Career Officer
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 918
# 41
03-14-2013, 09:34 AM
There are plenty of size discrepancies just look at the transporter pads they are GINORMOUS it's like all of the ships are equipped with cargo bay size transporters.

It would be nice if they went thru and fixed them all but imo i would rather they spend that time fixing load screens and things like imbalance in the skillsets (like removing the nerfs from science abilities and splitting the attack patterns and evasive patterns into separate skills).
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 855
# 42
03-14-2013, 11:28 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by tacofangs View Post
You're kidding right? Max has a "scale" controller. It takes two seconds to change the defiant from 170m to 120m long. . .
While that is -technically- true, one also must consider the impact that changing a ship models size might have on the texturing. You can reduce a Galaxy Class from 640 meters down to 50 meters, and it would still look proportionally correct on it's own. But put that Galaxy Class up next to a shuttle, and you realize the ridiculousness of the scaling (windows, lifepods, various other details, completely out of whack)

Minor scaling changes such as 170 m to 160 m may go unnoticed, but if you do any major rescaling, there is likely to be some re-texturing required as well.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,008
# 43
03-14-2013, 11:41 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffel82 View Post
According to Memory Alpha, the size of the Defiant according to the CGI model used in the show was 170.7 m...very close to the 164.5 m the devs settled on.

Ex Astris Scientia has the most comprehensive analysis of the Defiant situation that I've ever seen. In short, there are so many problems, either because the Defiant was resized for an episode, or because Deep Space Nine was, or because some ship appearing on-screen with the Defiant was, I think it's pretty fair to pick just about any size within the wide range provided by the visual evidence as the "correct" one. Picking the most commonly depicted size is a logical way to do it, but it's not necessarily the only way to do it.

On the topic of the CGI models being superior, the Defiant's appearance in First Contact is extremely problematic...it depicts the ship as being in the 50 m range!

Naturally, I don't think this is the same CGI model used in the series, but...well, there it is.
No offense, but you're having the same problem Logical had, that you are confusing the CGI models with the Studio models. That scene in First Contact with the Enterprise-E and the Defiant were both studio models, not CGI (the Background ships were CGI). Only CGI scene the Enterprise-E had was when it was going through the temporal vortex.

And all the scenes that people question that had size discrepencies, was when studio models were involved. Because they guessed the scale for those scenes. But with CGI it's not different that what we have in STO, it's all about position relative to objects and the camera position. So if someone took a screenshot and people said it one ship was larger, then it boils down to your eyes fooling you (where you think it's wrong, but actually right).



The point is, like this and you talking about the exterior model used for the outdoor shot with the Jem'Hadar Fighter, they are guessing with the scaling. But with CGI, it's an absolute.

Well when it comes to STO, they do guess. I mean that crashed BoP in Alpha and in the Final 2800 mission are WAY too small.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tacofangs View Post
SPOILER: *Sorry to burst your bubble, but there is a lot of smoke & mirrors outside the shipyard window. We're doing some tricky stuff with forced perspective, and scaling ships down as they get farther from that window. Don't believe everything you see. The actual ESD model (which, as I mentioned, is modeled to canon dimensions), would have trouble fitting a couple of nova classes inside. People have asked for a while to be able to fly in there and hang out. You couldn't navigate it if you wanted to.

ETA: I just did a quick test. Yes, you could fit 8 Galaxy's in the Dome of the properly scaled ESD. However, they have to be flipped over, and crammed together is such a tight configuration, it would be logistically impossible.*
Well duh, thats what I was pointing at.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tacofangs View Post
That's a nice idea, but I don't buy it. . . production needs dictate a lot of things that you or I wouldn't be naturally inclined to do. (Note First Contact, and the Defiant/Ent E scaling issues)
See Above. They weren't CGI.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tacofangs View Post
I don't think anyone has done this, but I'm not on the ship team. However, what exactly would this get us? So we find out the scale of the model used? We have canon dimensions already. The models wouldn't be usable in game.
I didn't say use the models in-game, I said for you guys to study.

Wouldn't you rather have the real models to examine than looking at pictures off the internet that sometimes isn't all that clear?

