HOME | DD

Published: 2013-07-28 13:08:12 +0000 UTC; Views: 1061; Favourites: 17; Downloads: 24
Redirect to original
Description
Some people can build a model and then say "That's done, now let's do something else." Me, on the other hand, I build a model and then agonise over it for years. I keep tweaking it and rebuilding bits of it, trying to get it ...just ...right.So anyway, I've been looking at my animation of my USS Paul Dirac model jim197.deviantart.com/art/USS-… and I've decided that the shape of the primary hull is wrong. The top face is basically a simple dome, reminiscent of the Excelsior and the TNG Enterprise. And therein lies the problem; these are post-TOS ships and I want my design to look TOS-era.
After giving it some thought, I've decided to flatten the primary hull's top face out at the edges so that it looks more like the TOS Enterprise primary hull. This change also makes it look a bit like the NX-01 primary hull, meaning it could be a transitional form between the NX-01 and NCC-1701 hulls. I find this notion very appealing.
To be clear, I don't think this change makes it look any prettier (in fact the original shape is probably more attractive), but I do think it fits better with Star Trek canon.
If you aren't into Star Trek then this may seem like a lot of fuss over a very small detail ...but if you aren't into Star Trek then you probably haven't read this far anyway, so it probably doesn't matter.
There are other bits of the USS Dirac model that could use improvement too, but that's for another day.
Images rendered using POV-Ray 3.7 on Sunday 28th July 2013, and composited using GIMP.
Related content
Comments: 10
CR99nut [2013-09-19 04:10:50 +0000 UTC]
Before I even clicked the thumbnail to get to the full sized version, I said aloud "Hey, he flattened the saucer edge!" Yup, I notice little details like that, and I agree with your idea that it looks more TOS than TNG now. This is a believable TOS predecessor, without getting too 'fanboyish' (studded with a ridiculous amount of extraneous weapons pods, mating two entire starship hulls together, that sort of thing).
I used to think that I was taking a long break from ST, but I notice that even though I left ST for a while, it didn't leave me.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Jim197 In reply to CR99nut [2013-09-21 13:21:59 +0000 UTC]
Thanks, I'm glad you think it looks like a credible TOS or pre-TOS design. I know exactly what you mean about extraneous weapons pods etc., and that's exactly the kind of thing I'm trying to avoid.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
BasillArt [2013-07-30 14:01:36 +0000 UTC]
Nice. I tend to prefer the flattened outer edges myself, so I actually prefer this to the original in the "prettier" category (while no major diss to the original, mind you). The original is still a perfectly viable variation (say, if you ever wanted to give her another name and show her in some deep space rendezvous mode with the Paul D or something).
I certainly know the sensation of "a model is never done" all too well myself.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Jim197 In reply to BasillArt [2013-07-30 18:18:03 +0000 UTC]
Thanks. I have to say, the flattened outer edge is definitely growing on me, it's seems to give the hull a much more interesting shape. Also, I have kept the original hull form so hopefully I will find another use for it.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Phaeton99 [2013-07-28 15:42:20 +0000 UTC]
A significant refinement toward era aesthetics, if subtle.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Jim197 In reply to Phaeton99 [2013-07-28 18:13:48 +0000 UTC]
Thank you, that's what I thought
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Phaeton99 In reply to Jim197 [2013-07-28 19:56:23 +0000 UTC]
The difference between good design and great design often lies in such little details.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Jimlogan1701 [2013-07-28 14:35:39 +0000 UTC]
Nice update, looks more in line with other starfleet designs. I really do sympathize with you about getting things to look just right too........i'm still at it myself lol.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Jim197 In reply to Jimlogan1701 [2013-07-28 18:15:30 +0000 UTC]
Thanks, I was hoping other people would agree it was a move in the right direction.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Jimlogan1701 In reply to Jim197 [2013-07-28 19:23:22 +0000 UTC]
how can i argue with a Dalek
👍: 0 ⏩: 0