So, once again, Linux users get screwed. (though, we're used to it) I don't know why that feature isn't in the Linux version, but it's not. It's really odd, since other cross platform programs have that (IE: Inkscape, GIMP.) I have no idea what the Mac version has, because I don't have a Mac.
The Linux version doesn't have it because it's "using ready-made modal window functions in windows that are not present in linux, so we would have to code these manually." Blender Artists thread about it.
However, both versions have the "Restore Previous Session" feature, which is a real bacon saver in the event of a crash or accidental closure. So, you're at least protected there.
Was going to mention this. Every time Blender closes (that isn't, y'know, an outright cataclysmic crash), it saves the session and can be easily restored on next launch. Coupled with the Auto-Save feature and saving incrementally (open save dialog, make sure your initial file has a number in it like 000, then just hit + to increment the number for each save), it's actually pretty hard to lose your work.
i turned on that prompt quit feature within a few weeks of starting to use blender, the ability to quit on a key combination ( i can no longer remember the awful combination) however is a truly stupid thing to put in. one would think with blender being open source annoyed users might have ensured later versions no longer contained this dangerous "flaw".
The Linux version doesn't have it because it's "using ready-made modal window functions in windows that are not present in linux, so we would have to code these manually." Blender Artists thread about it.
I've heard/seen excuses like that before, and they seem weak to me. I'm no programmer, but it seems to me that they could program it to use universal tools, as opposed to Windows controls. However, things like this occur when people get lazy programming stuff for Windows and don't worry about how it works in other operating systems.
Though, this isn't and never was a deal breaker for me. Honestly, I don't even like how the prompt works. It only has two options, "Save" and "Cancel," allowing you to either save and quit or cancel quitting. Most prompts like that allow you the option to not save and still quit, but this one doesn't. So, even if I was running Blender in Windows, I'd probably deactivate that thing.
Sorry for the lack of updates. The planetary sensor array posed a greater challenge than I had anticipated. Took way too long and I had to abandon an earlier attempt after the results rendered far too poorly.
I'm actually happy with how the latest incarnation has turned out. I still have a fair amount of detail I intend to add inside the cowlings but I'm sticking a pin in it for the night.
And please keep the Blender conversation rolling! I'd already discovered the "+" increment option but I cannot tell you why I haven't set the auto-save option...
One question I have for the Blender elite is how do I hide/unhide a collection/group of meshes? I'm used to the grouping feature in Max where the group is treated as a unified object until it is either opened or exploded. I've tried googling for a succinct answer but apart from a rather snarky reply from a maintainer when some users posted this feature request in the bug tracker I have yet to find any actual solutions.
Yeah, what's the big idea? Gotta keep the updates coming or I'll continue succumbing to the urge to correct evil_genius_180.
The planetary sensor array posed a greater challenge than I had anticipated. Took way too long and I had to abandon an earlier attempt after the results rendered far too poorly.
I'm actually happy with how the latest incarnation has turned out. I still have a fair amount of detail I intend to add inside the cowlings but I'm sticking a pin in it for the night.
And please keep the Blender conversation rolling! I'd already discovered the "+" increment option but I cannot tell you why I haven't set the auto-save option...
One thing to remember about settings is that if you have a file open, then save your settings, the current file also becomes a default setting. I think there's a way to decouple this, but more than a few times I've accidentally saved my active scene as my startup file.
Whenever you want to change a default setting, best to open a blank new scene, change the setting, then save settings.
One question I have for the Blender elite is how do I hide/unhide a collection/group of meshes? I'm used to the grouping feature in Max where the group is treated as a unified object until it is either opened or exploded. I've tried googling for a succinct answer but apart from a rather snarky reply from a maintainer when some users posted this feature request in the bug tracker I have yet to find any actual solutions.
In the Outliner, you can right-click on the top element in a mesh hierarchy (assuming you mean objects that are parented to one another) and "Select Hierarchy." This will select the object and all its children. Then simply use the usual Hide/Unhide (H, Alt H) commands as normal.
In the Outliner, you can right-click on the top element in a mesh hierarchy (assuming you mean objects that are parented to one another) and "Select Hierarchy." This will select the object and all its children. Then simply use the usual Hide/Unhide (H, Alt H) commands as normal.
I think that is the closest that Blender will do to the functionality I'm seeking. Unfortunately when I right click on a parent and click "Select Hierarchy" it doesn't actually appear to do anything. Following it up with "alt+h" results in everything in the scene being unhidden.
Thanks for the info, though. I'll do some additional experimentation tomorrow. I'm sure there's a subtle nuance that I'm overlooking.