Quote:
Originally Posted by tacofangs View Post
You're kidding right? Max has a "scale" controller. It takes two seconds to change the defiant from 170m to 120m long. . .

I never said MAX didn't have a scaling function.

I said it took time to change scales. While the function is relatively fast and easy, you have to re-render the scene for the final production run.
NO to ARC!

Season 9.5 = STO's NGE is Here! Welcome to the Grind!

New Crafting = It's not Crafting, is an overblown Reputation System.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,412
# 44
03-14-2013, 01:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by centersolace View Post
10. The Odyssey is an interesting case. Due to it having no canon size, it's tricky trying to figure out how big it's really supposed to be. But the more you look at it currently, the weirder it looks. Going from the number of floors, it's only about the size of the Sovy. However, it looks really stupid at that size. So based on it's crew capacity and description, that makes it wider than a Galaxy class.
http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6043/7...cf6ea7c9_z.jpg

Cryptic! Need some FREE KDF uniform options that you wont have to make? See Here.

JJ. Trek is just as canon and awesome as all other Trek, Get over it.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,539
# 45
03-14-2013, 02:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by azurianstar View Post
No offense, but you're having the same problem Logical had, that you are confusing the CGI models with the Studio models. That scene in First Contact with the Enterprise-E and the Defiant were both studio models, not CGI (the Background ships were CGI). Only CGI scene the Enterprise-E had was when it was going through the temporal vortex.
Certainly no offense taken - I'm no expert, and don't mind being corrected.

Memory Alpha does say that a CGI Defiant was used in First Contact, though. It was a different CGI model than the one used in later series, no less! I can imagine that if we're now comparing a CGI model Defiant to a physical model Sovereign, it's a whole 'nother can of worms...
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,008
# 46
03-14-2013, 02:29 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffel82 View Post
Certainly no offense taken - I'm no expert, and don't mind being corrected.

Memory Alpha does say that a CGI Defiant was used in First Contact, though. It was a different CGI model than the one used in later series, no less! I can imagine that if we're now comparing a CGI model Defiant to a physical model Sovereign, it's a whole 'nother can of worms...
Was sure I saw a behind the scenes they used the Defiant Model, oh well, can't argue with Memory Alpha.

But yes, everytime studio models are used either with another studio model or a CGI model, scales are based off perception than accuracy. CGI is always accurate, unless the director has the scale purposely changed for some odd reason. Like in STO, DS9 is larger to make it more grand as a HUB and shuttles are larger so we can see them.
NO to ARC!

Season 9.5 = STO's NGE is Here! Welcome to the Grind!

New Crafting = It's not Crafting, is an overblown Reputation System.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 976
# 47
03-14-2013, 03:28 PM
poster deleted by poster.

Last edited by lordfuzun; 03-14-2013 at 03:40 PM.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 976
# 48
03-14-2013, 03:34 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by notapwefan View Post
I am sure that J. J. Abrams will fix the size problem in Star Trek in future
No not really. The production crew of ST:2009 continues to grand tradition of having screwed up size scales. FWIW, the CGI model in the model is roughly the side of the Enterprise Refit from the Star Trek:TMP. You get that size by comparing the size of features on the ship. The model is not scaled any where the arbitrarily increased "official" size.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 976
# 49
03-14-2013, 03:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by tuskin67 View Post
If shuttles were to scale they would be a pain in the ass to see. They would be too small. The size they are has to do with gameplay reasons.

Also I believe they also stated it had to do with Camera limitations as well.
The Type F shuttle is almost too small as it is. If I zoom out to maximum camera distance, I barely see it in Sector Space.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 867
# 50
03-14-2013, 03:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by azurianstar View Post
Dude, that was not CGI. Those were Studio Models.

They didnt' start using CGI until Season 5 of DS9 / Season 3 of Voyager.
I know. I was simply stating that, had they used CGI models from the beginning, you would likely still have the same issue, because just like the Cryptic artists wanted to make DS9 look "too big" due to gameplay reasons, the artists who worked on DS9 often want edto make ships appear different sizes for screenplay reasons. Whether you are using a CGI model or a real model, you run into the exact same issue of size inconsistencies.
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:28 AM.