your technical discussion, surely does exceed the Perception, as you say. Aesthetically though, I think your, design parallels too close of that of the Perception. Yes, I can discern the secondary from primary better, but like you said you .. to form a triangle for better drive performance. But for me that is the main difference from a distance. I guess as a FAN of yours, (I hope you consider), I was looking for something physically different in the design, .. a WOW factor, the next major vessel look.
Anyway, a couple of questions;
Is hull separation is any of your thoughts?
I do not see thrusters, as part of this preliminary design. Any thoughts.
I really honestly don't see how they parallel each other so much Madmacs. These designs are radically different. As for the next "major" vessel. There won't be one - at least not any time soon. I leave for OCS next summer and it will likely take me that long to finish existing projects. Sad to say but I think this design is sufficiently different. I figured this design was "WOW" enough.
Hull Separation - Yes
Thrusters - have settled on a design or if I want to use a diff. tech
Posts
On the contrary, it serves to highlight her lines. The ship's design is all about forward motion from the side. The top view lacks any indicator of that motion with regards to the saucer area - consequently the cutouts and the impulse array help. Also its placement keeps means it doesn't interrupt the flow from the saucer to the nacelle.
Opinions are opinions though but I designed that element with the flow of the ship in mind.
Yup. I'm personally more of a fan of that look. Mind you this sort of shielding wouldn't look like the one in the movie (like it wasn't there and the hull was constantly exploding) - I envision it with more of the bubble shield texture and effect but simply hugging close to the hull.
At any rate, a taper to the superstructure would lend itself to the sense of forward motion you're trying to achieve with this ship much better than the flare you've got now. Just a thought.
Also, I think the 2 planned dorsal phaser strips on the secondary hull could probably be condensed to 1 and maintain the same coverage.
I DO like the second battery of phasers near the bridge, although I personally would have moved them just ever-so farther out (maybe just outboard of that hull line it's above). I hope to see an updated side profile to include them.
It isn't breaking up lines. Its using protrusions and separations to highlight an axis or an element. Below are just two examples of where this same technique has been used.
-Excelsior (same exact place as on Venture)
-Sovereign(Impulse Elements, shuttlebay, etc - all used to imply forward motion and all "breaking up her lines" from the top view)
Furthermore as I said before it doesn't mess with the lines as they travel from her saucer to the engines, your eyes still make the jump.
At the end of the day what this boils down to though isn't anything of better or worse design but simply a matter of opinion which we don't agree on. You feel it breaks it up and I feel it doesn't. Though I do appreciate the discussion and the viewpoint I personally am extremely happy with how the impulse flare looks.
Edit: I just realized one thing. I think you may be confusing what I mean by "superstructure" to be the impulse engines, yes? Please correct me if I'm wrong on that point. But at any rate, when I say superstructure I mean deck 2, although it slopes downward toward the impulse engines and doesn't stay as deck 2. Anyway, I love the impulse design, the whole Excelsior throwback you've got going there. I meant the section with the dark grey paneling on the sides. That's the flare I was talking about. It looks kind of like the shuttle bay on the Galaxy. That's the section that I think would look better as either tapered or just straight, rather than flared out.
BTW there's a 1-pixel-wide gap in the shields at the rear of the ship :rolleyes:
Can't wait to see the finished product.
ps- tried to send you a PM, but your box seems to be full.
I have to ask. We see the three smaller phaser banks on the dorsal view, but they're not present on the side view. Is that going to be amended?
Its already amended on Deviant Art. Go look at final side view post. I'll put it here soon.
Looking forward to the fore and ventral (?) views.
The area around the deflector looks like a huge, cute smiley-face in that view
I think I like the Venture better than the Perception.
The concept design and thought put into this Venture-Class is absolutely great!! Your design from what I have read, in your technical discussion, surely does exceed the Perception, as you say. Aesthetically though, I think your, design parallels too close of that of the Perception. Yes, I can discern the secondary from primary better, but like you said you .. to form a triangle for better drive performance. But for me that is the main difference from a distance. I guess as a FAN of yours, (I hope you consider), I was looking for something physically different in the design, .. a WOW factor, the next major vessel look.
Anyway, a couple of questions;
Is hull separation is any of your thoughts?
I do not see thrusters, as part of this preliminary design. Any thoughts.
I really honestly don't see how they parallel each other so much Madmacs. These designs are radically different. As for the next "major" vessel. There won't be one - at least not any time soon. I leave for OCS next summer and it will likely take me that long to finish existing projects. Sad to say but I think this design is sufficiently different. I figured this design was "WOW" enough.
Hull Separation - Yes
Thrusters - have settled on a design or if I want to use a diff. tech
I'm tempted to try my hand at another of your ships... this one especially