I think that is the closest that Blender will do to the functionality I'm seeking. Unfortunately when I right click on a parent and click "Select Hierarchy" it doesn't actually appear to do anything. Following it up with "alt+h" results in everything in the scene being unhidden.
Thanks for the info, though. I'll do some additional experimentation tomorrow. I'm sure there's a subtle nuance that I'm overlooking.
Try doing it twice. If you had anything selected the first time, it may simply function as a deselect toggle initially.
Slow going this week. Chaos at work so not much progress this week. This is the aft panel. Probably shouldn't have bothered since it gets the least amount of visibility but it's still good practice
Forgive the temporary colors, as with the other pictures I am just using placeholders until the mesh is completed.
And thanks for the pointers, McG! I have had some limited success selective hiding, though most times when I hit Alt+h I end up unhiding everything. I'm sure it's just a matter of practice using the interface more creatively than I have to date.
Slow going this week. Chaos at work so not much progress this week. This is the aft panel. Probably shouldn't have bothered since it gets the least amount of visibility but it's still good practice
Forgive the temporary colors, as with the other pictures I am just using placeholders until the mesh is completed.
I have had some limited success selective hiding, though most times when I hit Alt+h I end up unhiding everything. I'm sure it's just a matter of practice using the interface more creatively than I have to date.
Sorry, my previous statement was unclear.
In the Outliner, you can right-click on the top element in a mesh hierarchy (assuming you mean objects that are parented to one another) and "Select Hierarchy." This will select the object and all its children. Then simply use the usual Hide/Unhide (H, Alt H) commands as normal.
Hide/Unhide and H, Alt H were meant to be paired -- H for Hide, Alt H for Unhide -- and used as needed once the hierarchy was selected. The full sequence would thus be:
Hit 'a' to deselect everything (hit it twice if it ends up selecting everything instead; it's a toggle command)
In the Outliner, right-click on the top-level parent of the hierarchy you wan to hide.
Choose "Select Hierarchy"
Visually confirm that the entire hierarchy was selected as needed
Hit 'h' to hide all of the currently selected objects
When done, hit 'alt h' to unhide the objects previously hidden.
Nice work on the sensor doodad. That thing is a PITA to get right, especially since a lot of the images I have don't show those little details that closely. (I just skipped them, like they did for the CGI model for the TMP DVD )
Thanks for the clarification. Your instructions definitely work as advertised
And sorry for the typo in your handle earlier :rolleyes:
evil_genius_180,
After several nearly compulsive binges of hunting/scraping, I'm sitting on nearly 500 Mb of reference photos. I'm pleased to say that I've got reasonably detailed shots of the refit from just about every angle. Definitely helps when modeling the more obscure parts.
I had considered skipping the details here since they'll almost certainly be overlooked by viewers but I thought it'd be good practice just the same. I'm not going into too much detail so as to not overload the already weighty model for even more faces it doesn't need. At this point I think I've got it at a happy medium.
When I was building mine, I was on a serious time crunch and I wanted to keep the poly count under control because I *thought* it was for a fan film. So, if I didn't have really close shots of something, I just went "eh, that looks good enough" and moved on. The odds of that stuff ever being seen were practically nil, so I just skipped it entirely. Though, I certainly applaud you for going for every single detail. Maybe someday I'll do a version 2 and do that.
Long work week, not nearly enough progress. I'm about 60% through the impulse engines. The grill is just a placeholder texture. I am playing with the cycles brick textures as a transparency. Considering the complexity of the original grill I will either need to use an image map or model it physically. I'm on the fence regarding either solution.
I have to say, the main body of this section was a lot more challenging than I had anticipated. Only now in retrospect does it occur to me that I approached the model backwards, starting with the engine exhaust then proceeding into the cylinder of the dome housing. It would have been FAR more efficient to start with the cylinder, cut it in half and extrude out the rectangular outline as the exhaust body. Live and learn I guess!
I have to say, the main body of this section was a lot more challenging than I had anticipated. Only now in retrospect does it occur to me that I approached the model backwards, starting with the engine exhaust then proceeding into the cylinder of the dome housing.
I appear to have a normal error just round the bend on the back. I may need to dial back to an earlier mesh iteration to fix it since the bevels and extrusions will make hell for shifting the faces back to smooth. Oh well, it's all good practice
Almost done with the neck pylon. Still need to do the photon torpedo bay facing. The tail end of the spine will be completed once the engineering hull is sculpted since it will conform along the length.
