Looking really nice.
If you turn the paint job from green to yellow, you got the Cardasian version.
Thanks, there is a little difference in the front and I believe I have to lose the "gunlike" things on the fins but you're right. And the truth is, I need to do that.
So after a lot of effort I realized the two large covers on the wingtip disruptors weren't round enough. Figured out another way of doing them, with the added bonus of learning a new function in Lightwave that's going to make life easier.
Magnet. I haven’t worked much with magnet and “drag net.” In the past I felt like I was getting inconsistent results. So I read up on them again and used magnet on the side of the gun cover to help increase its curvature. Worked perfectly. I got exactly what I was hoping for.
I should add that I put the cover in a separate layer, did the magnet tool on the top view, selected nothing and placed the tool at the middle of the object and pulled out. The tool pulls hardest at the things close to the center of its location and has less and less effect the further away from the tool.
Thanks @scifieric and @evil_genius_180. I just noticed the post in this site's "Finished work" section with Christ Kuhn's BOP. It's an FBX file and the Disruptors appeared squashed when I opened it with Lightwave. However the rest of the ship will certainly help with the rest of this project. At least I can get a read on the underside of the ship. I have images that show it but no orthos. My favorite images are the blue screen images of a model that looks an awful lot like the BOP in the "Star Trek Voyage Home" movie (Save the Whales). They have been the main reference for this work.
I can send Chris' object in another format if you like.
It would be helpful. The other thing is that nearly every polygon in the entire mesh is separate. It's not quite that bad, but close. It would literally take me 2 weeks of point welding to create actual structures that could be highlighted and selected.
I think Chris Kuhn's underbelly is too small as I look at the blue screen STTVH shots of the BOP and compare them to his model. What you see below is not perfect, but much closer IMO. Another issue is the wing tip disruptors. I think his are not tall enough and in general too small for the model. That being said, the rest of his mesh is pure genius. Among other things, the painstaking accuracy of the detailed parts and greebles... Three thumbs up.
Ah, the classic BoP. The one design that never needs updating, because in ST:III they got it virtually Mona Lisa perfect the first time.
Ever find it funny that we can tweak Federation designs all day long and always are finding someway of making them look better, or at least aesthetically pleasing in a unique way that still says 'Federation'? Yet with the Klingons, you just really can't alter the designs too much at all or it just looks wrong (There are very few I think who can pull it off. Most of them are on this website).
Speaking of that, and looking at that studio model (thank you Coward), it looks like both Chris' and Brandenburg's meshes' necks are slightly shorter compared to the actual model's. Which is fustrating & confusing me because I just measured via shrinking the model image to the same size as that Chris' and they match. Same goes for when looking at the angle on Brandenburg's. So I can't quite put my finger on why it looks short. Probably the lighting in the picture versus the mesh lighting.
@Coward - Man. A big thanks. I had not seen those images before (and have them all now). Something I noticed (I hope I am seeing it right) is that the final extension of the bottom of the main hull isn't a round dome in those images.
One of the frustrating things is going to be trying to interpret size differences due to perspective. Unlike the computer or blueprints, a camera can't do orthographic imaging.
As far as I can tell, the model appears to be the same model as the images I have of it on blue screen. I'm especially sure of that as I look at the bridge and neck. So the bottom round dome versus the "suitcase-shaped" structure I see in those images is a head scratcher.
One pleasing thing is that I think I came closer to some of the internal greeble detail on the wingtip guns, from what I can see in those studio pictures.
@Barricade I am assuming you compared @Freak s orthos above to the model top photo and they match?
My model (because I had nothing else) is drawn on what I thought were some fairly accurate blueprints. However, one thing that bothers me about those is a clear visual difference in how far back those cooling fins go. I just counted them and there are 28 and 27 of them (27 on the wings / 28 on the body), so have to go and count mine. The drawback to drawings is they NEVER exactly match up top to side to front etc. Computer ortho shots are of course so much better.
Made considerable adjustments as a result of new photos and information. My wings were shaped wrong (the ortho drawings were wrong) and I actually did reduce the size of the disruptors a bit. In addition the underbelly of the main hull is trimmed back. It still needs work. There is a start to some of the wing plating.
Posts
If you turn the paint job from green to yellow, you got the Cardasian version.
Thanks, there is a little difference in the front and I believe I have to lose the "gunlike" things on the fins but you're right. And the truth is, I need to do that.
Which function is it?
The Disruptors.
I can send Chris' object in another format if you like.
Here is the bottom and top of Chris BoP.
I also have a Lightwave object if that helps.
Then I need your email.
I'll PM you with my email.
BTW these two orthos are done with the wings flattened right?
I think Chris Kuhn's underbelly is too small as I look at the blue screen STTVH shots of the BOP and compare them to his model. What you see below is not perfect, but much closer IMO. Another issue is the wing tip disruptors. I think his are not tall enough and in general too small for the model. That being said, the rest of his mesh is pure genius. Among other things, the painstaking accuracy of the detailed parts and greebles... Three thumbs up.
Have seen these images on modeler magic of the studio model? There's a couple of pictures which show the shape of the bottom.
https://modelermagic.com/klingon-bird-of-prey-studio-model/
Ever find it funny that we can tweak Federation designs all day long and always are finding someway of making them look better, or at least aesthetically pleasing in a unique way that still says 'Federation'? Yet with the Klingons, you just really can't alter the designs too much at all or it just looks wrong (There are very few I think who can pull it off. Most of them are on this website).
Speaking of that, and looking at that studio model (thank you Coward), it looks like both Chris' and Brandenburg's meshes' necks are slightly shorter compared to the actual model's. Which is fustrating & confusing me because I just measured via shrinking the model image to the same size as that Chris' and they match. Same goes for when looking at the angle on Brandenburg's. So I can't quite put my finger on why it looks short. Probably the lighting in the picture versus the mesh lighting.
One of the frustrating things is going to be trying to interpret size differences due to perspective. Unlike the computer or blueprints, a camera can't do orthographic imaging.
As far as I can tell, the model appears to be the same model as the images I have of it on blue screen. I'm especially sure of that as I look at the bridge and neck. So the bottom round dome versus the "suitcase-shaped" structure I see in those images is a head scratcher.
One pleasing thing is that I think I came closer to some of the internal greeble detail on the wingtip guns, from what I can see in those studio pictures.
My model (because I had nothing else) is drawn on what I thought were some fairly accurate blueprints. However, one thing that bothers me about those is a clear visual difference in how far back those cooling fins go. I just counted them and there are 28 and 27 of them (27 on the wings / 28 on the body), so have to go and count mine. The drawback to drawings is they NEVER exactly match up top to side to front etc. Computer ortho shots are of course so much better.