Star Trek Models and Resources

[evil_genius_180]

No problem. I'd never seen it either, that's where the Starship Schematics Database comes in handy.

http://www.shipschematics.net/

[gmd3d]

ah .. and I have been in that site for my other project

thanks again bro

[coyoteviper]

That's the ship! Yes, I have seen those. I recently captured several renders of it as well. When I am able to post an image, I will. Created by Adam Turner, I believe. But don't know if there are meshes or not, but sure hope so.

[Zoxesyr]

Originally Posted by evil_genius_180

@Ger: Here you go:

Attachment 3321

I can't say I've ever seen a 3D model of that one.

That's the old light cruiser from the original Star Fleet Battles. As I recall it was from the Earth-Romulan war and by the TOS era of SFB was considered an antique.

[catherine3678a]

Originally Posted by coyoteviper

After much searching, I found this site. I use Daz3d and poser 8. Recently, after doing a few star trek uniforms, I decided to look for models of the various vessels, thing is, most are for blender or 3ds, which I don't have. Does anyone know where to find files that would work in poaser or daz?

Bryce [free from Daz3d] can open 3ds files although that term seems to be applied to a couple of formats, one of which no it can't.

http://www.sharecg.com/pf/full_uploa...er_name=tuva01
Some of these will work in D/S and/or Poser.


http://forum.daz3d.com/viewtopic.php?p=2645993#2645993
Will keep one busy for days!

PoserRay [free] will convert some .lwo files into .obj files which can be imported into either program as well.

Originally Posted by dzweigel

Anyone working on a ST:XI model?

Regarding ST-XI ......

http://orbithangar.com/searchid.php?ID=5089

http://orbithangar.com/searchid.php?ID=5083

http://orbithangar.com/searchid.php?ID=5077

http://orbithangar.com/searchid.php?ID=5075

http://orbithangar.com/searchid.php?ID=5074

http://orbithangar.com/searchid.php?ID=5071

Hope this helps ya out.

Love the redesign of the new ships, those link are interesting thanks. Still not sure about that 2009 movie, who sets up lights facing a camera for all the major scenes?
I'm not sure if this is the best place, and I apologise I'm not much of a trekkie but has anyone come across an Enterprise F?

[gmd3d]

Originally Posted by DantesGambit

I'm not sure if this is the best place, and I apologise I'm not much of a trekkie but has anyone come across an Enterprise F?

a model of the Enterprise F .. never seen one

[evil_genius_180]

Originally Posted by DantesGambit

Still not sure about that 2009 movie, who sets up lights facing a camera for all the major scenes?

JJ Abrams does. He's too nutty about flares, IMO. He purposefully used older cameras that would have more flares, the newer cameras don't cause as many flares. And if he didn't have one happening with his set lights, he had someone with a flashlight off camera causing them. It was a bit much, though I do like the movie.

[coyoteviper]

thanks for the many links. No luck with the old light cruiser, guess I will have to lern to do that one myself...eventually- long way from that still yet. But the links did provide me with many other meshes that I had not thought about yet. So excited! Its render time!

[gmd3d]

Originally Posted by coyoteviper

thanks for the many links. No luck with the old light cruiser, guess I will have to lern to do that one myself...eventually- long way from that still yet. But the links did provide me with many other meshes that I had not thought about yet. So excited! Its render time!

good model to start with ........ but fire up your modelling program (which is ?? ) and start working on the basic shapes
post a few of your images in the "on the horizon" thread and we can at least offer suggestions to help you get started ....

Originally Posted by evil_genius_180

JJ Abrams does. He's too nutty about flares, IMO. He purposefully used older cameras that would have more flares, the newer cameras don't cause as many flares. And if he didn't have one happening with his set lights, he had someone with a flashlight off camera causing them. It was a bit much, though I do like the movie.

Seriously? I didn't know that. It's kind of loopy isn't it? The dang lighting detracts from the action. My friend put his sunglasses on to watch!
I have to be honest though I dislike these different timeline/paradoxical time travelling stories, they're full of loop holes I could float a carrier through. But then I'm no trekkie, someone said "Cardassian" to me once and I said "Gazuntite".

Tanaris: I found an Enterprise F. I'll try and get a nice render of it a let you see when I can.

[evil_genius_180]

Originally Posted by DantesGambit

Seriously? I didn't know that. It's kind of loopy isn't it? The dang lighting detracts from the action. My friend put his sunglasses on to watch!

