Author Topic: Star Trek: Discovery Discussion (WARNING: SPOILERS) (Read 88535 times)

Tuskin38 · « **Reply #280 on:** April 08, 2018, 05:30:57 PM »

The DSC Enterprise is going to be in the 2019 Ships of the Line Calendar. The image appears to be a digital painting, so it isn't the Screen used model, there are some minor differences. Either way it looks nice.

https://www.thetrekcollective.com/2018/04/2019-star-trek-calendar-previews.html

Darkthunder · « **Reply #281 on:** April 08, 2018, 05:58:55 PM »

See, now THAT kind of lighting I could totally get behind. But alas, the visual effects guy for Discovery seems obsessed with the overuse of a "blue filter" in every, single, space scene...

Do we have any official stats on the Disco Connie? Size, crew complement etc? Supposedly Discovery herself is around 750 meters which of course is ridiculously "JJ" oversized, and the Connie WAS a big ship before the introduction of the Excelsior Class 40 years later.

Morgan · « **Reply #282 on:** April 08, 2018, 07:38:13 PM »

Quote from: Darkthunder on April 08, 2018, 05:58:55 PM

See, now THAT kind of lighting I could totally get behind. But alas, the visual effects guy for Discovery seems obsessed with the overuse of a "blue filter" in every, single, space scene...

Holy crap I couldn't agree more. I hate the space scenes in Discovery and hope they go more natural in season two.

Quote

Do we have any official stats on the Disco Connie? Size, crew complement etc? Supposedly Discovery herself is around 750 meters which of course is ridiculously "JJ" oversized, and the Connie WAS a big ship before the introduction of the Excelsior Class 40 years later.

None that I know of. The Crossfield-class is approximated to be around 560 meters roughly (source below) - a lot of that length comes from the nacelles.

I wouldn't imagine the Discovery Constitution would be too much bigger than the original or refit.

https://www.reddit.com/r/startrek/comments/74n1co/uss_discovery_18_decks_constitution_comparison/

Tuskin38 · « **Reply #283 on:** April 08, 2018, 07:47:06 PM »

Quote from: Morgan on April 08, 2018, 07:38:13 PM

The Crossfield-class is approximated to be around 560 meters roughly (source below)

We were given an official size for the Crossfield last year, 750.5 meters.

The Shenzhou is 423 meters if you were wondering.

According to the Wonder-Con panel a couple weeks back, the Connie will be scaled up a bit, but they didn't say by how much. The Saucer is clearly bigger.

They also hinted the Enterprise's crew will be wearing familiar uniforms.

https://i.imgur.com/3hsBOFz.png higher res version of the image, still bad a quality Jpeg though

Nebula · « **Reply #284 on:** April 08, 2018, 10:28:52 PM »

If you subtract the unsually long Nacelles from the Crossfield class you get a better idea of its livable size.
If they went with the Nacelle design seen in the early promo shots It'd be much closer to the 400 to 500 Meter length.

In fact what would be the length of the main hull of the Enterprise if we didn't account for the Nacelles?

Tuskin38 · « **Reply #285 on:** April 09, 2018, 02:52:41 PM »

Pike has been cast

http://trekcore.com/blog/2018/04/anson-mount-is-star-trek-discoverys-captain-pike/

He almost looks like Jeffery Hunter

Morgan · « **Reply #286 on:** April 11, 2018, 01:37:05 PM »

Quote from: Tuskin38 on April 09, 2018, 02:52:41 PM

Pike has been cast

http://trekcore.com/blog/2018/04/anson-mount-is-star-trek-discoverys-captain-pike/

He almost looks like Jeffery Hunter

I'm a little disappointed that it's not Bruce Greenwood, but the resemblance to Hunter is uncanny.

I really, REALLY hope that Zachary Quinto is the one to play Spock. Him and Leonard Nimoy got very close and, no matter what anyone says about the JJ films, Quinto does a damn good Spock.

Tuskin38 · « **Reply #287 on:** April 11, 2018, 02:11:04 PM »

I don't think they'll cast anyone from the Kelvin Timeline films.

It would cause confusion.

Another actor cast, but not as a known character. Nor are they a crew memeber of the Discovery or Enterprise.

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/tig-notaro-boards-star-trek-discovery-1101648

Darkthunder · « **Reply #288 on:** April 11, 2018, 04:31:11 PM »

USS Hiawatha???

HAHAHA ROFL!!!

Tuskin38 · « **Reply #289 on:** April 11, 2018, 04:32:10 PM »

What the hell is wrong with Hiawatha?

3 of 12 · « **Reply #290 on:** April 12, 2018, 03:08:45 AM »

I don't see anything wrong with the name. It was used in Starfleet Command for an Akula class vessel and there have been a few US ships in the past named Hiawatha as well.