I've found reference material, including screen shots that support the starboard side of the photon torpedo bay being either smooth or a mirror of the port side. For now I'm deferring to the path of least resistance and keeping it smooth. Should the situation arise, mirroring the sides will require only an update to textures.
While working on this it occurred to me how absolutely insane the photon torpedo bay is in this design. It seems somewhat foolhardy to store your most powerful explosives in the fragile umbilica dividing your craft. To have your launch bays actually straddling the matter/antimatter intermix chamber seems positively suicidal!
That looks great. I don't know about you, but I found the subtle curvature of that pylon to be a bit of a challenge.
As for the torpedo launcher area, my references show it being symmetrical. Both sides even have a docking port, which seems a bit redundant. I've attached a picture of the starboard side.
I think we had a discussion once ages ago about how one shot to the torpedo magazines could pretty much destroy, or at the very least forcibly separate the ship. Not just this one either. The Enterprise-C and Enterprise-D have torpedo launchers there too.
Not to thread hijack (since the model is very impressive and should remain the star of the show, as it were), but maybe there is a method to their madness.
Photon Torpedoes are basically anti-matter warheads, right? They reach the target, drop the containment field, and turn the reaction into a big blast of radiation and photons (hence the name). But, it's not like they'd store the anti-matter charge IN the torpedoes while they're in the magazine. I mean, nuclear weapons--they're inert until triggered. Chemical explosives have issues, hence heavily armored magazines. But you're not going to leave anti-matter weapons "charged."
So, perhaps the placement ISN'T foolhardy? Maybe it's just the most convenient place to siphon off the antimatter stream to the engines to fuel and arm the torpedoes? I don't know if any of the blueprints have that ... but it's not unlike Trek to leave some critical details out while over-explaining others, right?
Excellent work on the model, so far. There are a LOT of Connies out there (refit, pre-refit, JJ, etc.) and this one is shaping up to be a beauty.
That curve nearly drove me nuts. I'm not sure I'm 100% done with the modeling but I'm trying to not let motivation be extinguished by minutia on any given subtlety when as a whole it still is a convincing illusion. I actually had a LOT more trouble getting a form down for the torp launcher than the pylon but I'm pretty happy with this result. That may change once I start on the engineering hull...
With regards to the airlock on the torpedo launch bay, I've actually got screencaps backing up both arguments. I can post examples this evening but that's not terribly important. I think the original Enterprise refit lacked an airlock on the starboard side but the replacement ship (-A) had airlocks on both port and starboard.
Sanderlee,
Your explanation is the best I've heard yet for the photon torpedo placement. It really does make a lot of sense and would be far more safe than to have scores of magnetic bottles all holding their destructive payload, just waiting for a momentary fluctuation in charge to give them an excuse to annihilate themselves and bisect the ship!
I'm definitely not blazing a new trail by modeling a TMP connie but I thought how better to learn a new 3D platform than with something that I and the rest of the community are so intimately familiar. Better to learn from the familiar than to blaze a new trail and learn that the tools (or my skills) aren't up to the challenge
I've already started collecting reference material for my next project. I want to play with kinematics and animation in Blender and I think I've found the ideal platform to kick that around.
That curve nearly drove me nuts. I'm not sure I'm 100% done with the modeling but I'm trying to not let motivation be extinguished by minutia on any given subtlety when as a whole it still is a convincing illusion. I actually had a LOT more trouble getting a form down for the torp launcher than the pylon but I'm pretty happy with this result. That may change once I start on the engineering hull...
I know what you mean. It's easy to get frustrated and burnt out on a project like this, so you have to know when ti's time to go "it's close enough" and move on.
With regards to the airlock on the torpedo launch bay, I've actually got screencaps backing up both arguments. I can post examples this evening but that's not terribly important. I think the original Enterprise refit lacked an airlock on the starboard side but the replacement ship (-A) had airlocks on both port and starboard.
Yeah, unfortunately, the pics I have of the ship are of its most recent configuration, for Star Trek VI. The model was over a decade old by then and hadn't always been treated well, so they had to do extensive work on it. Who knows, they may have added an airlock to that side. Maybe they weren't sure if it was supposed to be symmetrical either. Plus, it had had various work done to it previously.
Posts
Was going to mention this. Every time Blender closes (that isn't, y'know, an outright cataclysmic crash), it saves the session and can be easily restored on next launch. Coupled with the Auto-Save feature and saving incrementally (open save dialog, make sure your initial file has a number in it like 000, then just hit + to increment the number for each save), it's actually pretty hard to lose your work.
