Greetings!

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

Greetings!
This is the fancy new sidebar. It offers quick access to your profile, messages, threads and so on.
Hit the X in the top right corner to dismiss this message.
Greetings!

Welcome to the fancy new Scifi-Meshes.com! You old username and password should work. If not, get in touch with staff either here, on Facebook or on Discord.

For a quick summary on what's new, check out this thread.
You should also check out the Community Guidelines here.
You can check out most recent posts here or by clicking the handy links on the top menu or the sidebar.

You can dismiss this message by clicking the little X in the top right corner.

Star Trek Discovery

rojrenrojren292 Louisville, Kentucky USAPosts: 1,463Member
edited October 2017 in General Discussion #1
Hmmm.

https://twitter.com/startrekcbs


I can't say I'm a big fan of the design. I never thought much of the McQuarrie design it seems to be based on.
Post edited by rojren on
"Tradition: Letting dead people make your decisions for you."
-- Sir Terry Pratchett (paraphrase)
Tagged:
«1345

Posts

  • SchimpfySchimpfy171 Posts: 0Member
    Well, I'll at least give it a chance...
  • BlueNeumannBlueNeumann265 Posts: 1,007Member
    I wonder how long it will take you brilliant geniuses to build one of those babies. Seems like there's enough reference material.

    I'll say this: I can already picture the interior, and started doodling it. Keeps the same earth tones, low lights, moody, a bit bulky and brutalist with some exposed pipes, but unbelievably cool. The bridge would be a big, open command center (with a low ceiling, typical for this ship), with lots of crew going about. The wall panels would be big plasma monitors on the top, with backlit panels below, and push-button consoles with the arc layout (like TOS/TUC). The chairs are blocky and square, nice and sturdy, with warm texture to them (think fabric seat covers). The viewscreen is very wide, 2.35:1, with blinkies at the bottom. The uniforms are muted colours and dark gray, and some crew wear sweaters like in the British army.
  • evil_genius_180evil_genius_180651 Posts: 8,458Member
    I like it. The McQuarrie design was always cool to me and I like how they've refined it.
  • LennOLennO5 Posts: 0Member
    Haha…ok honestly… I've just logged in here in ages, and i thought i'd never do it again JUST for something like this, for just expressing my absolute distaste for something: But I've been through a lot with some guys here and a lot with Startrek. I understand what they were trying to do. But man… This is _THE_ absolutely worst trek starship design _ever_ and i thought you couldn't do something more visually repelling then some fan design out there. This is just… unbelievable bad marketing. Sure, it's not the finished CGI, but that ship's shapes are just awful. Truly awful. There's just nothing more I can say. Sure, there's gonna be different opinions about it but there has never ever been a startrek ship design (from any bloody A, B, C, to D, to NX to Intrepid-Class, to Sovereign to the Defiant to Runabouts to…anything basically) that i did not in some way admire, appreciate or accept. This is just silly. If this is called "design", Kelvin-Timeline Trek is thought provoking drama. Kelvin-Trek, of course, is not (I still like it, even though it's not the trek i've grown up with and i don't care if it is) but seriously…wtf? At least the Klevin Timeline has good design. Trek always did. Now, it doesn't anymore. I came back from a party damn excited to finally get a look at the new series, and they present this absolutely laughable attempt at combining a saucer with some nacelles? The top of the saucer actually looked promising. Damn, I'm underwhelmed and actually pissed if this is what Discovery is gonna look like. It's 2016!
  • zillabeastzillabeast171 Posts: 26Member
    The flying Dorito design returns!

    I don't hate the design as bad as most seem to, but what intrigues me most is that registry number. I think it's our strongest clue as to when this show is set.

    NCC-1031 is an older registry number than the TOS Enterprise, but newer than the U.S.S. Kelvin (NCC-514). Now in 2233 when the Kelvin is destroyed in the alternate timeline, the ship already looks old and rusted. You could guess it's about 20 years old or so.

    So if the Kelvin was commissioned in the 2210's, that means about 1200 starships where commissioned in a 50 year period between then and TOS. Using that average, if the Discovery is a new ship in the series, it's probbaly set in the 2230's or 40's. Plenty of material to draw off of referenced in the original series (Axenar), which would explain the lawsuit, too.