Darkthunder · « **Reply #291 on:** April 12, 2018, 02:12:05 PM »

Quote from: Tuskin38 on April 11, 2018, 04:32:10 PM

What the hell is wrong with Hiawatha?

Sorry, mostly familiar with the name as an annoying Disney character.

Tuskin38 · « **Reply #292 on:** April 12, 2018, 02:28:11 PM »

and I could have not used the word hell, it was a little aggressive.

Shadowknight1 · « **Reply #293 on:** April 14, 2018, 02:07:44 AM »

In all honesty...the space shots in Discovery aren't any more natural or unnatural than what we consider natural lighting in Star Trek. As an example, it seems like the Discovery and the Enterprise are meeting in deep space. Unless there's a nearby star, wouldn't the running lights, floodlights, windows, and engines be the only illumination on the ships?

Tuskin38 · « **Reply #294 on:** April 14, 2018, 07:08:05 PM »

According to Scott Schindler and John Eaves, the difference is do to legal reasons, they couldn't use the TOS design. It had to be at least 25% different because of copyright.

https://www.facebook.com/john.eaves.526/posts/2039419259419297

it must be all in context, because they can still show the Enterprise on book covers, in video games, comics and toys.

Also the design we got in the finale episode wasn't Eaves' original final design, the VFX department made their own changes.
Nor is the calendar one above final, they fixed that up in Photpshop to make it match the aired version. That explains the ghostly second deflector antennae.

Here are the differences between his version and the show version according to him:

Quote

The changes between the two enterprises are as follows. The new ship has more TMP struts than TOS struts, the main hull and nacelles are shorter and more plump, the deflector dish now has one antenna vs two, the impulse module is thinner from side to side, the overall ship has a heavier plating detail, and the exterior has a more broader range in lighting and nacelle glow. I am sure there are subtle differences but I have not seen any more than you have to make a more detailed comparison so look at the calendar as concept art and all will be good and hope this quick breakdown helps.

Here are couple comments on the design:

Scott Schneider - "...We had straight pylons. We never considered the swept because we felt it would be jumping forward in time for one element. Having said that there are elements of the refit design that really should have been in the original such as an airlock/docking port. I also added hatches to the bottom of the saucer that slide open to reveal additional airlocks. These werent added so much as copying the refit but rather that they just make sense as a functioning ship. I like to approach things from the standpoint of practical application"

Also John Eaves gave explanation for the split in the struts:
John Eaves - "...we split the struts so in time the cooling vent side could be removed to make it more like the Original TOS strut."

And to round that off, Jonathan Frakes spoiled plot details again, this time for Season 2 Episode 2, so:

SPOILER WARNING
https://i.imgur.com/QRdV6AN.png

Darkthunder · « **Reply #295 on:** April 14, 2018, 09:55:33 PM »

Quote from: Tuskin38 on April 14, 2018, 07:08:05 PM

According to Scott Schindler and John Eaves, the difference is do to legal reasons, they couldn't use the TOS design. It had to be at least 25% different because of copyright.

Sorry, but that sounds like a load of bull to me. Can't use the TOS Connie because of copyright? CBS is making Discovery. CBS owns Star Trek (on television). TOS was on television. They own the copyright for the TOS Connie. Logic dictates, they could legally use it if they so choose. They chose not to. Plain and simple.

Tuskin38 · « **Reply #296 on:** April 14, 2018, 11:43:04 PM »

Quote from: Darkthunder on April 14, 2018, 09:55:33 PM

Sorry, but that sounds like a load of bull to me. Can't use the TOS Connie because of copyright? CBS is making Discovery. CBS owns Star Trek (on television). TOS was on television. They own the copyright for the TOS Connie. Logic dictates, they could legally use it if they so choose. They chose not to. Plain and simple.

25% is the legal limit of copyright difference, which matches up with what they told John to make.

They don’t have any other information except for what the higher ups told them. 25% difference because of legal reasons. But they’re just the concept artists, not CBS pencil pushers, so they don’t have all the information. They’re just told what to do.

So you could be partially right, it’s 25% different so they can legally classify it as a new design and make new copyrights and make more money from licensing it.

Tuskin38 · « **Reply #297 on:** April 17, 2018, 02:54:52 PM »

http://trekcore.com/blog/2018/04/enterprise-redesign-for-star-trek-discover-creative-not-legal/

CBS has responded, they do own the rights to the TOS designs.

Darkthunder · « **Reply #298 on:** April 17, 2018, 05:44:43 PM »

So I was right then. But I don't think CBS is being entirely truthful either, since John Eaves (now deleted) Facebook post suggested that they were forced to do the modifications, not simply because of "creative reasons".

Tuskin38 · « **Reply #299 on:** April 17, 2018, 05:52:17 PM »

It isn't a legal reason because they don't own the rights, but because they want to merchandise this new one.

News:

Author Topic: Star Trek: Discovery Discussion (WARNING: SPOILERS) (Read 88535 times)