Books: [ Ashes of Alour-Tan | Embers of Alour-Tan ] | Blender Tutorials | Blog
I've heard/seen excuses like that before, and they seem weak to me. I'm no programmer, but it seems to me that they could program it to use universal tools, as opposed to Windows controls. However, things like this occur when people get lazy programming stuff for Windows and don't worry about how it works in other operating systems.
Though, this isn't and never was a deal breaker for me. Honestly, I don't even like how the prompt works. It only has two options, "Save" and "Cancel," allowing you to either save and quit or cancel quitting. Most prompts like that allow you the option to not save and still quit, but this one doesn't. So, even if I was running Blender in Windows, I'd probably deactivate that thing.
I'm actually happy with how the latest incarnation has turned out. I still have a fair amount of detail I intend to add inside the cowlings but I'm sticking a pin in it for the night.
PlanetarySensorArray-179.png
And please keep the Blender conversation rolling! I'd already discovered the "+" increment option but I cannot tell you why I haven't set the auto-save option...
One question I have for the Blender elite is how do I hide/unhide a collection/group of meshes? I'm used to the grouping feature in Max where the group is treated as a unified object until it is either opened or exploded. I've tried googling for a succinct answer but apart from a rather snarky reply from a maintainer when some users posted this feature request in the bug tracker I have yet to find any actual solutions.
Looks marvelous!
One thing to remember about settings is that if you have a file open, then save your settings, the current file also becomes a default setting. I think there's a way to decouple this, but more than a few times I've accidentally saved my active scene as my startup file.
Whenever you want to change a default setting, best to open a blank new scene, change the setting, then save settings.
In the Outliner, you can right-click on the top element in a mesh hierarchy (assuming you mean objects that are parented to one another) and "Select Hierarchy." This will select the object and all its children. Then simply use the usual Hide/Unhide (H, Alt H) commands as normal.
Is that what you mean?
Books: [ Ashes of Alour-Tan | Embers of Alour-Tan ] | Blender Tutorials | Blog
I think that is the closest that Blender will do to the functionality I'm seeking. Unfortunately when I right click on a parent and click "Select Hierarchy" it doesn't actually appear to do anything. Following it up with "alt+h" results in everything in the scene being unhidden.
Thanks for the info, though. I'll do some additional experimentation tomorrow. I'm sure there's a subtle nuance that I'm overlooking.
Books: [ Ashes of Alour-Tan | Embers of Alour-Tan ] | Blender Tutorials | Blog
Forgive the temporary colors, as with the other pictures I am just using placeholders until the mesh is completed.
PlanetarySensorArray-Aft-182.png
And thanks for the pointers, McG! I have had some limited success selective hiding, though most times when I hit Alt+h I end up unhiding everything. I'm sure it's just a matter of practice using the interface more creatively than I have to date.
Looking good!
McG is a film producer.
Sorry, my previous statement was unclear.
Hide/Unhide and H, Alt H were meant to be paired -- H for Hide, Alt H for Unhide -- and used as needed once the hierarchy was selected. The full sequence would thus be:
Does that make more sense?
Books: [ Ashes of Alour-Tan | Embers of Alour-Tan ] | Blender Tutorials | Blog
False color for details
PlanetarySensorArray-Stbd-false-189.png
A little closer to the final colors
PlanetarySensorArray-Stbd-189.png
McC,
Thanks for the clarification. Your instructions definitely work as advertised
And sorry for the typo in your handle earlier :rolleyes:
evil_genius_180,
After several nearly compulsive binges of hunting/scraping, I'm sitting on nearly 500 Mb of reference photos. I'm pleased to say that I've got reasonably detailed shots of the refit from just about every angle. Definitely helps when modeling the more obscure parts.
I had considered skipping the details here since they'll almost certainly be overlooked by viewers but I thought it'd be good practice just the same. I'm not going into too much detail so as to not overload the already weighty model for even more faces it doesn't need. At this point I think I've got it at a happy medium.
When I was building mine, I was on a serious time crunch and I wanted to keep the poly count under control because I *thought* it was for a fan film. So, if I didn't have really close shots of something, I just went "eh, that looks good enough" and moved on. The odds of that stuff ever being seen were practically nil, so I just skipped it entirely.
PlanetarySensorArray-191.png
Impulse-Aft-226.png
I have to say, the main body of this section was a lot more challenging than I had anticipated. Only now in retrospect does it occur to me that I approached the model backwards, starting with the engine exhaust then proceeding into the cylinder of the dome housing. It would have been FAR more efficient to start with the cylinder, cut it in half and extrude out the rectangular outline as the exhaust body. Live and learn I guess!