    Or it might not be any of that. Still, fun to speculate!
  • MadKoiFishMadKoiFish1028 West of the right nutPosts: 3,712Member
    homage, homage, homage, I am sick of homage!

    It is like people today cannot live with out one trope after another being reused non stop. Entire shows and movies that are enormous tropes in of themselves. Go back to /b please.

    Into Darkness was one gigantic trope, so much so it was nearly a parody of what it was.


    I think this thing is horrendous it is just a mess of bits others came up with stuck onto a old profile that was rejected some 40 years ago all to make some demented homage to what did not come before. Also loads of details filched from others work.

    But given the evidence, I doubt much discovery will go on outside of the ship.


    Really if they has just bought this guys model and finished it off I doubt so many would have thrown up in their mouths today.

    http://www.scifi-meshes.com/forums/showthread.php?73811-Planet-of-the-Titans-Enterprise&highlight=star+trek+titans

    http://www.trekbbs.com/threads/planet-of-the-titans-u-s-s-enterprise.130992/

    Not sure if I could swallow it as a pre TOS ship, but it relates far better as a execution of design.


    And really STD. . . . that wont go away any time soon.

    Oh and cbs is now claiming this is not the FINAL design. Sorry guys Jan 2017 is less than 6mo away. You cannot still be messing about with designing anything, you should be hiring actors and have penned scripts by now. I smell a "OH$HIT, gotta fix this crap" moment that spilled on the floor.
  • Wishbone_AshWishbone_Ash63 Posts: 0Member
    Great design for the ship but I hope this is just a temporary model for the trailer because that's some ****ty CG right there...

    The best thing about the design is its causing a lot of fanboi butthurt. This is a very good thing.

    It's also the first Trek ship I've seen that actually has a vaguely plausible mass distribution so it could actually conceivably function.
  • LennOLennO5 Posts: 0Member

    The best thing about the design is its causing a lot of fanboi butthurt. This is a very good thing.

    I agree. Just because reading trekbbs and /r/startrek and facebook usually lets me seriously doubt the fact that large parts of the (online) fandom actually understand StarTrek, its philosophy, its history and values. Fan reaction usually seems to be negative to anything new. As I said before, I never had any serious issues with anything in Trek, and if i had, plot issues, with episodes, old movies and new movies (Into Darkness I'm looking at you), but never ever have I felt that any of the movies or the shows designers didn't do their very best to deliver visual stunning imagery and seriously elegant (and an old rustbucket can be elegant too) ship design (for the hero ships, everything else was kinda meh most of the time, but that's totally ok especially on a TV show where there's virtually no time for anything). If Voyager looked like some of the early design with the runabout nacelle pylons, i would have been on the fence. i would have accepted it after a while, but never felt any connection to the ship. Which propably wouldn't have influenced the show's viewing experience that much, but it would have distracted me. The Kelvin Timeline 1701, and
    and
    are elegant, beautiful designs that make me believe the ship is real. Discovery is just about as ugly as it gets. Will it look better if the CGI wasn't done by some poor intern at CBS or some other guy/gal they did't pay much, didn't care or didn't have time to finish something that doesn't look like straight out of a 2000's Video Game? Sure. Doesn't change the fact that the general design doesn't appeal to a lot of people. I can absolutely understand why. I hate it, and you can greeble the heck out of it, it's not a "Discovery". That argument about it being Klingon influenced? Srsly? Sure, i mean, ok, why not, even though this is grasping straws to explain its design flaws, but still, klingon design can look great, elegant, and still worn, full of sharp edges and rusty. But it would just not look like that if Discovery is meant to be our new "home" for lots of seasons to come. Good CGI will make Discovery watchable, not believable. Even a damn borg cube is believable in the suspension-of-disbelief context.

    You could get a lot more out of the general shapes (which could work, actually), but you would be totally re-designing it from scratch to a point where it absolutely wouldn't be the same design any more.

    End rant ;) I guess I'm just stunned this is the first time Trek design every let me down. Maybe largely as well because there's some real talent attached to the show and CBS is just awfully bad at marketing and making it appealing so far.