Yeah, there's a little production featurette on the DVD (I have the single-disc one, so it should be on the movie disc for the 2-disc set.) In that featurette, they flat-out say that JJ loves him some lens flares and explain the thing about the cameras and what he did with flashlights. I get a little bothered by it also and I almost reached for the sunglasses at one point or another.

Originally Posted by DantesGambit

I have to be honest though I dislike these different timeline/paradoxical time travelling stories, they're full of loop holes I could float a carrier through. But then I'm no trekkie, someone said "Cardassian" to me once and I said "Gazuntite".

Time travel movies with paradoxes that are written well work fine (Back to the Future, for example.) However, the writing in Star Trek was suspect. They didn't check their "facts" correctly and did the USS Kelvin totally wrong (for one thing, if you scale it to their BS size of the new E, it's over 600 meters long, roughly the size of the Enterprise-D.) There are so many things "wrong" with the Kelvin scenes that it couldn't possibly be the regular Trek universe, the whole movie has to take place in an alternate reality.

Originally Posted by evil_genius_180

@Ger: Here you go:

Attachment 3321

I can't say I've ever seen a 3D model of that one.

It doesn't look all that detailed ..... I may have a go at modeling it sometime in the future.

Originally Posted by evil_genius_180

Yeah, there's a little production featurette on the DVD (I have the single-disc one, so it should be on the movie disc for the 2-disc set.) In that featurette, they flat-out say that JJ loves him some lens flares and explain the thing about the cameras and what he did with flashlights. I get a little bothered by it also and I almost reached for the sunglasses at one point or another.

The daft thing is somewhere like the conn of a military vehicle, which the ships of starfleet basically are, should be the most ergonomic environment in the world. Reflected glare from one of his thousands of pointless light bulbs could block vital information at a critical moment. They really didn't put much thought into the set design past "Oooh shiiiiney!" did they?

Originally Posted by evil_genius_180

Time travel movies with paradoxes that are written well work fine (Back to the Future, for example.) However, the writing in Star Trek was suspect. They didn't check their "facts" correctly and did the USS Kelvin totally wrong (for one thing, if you scale it to their BS size of the new E, it's over 600 meters long, roughly the size of the Enterprise-D.) There are so many things "wrong" with the Kelvin scenes that it couldn't possibly be the regular Trek universe, the whole movie has to take place in an alternate reality.

Yes I totally agree. Back to the Future was awesome! But in that case the story was focused around time travel. Star Trek 2009 was a weak writers attempt to remake the series and stuff Leonard Nimoy into the film to give it credibility. Time Travel isn't its focus and it upsets something that has long been established. I was half expecting to see USS Enterpize! Y'know cause JJ is down with the hood and all.
I literally just got through rewatching 2009 Trek and I have to admit its really as bad as I remember. Can't win em all I guess.
Though, and I bare in mind this may not be the correct thread, I gotta ask what was wrong with the Kelvin? Was the model design wrong? (He says trying to make it look like all this has anything to do with the thread)

[evil_genius_180]

Don't worry if you go off topic, we do it all the time.

As to the Kelvin, I freakin' love it. However, in the "Prime Universe" in 2233, the Kelvin would have had its own emblem, yet they're wearing what (at the time) was the Enterprise emblem on their uniforms. Another point (besides the size of the ship) is that humans in 2233 have no way of knowing what a Romulan looks like, they never saw one until 2266. Also, the ship has a lot of touch screens and stuff like that, which make it fit better into a futuristic look at current tech, but the original show all had buttons, toggles and switches. This is the problem of taking a couple of overzealous writers and a new director into Star Trek, they mess things up worse than Rick Berman ever could. They thought, if they made it appear that the "Prime Universe" was split at an earlier time, then they could present the whole movie as an alternate reality story and Trek fans would accept it. However, to accomplish that, they have to do the parts that are supposed to be in the original universe correctly, they didn't. They should have just done a total reboot, like they have with BSG, Hawaii Five-O and several other franchises.

Having said that, I still really like Star Trek. (the 2009 movie) I think it's a great flick, I just don't like all of the wrong things they did, so I lump the whole movie into an alternate reality, even the 2233 and 2287 parts.

Back on the thread topic, I love the Kelvin model and do plan to build it one of these days. I started one in 2009 but I didn't have the best references for it. I have more now and will tackle that (perhaps) sometime this year.

[MCP935]

thanks a lot for the links