That's how I've always done this style of engine.
Gigabyte RTX 3080 Gaming OC 12GB
1TB NVMe SSD, 2 x 1GB SATA SSD, 4TB external HDD
32 GB RAM
Windows 11 Pro
Impulse-Aft-228.png
You'd be surprised.
Probably, lol.
Gigabyte RTX 3080 Gaming OC 12GB
1TB NVMe SSD, 2 x 1GB SATA SSD, 4TB external HDD
32 GB RAM
Windows 11 Pro
Impulse-Aft-236a.png
Impulse-Aft-236b.png
I appear to have a normal error just round the bend on the back. I may need to dial back to an earlier mesh iteration to fix it since the bevels and extrusions will make hell for shifting the faces back to smooth. Oh well, it's all good practice
Impulse-Aft-243f.png
Impulse-Aft-243a.png
Impulse-Fore1-243.png
Impulse-Aft2-243.png
Neck-284-01.png
Neck-284-02.png
Neck-284-03.png
I've found reference material, including screen shots that support the starboard side of the photon torpedo bay being either smooth or a mirror of the port side. For now I'm deferring to the path of least resistance and keeping it smooth. Should the situation arise, mirroring the sides will require only an update to textures.
While working on this it occurred to me how absolutely insane the photon torpedo bay is in this design. It seems somewhat foolhardy to store your most powerful explosives in the fragile umbilica dividing your craft. To have your launch bays actually straddling the matter/antimatter intermix chamber seems positively suicidal!
It does look nice there, though
As for the torpedo launcher area, my references show it being symmetrical. Both sides even have a docking port, which seems a bit redundant. I've attached a picture of the starboard side.
I think we had a discussion once ages ago about how one shot to the torpedo magazines could pretty much destroy, or at the very least forcibly separate the ship. Not just this one either. The Enterprise-C and Enterprise-D have torpedo launchers there too.
Photon Torpedoes are basically anti-matter warheads, right? They reach the target, drop the containment field, and turn the reaction into a big blast of radiation and photons (hence the name). But, it's not like they'd store the anti-matter charge IN the torpedoes while they're in the magazine. I mean, nuclear weapons--they're inert until triggered. Chemical explosives have issues, hence heavily armored magazines. But you're not going to leave anti-matter weapons "charged."
So, perhaps the placement ISN'T foolhardy? Maybe it's just the most convenient place to siphon off the antimatter stream to the engines to fuel and arm the torpedoes? I don't know if any of the blueprints have that ... but it's not unlike Trek to leave some critical details out while over-explaining others, right?
Excellent work on the model, so far. There are a LOT of Connies out there (refit, pre-refit, JJ, etc.) and this one is shaping up to be a beauty.
That curve nearly drove me nuts. I'm not sure I'm 100% done with the modeling but I'm trying to not let motivation be extinguished by minutia on any given subtlety when as a whole it still is a convincing illusion. I actually had a LOT more trouble getting a form down for the torp launcher than the pylon but I'm pretty happy with this result. That may change once I start on the engineering hull...
With regards to the airlock on the torpedo launch bay, I've actually got screencaps backing up both arguments. I can post examples this evening but that's not terribly important. I think the original Enterprise refit lacked an airlock on the starboard side but the replacement ship (-A) had airlocks on both port and starboard.
Sanderlee,
Your explanation is the best I've heard yet for the photon torpedo placement. It really does make a lot of sense and would be far more safe than to have scores of magnetic bottles all holding their destructive payload, just waiting for a momentary fluctuation in charge to give them an excuse to annihilate themselves and bisect the ship!
I'm definitely not blazing a new trail by modeling a TMP connie but I thought how better to learn a new 3D platform than with something that I and the rest of the community are so intimately familiar. Better to learn from the familiar than to blaze a new trail and learn that the tools (or my skills) aren't up to the challenge
I've already started collecting reference material for my next project. I want to play with kinematics and animation in Blender and I think I've found the ideal platform to kick that around.
Books: [ Ashes of Alour-Tan | Embers of Alour-Tan ] | Blender Tutorials | Blog
I know what you mean. It's easy to get frustrated and burnt out on a project like this, so you have to know when ti's time to go "it's close enough" and move on.
Yeah, unfortunately, the pics I have of the ship are of its most recent configuration, for Star Trek VI. The model was over a decade old by then and hadn't always been treated well, so they had to do extensive work on it. Who knows, they may have added an airlock to that side. Maybe they weren't sure if it was supposed to be symmetrical either. Plus, it had had various work done to it previously.
This model is looking great.