    And yes, i do think quality standards matter when you are promoting your brand new All Access Paywall Streaming StarTrek show. It's a new startrek show. StarTrek is an integral part of pop culture. You don't post ****ty half assed trailers. You just don't. You'd never get to see something like this for the startrek movies, a starwars show, a new season of Game of Thrones or Man in The High Castle. Doesn't happen. So I'm kinda wondering how this visually, in terms of CGI, awful (and I guess we all agree on that) teaser happened.
  • Pic-A-CardPic-A-Card0 Posts: 0Member
    LennO wrote: »
    Haha…ok honestly… I've just logged in here in ages, and i thought i'd never do it again JUST for something like this, for just expressing my absolute distaste for something: But I've been through a lot with some guys here and a lot with Startrek. I understand what they were trying to do. But man… This is _THE_ absolutely worst trek starship design _ever_ and i thought you couldn't do something more visually repelling then some fan design out there. This is just… unbelievable bad marketing.

    I haven't logged in in ages as well, but when I saw the promo, my first thought was "Oh man, I've seen better McQuarrie-inspired designs from people on SFM". There was better quality work here 10+ years ago, and now CBS rolls this out in 2016. I could get behind the Flying Dorito (lol) design if they had done it right, but here it just looks like a kitbash some guy cobbled together. I think it's a combination of NOT picking the best angles of the ship and the overall previz-quality of the CG. :( I hope they get their act together.
  • evil_genius_180evil_genius_180651 Posts: 8,458Member
    o
    I wonder how long it will take you brilliant geniuses to build one of those babies. Seems like there's enough reference material.

    I'm seriously tempted, and I haven't felt like modeling anything in months. Though, the ship is likely to change some before the final sequences are done, as this is TEST FOOTAGE, not final. As we all know, test footage is lower quality work done to test the overall look of something before committing time and resources to finished works. They likely only released it to gauge "fan" reactions. (butthurt doesn't quite cover it)

    Anybody remember that crude test render of the NX-01 from TV Guide before the series premiere? (if not, it's on Ex Astris Scientia) The ship looked like a cheap copy of what we saw in the pilot and series.

    Edit: here's the image to which I'm referring:
    110838.jpg
  • IRMLIRML176 Posts: 0Member
    the cg in the trailer was WEAK, does anybody know what company came up with that?
  • DannageDannage171 Posts: 0Member
    I for one am honoured that they took my Boudicca trailer and ripped the first half of that off for their premier. :)

    I'm not a fan of the design myself but I'll wait to see a few more views of it. From some angles, I didn't like the Galaxy class but others I loved her. Bit confused at to how it looks post TOS but is 700 registry numbers lower. I had thought it might have been set between ST:VI and TNG.
  • U.S.S. SpeedU.S.S. Speed0 Posts: 0Member
    I haven't logged in here in like... 10 years?

    Just to say how terrible that design AND the CGI looks. Jesus... People on here do dozen times better in both design and CGI as a hobby. I have a feeling they hired someone's nephew to make that CGI. I'm pretty confident I could do better in a month of work.
  • mattcmattc176 Posts: 317Member
    Great design for the ship but I hope this is just a temporary model for the trailer because that's some ****ty CG right there...
    .

    It's just a study concept according to Eaves. No VFX folks are on board just yet.....not that the fanboys care.
  • Hunter GHunter G61 Posts: 0Member
    LennO wrote: »
    Sure, there's gonna be different opinions about it but there has never ever been a startrek ship design (from any bloody A, B, C, to D, to NX to Intrepid-Class, to Sovereign to the Defiant to Runabouts to…anything basically) that i did not in some way admire, appreciate or accept.

    I came back from a party damn excited to finally get a look at the new series, and they present this absolutely laughable attempt at combining a saucer with some nacelles? The top of the saucer actually looked promising. Damn, I'm underwhelmed and actually pissed if this is what Discovery is gonna look like. It's 2016!
    MadKoiFish wrote: »
    homage, homage, homage, I am sick of homage!

    It is like people today cannot live with out one trope after another being reused non stop. Entire shows and movies that are enormous tropes in of themselves. Go back to /b please.


    I think this thing is horrendous it is just a mess of bits others came up with stuck onto a old profile that was rejected some 40 years ago all to make some demented homage to what did not come before. Also loads of details filched from others work.

    This kind of sums up my thoughts as well. I actually first saw the video on Tumblr, and thinking it was a fan video from 2007 (based on the thumbnail) played like 5 seconds of it, *that's what I thought* cringed and kept scrolling like I do with most fan videos. Then I hear it's the official CBS promo?? Wow. The design might grow on me, but they absolutely could have executed it better, despite being a concept.

