The Official Star Trek Movie Forum

The Official Star Trek Movie Forum > Star Trek > Star Trek XI: The Movie > Model or CG Enterprise???
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 02-19-2008, 05:36 AM
DaveO DaveO is offline
Ensign
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 32
Default

Just so there's not any confusion...

An object in CG is a model, a "CG Model."

A model placed in front of a camera is known as a practical model.

Most here seem to favor a practical model of the E.

Me? I prefer it if I can't tell what they used. If my disbelief has been tossed out the window, I'm good.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 02-19-2008, 06:01 AM
Saquist's Avatar
Saquist Saquist is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 11,257
Default

If they darken the model that's how you know it's CGI...it's to add imperfection to a perfection model. If there is alot of ambient light it's usually a physical model.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 02-19-2008, 08:10 AM
DolFan2020's Avatar
DolFan2020 DolFan2020 is offline
Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Florida.. hence Dolphins FAN!
Posts: 290
Default

I'd prefer a CG vessel for the new movie. The CG artwork is great and it worked for Enterprise.....
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 02-19-2008, 08:57 AM
mick1965 mick1965 is offline
Midshipman
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1
Post hi all

id love too see the movie and the ship should bee cg
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 02-19-2008, 11:30 AM
flyer00jay's Avatar
flyer00jay flyer00jay is offline
Lieutenant, Junior Grade
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: In Space
Posts: 137
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveO View Post
Just so there's not any confusion...
Me? I prefer it if I can't tell what they used. If my disbelief has been tossed out the window, I'm good.
Exactly.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 02-19-2008, 04:12 PM
The Commodore The Commodore is offline
Ensign
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 45
Default

Oh I'd definitely like to see them use old-fashioned models whenever possible, even though I'm almost sure that's not going to happen. Even with our technology today, we're not ready for using CGI for everything, and there's something lost anyhow. Trust me: watch Star Trek III; there you see special effects that are sometimes more impressive than moments in First Contact. Seeing the Refit fly by was greater than seeing the original Ent-E fly by in Contact. Thing is, only with a model do you get a good feeling of size: In STIII, the Enterprise looked like a freaking city when it moved. It looked like a a dreadnaught. Because of the slowness of movement, and because of the lighting and the vantage-differences, the special effects show a certain respect for the fact that the U.S.S. Enterprise is a very, very large object. With CGI, everything becomes an exercise in "woo, look what I can do!", and the quick movement of the ships without any shots of it moving like molasses or having certain vantage points or having really important music telling you that it's amazing that this thing is so freaking big (i.e. the pan from the refit Enterprise to Starbase 74) just makes CGI models unimpressive. They look pretty as pictures, and the explosions often look nice, but there's no suspense in the movement, there's no grandeur. Do you know what I mean, guys?
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 02-19-2008, 05:57 PM
the_tortel!'s Avatar
the_tortel! the_tortel! is offline
Lieutenant, Junior Grade
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 206
Default

ILM's doing the CG, so I'll bet we won't be able to tell(well) if it's a practical model or CGI
they're great with blending the two
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 02-19-2008, 06:06 PM
Saquist's Avatar
Saquist Saquist is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 11,257
Default

ah...I don't think they did a good job of that on the Star Wars Films........at alll.....
Hopefully they don't do that.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 02-19-2008, 06:38 PM
The Commodore The Commodore is offline
Ensign
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 45
Default

Yeah no kidding, Saquist; the Queen's ship looked like a 1990s screensaver.

Last edited by The Commodore : 02-19-2008 at 09:50 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 02-19-2008, 10:20 PM
MissionTrek08's Avatar
MissionTrek08 MissionTrek08 is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Southern California
Posts: 5,562
Default

Put it this way: you can film a model and make it look great, or it can look like crap. Same goes with CG. It depends on who is designing the shots, not which type of object is the star of the shot. I think the teaser has already given us a good example of how Abrams et al want to give the Enterprise massive, big, heavy scale when viewed on movie screens... and that's just when it's sitting on construction pylons. I'm sure they'll do the same and more when the E launches in space, whichever method they use to film it.
__________________

MISSION:TREK's in-depth review of STAR TREK


Proud member of the Friends of Zardoz Association. Avatar courtesy of Eliza's House of Avatars with three convenient locations near you. Free balloons for the kids!
Reply With Quote
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

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:31 AM.


Forum theme courtesy of Mark Lambert
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2009 by Paramount Pictures. STAR TREK and all related
marks and logos are trademarks of CBS Studios Inc. All Rights Reserved.