›

Greetings!

Welcome to Scifi-Meshes.com! Click one of these buttons to join in on the fun.

Sign In Register

Quick Links

3DThe U.S.S. Enterprise Flies Again

Hunter GHunter G1925 Posts: 544Member
edited August 2014 in Work in Progress #1
This thread is for renders of the Enterprise refit. I'm taking a break from my TOS redesign, since I've been having a lot of artist block with the details. So I thought I'd dig up the old revamped refit. I would love to make some animations with it, but a single image takes almost 24 hours to render, so a 1 second animation would take almost a month!

She Flies Again
She%20Flies%20Again.png
To Boldly Go
To%20Boldly%20Go.png
Departure
Departure.png
106583.jpg
Post edited by Hunter G on
Tagged:

Posts

  • SchimpfySchimpfy396 Posts: 1,632Member
    #2
    Beautiful work, Hunter. Top notch. My untrained eyes see nothing wrong at all. :thumb:
  • evil_genius_180evil_genius_1804617 Posts: 11,190Member
    #3
    Well, it's not like you'd need to be rendering animations at 3840 X 2160. Most of us render at half that, 1920 X 1080. So, I don't see why it would take you quite 24 hours per frame. However, it will still take some time. You probably need to look at some of your prettiness settings and see what won't be absolutely necessary for a few second flyby. You can get by with using slightly lower AA and other settings in animation than you can in still images. ;)

    The renders look good, especially that last one. Though, I'm not a fan of all of the unnecessary lens flares. Also, why does the ship have torpedo launchers in the bottom rear of the engineering section? I know Dennis didn't put those there.
  • TALON_UKTALON_UK2 Posts: 0Member
    #4
    Well he does say revamped version of the Enterprise refit, I'm guessing the rear firing torp launchers are part of those revamped details, but I was hard pressed to find any other changes, though I see on closer inspection that he's added physical sources for the lights casting over the hull. Hunter, care to go through what other changes you made to the design? Looks a thing of beauty. Nice work.

    :thumb:
  • spacefighterspacefighter2 Posts: 0Member
    #5
    the top image looks movie quality.
  • evil_genius_180evil_genius_1804617 Posts: 11,190Member
    #6
    TALON_UK wrote: »
    Well he does say revamped version of the Enterprise refit, I'm guessing the rear firing torp launchers are part of those revamped details, but I was hard pressed to find any other changes, though I see on closer inspection that he's added physical sources for the lights casting over the hull. Hunter, care to go through what other changes you made to the design? Looks a thing of beauty. Nice work.

    :thumb:

    I know he said he revamped it, but that can mean a lot of things. (it can mean new textures) The launchers are the only major change I see. The light sources on the nacelles are a small thing. I wasn't asking so much how they got there, I was asking why they are there.
  • TrekMDTrekMD192 Posts: 639Member
    #7
    Beautifully done!
  • McCMcC373 Posts: 704Member
    #8
    Beautiful work, Hunter!
    WIP: [ SDF-1 Macross ] Done: [ Coronado | Ambassador (original) | T'Varo ]

    Books: [ Ashes of Alour-Tan | Embers of Alour-Tan ] | Blender Tutorials | Blog
  • nightfevernightfever372 Posts: 585Member
    #9
    I like these renders. Great work on the textures.
  • Hunter GHunter G1925 Posts: 544Member
    #10
    spacefighter wrote: »
    the top image looks movie quality.
    TrekMD wrote: »
    Beautifully done!
    McC wrote: »
    Beautiful work, Hunter!
    nightfever wrote: »
    I like these renders. Great work on the textures.

    Good to hear!
    evil_genius_180 wrote: »
    Well, it's not like you'd need to be rendering animations at 3840 X 2160. Most of us render at half that, 1920 X 1080. So, I don't see why it would take you quite 24 hours per frame. However, it will still take some time. You probably need to look at some of your prettiness settings and see what won't be absolutely necessary for a few second flyby. You can get by with using slightly lower AA and other settings in animation than you can in still images. ;)

    The renders look good, especially that last one. Though, I'm not a fan of all of the unnecessary lens flares. Also, why does the ship have torpedo launchers in the bottom rear of the engineering section? I know Dennis didn't put those there.

    When I said render, I meant to include editing levels, lighting, layering the background, and other elements in Photoshop. That's part of the reason why I can't do an animation that looks that good. That is unless I use cycles, which would take weeks on my computer, even with no textures at half 1080p and. I've tried. :'( In other words, I could make images like this strictly in cycles, but I decided to save time by doing some of it in Photoshop.

    As far as the rear launchers, I put them there because it wouldn't make sense to have only front launchers. Plus I actually have plans to do a reboot version of the refit after my TOS reboot, and that's one of the things it will have. ;)
    TALON_UK wrote: »
    Well he does say revamped version of the Enterprise refit, I'm guessing the rear firing torp launchers are part of those revamped details, but I was hard pressed to find any other changes, though I see on closer inspection that he's added physical sources for the lights casting over the hull. Hunter, care to go through what other changes you made to the design? Looks a thing of beauty. Nice work.

    :thumb:

    That's pretty much the extent of my adding details. The topology's completely different, but you can't see that in the renders.
  • evil_genius_180evil_genius_1804617 Posts: 11,190Member
    #11
    Hunter G wrote: »
    As far as the rear launchers, I put them there because it wouldn't make sense to have only front launchers. Plus I actually have plans to do a reboot version of the refit after my TOS reboot, and that's one of the things it will have. ;)

    Well, there are a lot of ships that only have forward launchers, but that's neither here nor there. ;) Personally, I would have integrated a single launcher into the base of the main pylon, where the forward launchers are. Where they are, they kind of mess up the aesthetics of the ship's rear section (or butt, if you prefer. ;)) Just my two cents.
  • Hunter GHunter G1925 Posts: 544Member
    #12
    evil_genius_180 wrote: »
    Well, there are a lot of ships that only have forward launchers, but that's neither here nor there. ;) Personally, I would have integrated a single launcher into the base of the main pylon, where the forward launchers are. Where they are, they kind of mess up the aesthetics of the ship's rear section (or butt, if you prefer. ;)) Just my two cents.

    That would make more sense, also because you would only need one place for torpedo storage. I'll see what I can do.:thumb:
  • publiusrpubliusr555 Posts: 1,755Member
    #13
    I've always wanted to see more iterations of the refit

    As of late, there has been more work done on that era
    http://s577.photobucket.com/user/Kelvin0514/media/fairfax_comparison_zpsdab9a729.jpg.html
    https://www.flickr.com/photos/122516243@N05/13680892625/sizes/o/

    Raan type nacelles on this model
    http://s577.photobucket.com/user/Kelvin0514/media/devonshire%20model/devonshire91_zps14df0e2a.jpg.html
    http://i577.photobucket.com/albums/ss217/Kelvin0514/devonshire%20model/devonshire78_zps8ee05e97.jpg
    http://s577.photobucket.com/user/Kelvin0514/media/devonshire%20model/Coronado_vs_Devonshire_zpsd12e6f4c.jpg.html

    One of my favorites has been the Balson
    http://www.shipschematics.net/startrek/images/federation/commandcruiser_balson.jpg

    But the Nacelles are too short to balance that even more elegant secondary hull.

    Something you might want to do next. Make the primary hull saucer wider and install upon that Balson secondary hull, but using a somewhat different dorsal. Keep the nacelles raised.

    One last thing to think about. In some of Matt Jeffries early sketches, he had a smaller impulse about where the torpedo exhaust would be.

    I might have a wide ABBE class impulse deck, with an aft firing tube located there instead.
Sign In or Register to comment.