    MadKoiFish wrote: »
    Oh and cbs is now claiming this is not the FINAL design. Sorry guys Jan 2017 is less than 6mo away. You cannot still be messing about with designing anything, you should be hiring actors and have penned scripts by now. I smell a "OH$HIT, gotta fix this crap" moment that spilled on the floor.

    Exactly. I know for a fact that I can at least set up better lighting and materials for a simple cube in 60 seconds (and I know at least a dozen other people on this site can do the same), so why can't a team of professionals do it? I know it's not finished or final blah blah blah, but come on. At least light your temporary model better to start with. Or if it would require too much time to animate a high quality model, then just do still images!

    But alas, I won't pass too much judgement this soon. I'll have to wait and see where it goes, since the're just testing out the shapes at this point.
  • rojrenrojren292 Louisville, Kentucky USAPosts: 1,463Member
    (My opinion)

    Matt Jefferies ship designs are nothing less than iconic. Andrew Probert took the designs and carried them to a new place. Most iterations since then has sort of wallowed around, seemingly directionless, without any designs really standing out. (Except for some being really bad.)

    I would like to think that's the fault of the studio decision makers and not of the current batch of designers. I mean, after 50 years of constant re-iteration and re-re-refinement to build on, these things should be nothing less than awesome.
    "Tradition: Letting dead people make your decisions for you."
    -- Sir Terry Pratchett (paraphrase)
  • DannageDannage171 Posts: 0Member
    To be fair, if they haven't got anyone on board, I'm pretty sure the boys here could all build a retcon of that ship and either do a better job, give the final designer a much better idea, or at least practice their modelling skills. I may even trygetting back into it, just to build a better version of this.

    Can I suggest a competition? People could do their own version for fun anyway, or to inspire designers.. Beats just complaining how bad it is. Can a mod set up a thread, or section?
  • psCargilepsCargile232 Posts: 546Member
    Is nostalgia a Gen X thing with movies? I mean, I'm Gen X and I want to move forward into something new, not mining concepts out of the past. The first time I saw the Phase 2 Enterprise concept, I wasn't impressed. I don't understand how a group of people could sit around a table and say, "Let's do this." I understand the Akira/NX argument is about the same, but at least the NX looked better, and looked Star Trek. This design always looked like it came from a cheap Trek knock-off series. I'm not a fan of STO, but they have better designs than this. I've done better concepts than this. We've all done better designs than this! Is this a joke?
  • homerpalooza67homerpalooza67226 Posts: 1,891Member
    I saw the trailer on my phone, so no position to judge the quality of the CGI. I don't really care for the USS Discovery design as shown, in general, but if it's a good story I'm all in. I'd like to see a bridge based on the Kelvin design from ST09.
  • Draco_AstreusDraco_Astreus0 Posts: 0Member
    I have to say... I am a big fan of this new design. I almost have the impression that folks would only praise the new design if it carried the standard 2-nacelle/conical-engineering-hull/saucer structure... The triangular engineering hull to me speaks of speed, action, dynamicy, and futuristicness. Can't view it from the perspective of its being a new design, fitting Starfleet parameters, which reflects the newness of the show? As for its being based on the old new Enterprise concept, I rather appreciate the homage to that which was... Sort of a way to create something new which was already semi-official. Like a way to see what it would have been like to have this design be the star of the show.

    Mmmm and I'm seriously considering modelling her...
  • evil_genius_180evil_genius_180651 Posts: 8,458Member
    psCargile wrote: »
    The first time I saw the Phase 2 Enterprise concept, I wasn't impressed

    Really? Because I like the Phase II design. I think Matt Jefferies did a bang up job updating his design. Andrew Probert and Richard Taylor just "finished" it for TMP.

    Unless, of course, you mean this design, which was never part of Phase II. This design comes from concept art for the movie "Planet of the Titans," which died in pre-production in the mid '70s.
  • Knowles2Knowles2171 Posts: 0Member
    MadKoiFish wrote: »
    homage, homage, homage, I am sick of homage!

    It is like people today cannot live with out one trope after another being reused non stop. Entire shows and movies that are enormous tropes in of themselves. Go back to /b please.

    Into Darkness was one gigantic trope, so much so it was nearly a parody of what it was.


