Hello!
Been tired of non scifi work lately, so here's this image.
Great mesh by darthviper107, it's such a photogenic ship
And I have put together and small gif, because why not.
Hope you like it!
:cool:
I can think of at least a couple episodes where they put down Serenity in a desert. Besides, the barren landscape leaves nothing to draw your eye away from Serenity, which is the focus of the image.
I agree with Deks. The lighting is superb and that lens adds a unique look.
Thank you guys for the comments ! My plan was to put more stuff in the background, but in the end i really like the simplicity and the lines i've got with this lens. I did not want to put flare in this image because you can not have scifi image these days without flares, right? But in the end it just needed one, it looked dry.
Hello!
Been tired of non scifi work lately, so here's this image.
Great mesh by darthviper107, it's such a photogenic ship
And I have put together and small gif, because why not.
Hope you like it!
:cool:
Although the ship is a nice piece of art, the thing might as well be a statue. It would not fly. Although CG gives us the ability, as artists, to lie more perfectly, hard sci-fi would reject this as unbelievable.
For objects to fly without E=2M for a basic, ballistics mathematical philosophy, it needs to defy gravity. How would a uniform field, such as the above, remain consistent and symmetrical with so many points and asymmetrical inconsistencies in the ship?
You are making the assumption that an anti-gravity field needs to be consistent and symmetrical. Using that logic, then all ships that use an anti-gravity field has to be circular in design. Other than the C57-D cruiser or Jupiter 2 or the Borg sphere, none of the other ships would be able to use anti-gravity.
I am not technical by any means, but I have to do something while I am at work!
You are making the assumption that an anti-gravity field needs to be consistent and symmetrical. Using that logic, then all ships that use an anti-gravity field has to be circular in design. Other than the C57-D cruiser or Jupiter 2 or the Borg sphere, none of the other ships would be able to use anti-gravity.
I am not technical by any means, but I have to do something while I am at work!
actually there are some rather interesting arguments here, IF gravitons exist and IF they could be generated without needing to lug around a colossal mass then you face the properties of the field which affect how your gravity turns out. you could have loads of really small generators under your floors these however would have fields dropping off quadratically so they would seem very weak at head height but too strong at floor level. another method would be a uniform field with some sort of antigravity part above, kind of like a capacitor with positive and negative charges. this would give a uniform field of the same strength at all points between your graviton producing and absorbing plates with just a few funny effects around the edges. the other issue is of course over several decks if you have embedded gravity generators in the floor they will attract the things "below" them up as well as pulling the stuff "above" down. i strongly suspect that it would be fundamentally impossible to put a material beneath the gravity generators which could prevent them attracting things on the other side of them as this would enable the construction of a perpetual motion machine which is of course impossible and in violation of the first law of thermodynamics.
sorry i just realised you were referring to use antigravity to hover(not onboard artificial gravity without use of spin sections) , if the antigravity system were treated like a simple upward force then all you need to do is have it positioned such that it passes through the ship's centre of mass or multiple generators of antigravity such that when combined with the downward force of gravity on all other bits of your ship they sum to give a torque of zero. this doesn't really place many requirments and constraints on the shape at all as long as you stick the generators in the right place.
Although the ship is a nice piece of art, the thing might as well be a statue. It would not fly. Although CG gives us the ability, as artists, to lie more perfectly, hard sci-fi would reject this as unbelievable.
For objects to fly without E=2M for a basic, ballistics mathematical philosophy, it needs to defy gravity. How would a uniform field, such as the above, remain consistent and symmetrical with so many points and asymmetrical inconsistencies in the ship?
This is why it's called science fiction. For all you know, by the time of Serenity, (which has no set date on our calendar) somebody invented a little gizmo that all ships used that made it all work. (what I like to call the flux capacitor rule)
Posts
Not every image has to have loads of details in the background.
This one turned out pretty good.
Nice lighting and the fish-eye lens effect adds a unique look.
I agree with Deks. The lighting is superb and that lens adds a unique look.
Excellent work!
Where did you find the mesh?
Yeah I forgot. Thnx
:thumb:
FIELDRING1.jpg
For objects to fly without E=2M for a basic, ballistics mathematical philosophy, it needs to defy gravity. How would a uniform field, such as the above, remain consistent and symmetrical with so many points and asymmetrical inconsistencies in the ship?
I am not technical by any means, but I have to do something while I am at work!
actually there are some rather interesting arguments here, IF gravitons exist and IF they could be generated without needing to lug around a colossal mass then you face the properties of the field which affect how your gravity turns out. you could have loads of really small generators under your floors these however would have fields dropping off quadratically so they would seem very weak at head height but too strong at floor level. another method would be a uniform field with some sort of antigravity part above, kind of like a capacitor with positive and negative charges. this would give a uniform field of the same strength at all points between your graviton producing and absorbing plates with just a few funny effects around the edges. the other issue is of course over several decks if you have embedded gravity generators in the floor they will attract the things "below" them up as well as pulling the stuff "above" down. i strongly suspect that it would be fundamentally impossible to put a material beneath the gravity generators which could prevent them attracting things on the other side of them as this would enable the construction of a perpetual motion machine which is of course impossible and in violation of the first law of thermodynamics.
sorry i just realised you were referring to use antigravity to hover(not onboard artificial gravity without use of spin sections) , if the antigravity system were treated like a simple upward force then all you need to do is have it positioned such that it passes through the ship's centre of mass or multiple generators of antigravity such that when combined with the downward force of gravity on all other bits of your ship they sum to give a torque of zero. this doesn't really place many requirments and constraints on the shape at all as long as you stick the generators in the right place.
This is why it's called science fiction. For all you know, by the time of Serenity, (which has no set date on our calendar) somebody invented a little gizmo that all ships used that made it all work. (what I like to call the flux capacitor rule)