    I think this thing is horrendous it is just a mess of bits others came up with stuck onto a old profile that was rejected some 40 years ago all to make some demented homage to what did not come before. Also loads of details filched from others work.

    But given the evidence, I doubt much discovery will go on outside of the ship.


    Really if they has just bought this guys model and finished it off I doubt so many would have thrown up in their mouths today.

    http://www.scifi-meshes.com/forums/showthread.php?73811-Planet-of-the-Titans-Enterprise&highlight=star+trek+titans

    http://www.trekbbs.com/threads/planet-of-the-titans-u-s-s-enterprise.130992/

    Not sure if I could swallow it as a pre TOS ship, but it relates far better as a execution of design.


    And really STD. . . . that wont go away any time soon.

    Oh and cbs is now claiming this is not the FINAL design. Sorry guys Jan 2017 is less than 6mo away. You cannot still be messing about with designing anything, you should be hiring actors and have penned scripts by now. I smell a "OH$HIT, gotta fix this crap" moment that spilled on the floor.
    With those designs you can see how they evolve to the galaxy class vessels.
  • psCargilepsCargile232 Posts: 546Member
    Thanks for the correction, your Evil Geniusness. I associated the two for some reason.
  • oldmangregoldmangreg130 Woodland Hills, CAPosts: 1,332Member
    Cause, you know, people.... :D
    enterprise_p2_refit_03.jpg
    110855.jpg
    Your father called the future - "the undiscovered country". People can be very frightened of change.
  • bosunbosun61 Posts: 0Member
    Holy cow, that's the ugliest thing I've seen floating in space outside of a 0-g space toilet.

    If, as the registry hints, this is a pre-TOS show, I'd much rather see the Metaluna class starship that I first saw on this site. Now that is a pretty ship that nails the old Trek aesthetic.
  • EighthEighth0 Posts: 0Member
    I'm sort of new here, But this ship has inspired me or revitalized my interest in TV trek again. Its an ugly ship but I'm curious somehow. Time to put some effort back into modeling Trek ships again.
  • evil_genius_180evil_genius_180651 Posts: 8,458Member
    psCargile wrote: »
    Thanks for the correction, your Evil Geniusness. I associated the two for some reason.

    It's actually a common mistake. During the seventies, Paramount tried making a movie first, then it became a TV series, then back to a movie. Many people forget about the early attempt at the movie, which never got beyond the concept stage, and lump the concepts in with the TV series. It also doesn't help that, when discussing Phase II, many books and other sources often have a brief bit on Planet of the Titans, and show the work done by Ralph McQuarrie and Ken Adams, which in turn makes people mentally associate it with Phase II. Fortunately, by the time they actually got to the TV series, Gene Roddenberry realized he needed to get Jefferies back, because there's no good explanation on how a ship went from the TOS look to the wedge-shaped look without being a completely new ship.

    Though, Richard Taylor wanted to go in a completely different direction for TMP. Fortunately, Roddenberry told him "no" and made him use Jefferies' design as a base. One can only imagine what he wanted to do. :rolleyes:
  • Vortex5972Vortex597267 Posts: 994Member
    I'd like to see a bridge based on the Kelvin design from ST09.

    My thoughts on the bridge also, but after seeing this I'm dreading the set design.

    As for the ship... hate it. I don't mind them trying something different, but that concept needs heavy refinement. My first thought was of this:

    http://lordsarvain.deviantart.com/gallery/28842254/USS-Edward-Teller

    Looks so much better.

    I have issues with a lot of the detailing on this as well, such as the impulse engines. Why do the grilles light up and not the engine innards themselves?

    About the only thing I like is the recessed bridge and that lower sensor. They look interesting. The rest is utter **** and the colouring is worse than the NX-01. Too dark.
  • rojrenrojren292 Louisville, Kentucky USAPosts: 1,463Member
    "Tradition: Letting dead people make your decisions for you."
    -- Sir Terry Pratchett (paraphrase)
  • evil_genius_180evil_genius_180651 Posts: 8,458Member
    Like I said, a common mistake:
    inspired by Star Wars concept artist Ralph McQuarrie’s designs for Gene Roddenberry’s never-produced 1970s Star Trek series.
    (from the article rojren just linked to)

    :rolleyes:
Sign In or Register to comment.