USS Astraea - Flyaround Beauty Shots
Vložit
- čas přidán 16. 04. 2024
- Camera movement is still a little janky as I'm learning how to do the movement, but bussard vanes are fixed, and I've worked out it is way faster to cut the composition entirely from Blender and simplify it, then apply the effects in Davinci. Speaking of, incredibly simple lens flares!
- Krátké a kreslené filmy
![[柴犬ASMR]曼玉Manyu&小白Bai 毛发护理Spa asmr](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/0TsXQ7z2Dh4/mqdefault.jpg)
The best thing about your design is that it inherently resolves the "where is main engineering" problem that the original Constitution class had, since the nacelle pylons meet at the same place that impulse engineering would be at the back of the saucer.
I love this scene. I can clearly tell that you are a true star trek fan, You understand what star trek is because you understand that the starship is also the maim character of the show and it deserves its own time screen. I really loved the shots, really beautiful ship design. Love the mix between TOS and TMP, you took the best of the two to make something new and special.
Thank you so much!
Loved the use of Enterprise music.
I'd forgotten how much I love that theme, its excellent
Good design!
Interesting configuration for a ship. Kinda dig it! Nice job! The movement around the ship felt a bit herky jerky (but let's be honest, it's far and away miles ahead of any of my skills so I'll shush and enjoy it). Great job overall!
Kinda weird deflector dish. Overall, she's a nice ship. 😎👍
Nice job, i am glad the 1800 series is getting some notice after all this time, my ship was old constitution class ncc1821 uss echo, 7th fleet flag now in ship yard.
Hey that's a purdy ship.
Nicely done. Great design of TOS and TMP, daddy likes. 😁
I really love this design. Well done
Great work. Next time with some Warp drive FX, please.
thats on the to do list!
Awsome! Might need some more fps but other than that.... great stuff.
Interesting blend of the TMP and TOS aesthetic.
Amazing work!
Thank you!
She's beautiful.
This, I like.
I'm not a huge fan of incomplete saucers... I just don't see the point of losing the additional infrastructure... but this ship looks great!
Funnily enough it was originally a full circle early when modelling, I cut out the back section because it made the shape flow *much* better.
I've seen your posts on reddit, very cool design!
thank you!
tough little ship
Little? :P
She's longer than the Connie! (granted only because of those nacelles :D )
with fingernails that shined like justice.
Sweet!!
Are there going to be any longer videos?
I definitely have more I want to do with this one, and ideas for different models as well (some trek, some not). *Very* much still learning how to do it though
You can't use the feel-good version of the Enterprise theme without rendering enough video to use it all! I'm going to need you to fly around for two minutes and thirty five seconds please.
To do list!
Render quality is nice but the frame rate is a little jittery. I'd also suggest easing up on the camera movement too, always try and mimic what a real camera might be doing as impossible camera movements will immediately undermine the believability of your shot. Good work anyway..keep going :)
Re the jitteryness.. I think you just need to enable motion blur in whatever render software you are using.
@@RobertMcNamara3DMc oh that's possible, I didn't as the ship was static and I wanted it nice and crisp, didn't know it would effect frame rates thanks!
The camera motion is definitely too sharp at the start, tbh this started just as a test to see how long the render would take without any post processing in blender (it's entirely davinci here) and I didn't want to spread it out too far as I thought it would take longer than it did 🤣
I wanted the basic movement in place here where it swoops around the whole thing, but I didn't want that sudden jerkyness
Takes the concept of the separate engineering hull and throws it away. Another starship designed by people who don’t know how starships work. So, how to you plan to separate the saucer in case of a warp core breach?
What on earth makes you think it *can't* separate? I do in fact have modelled clamps at the connection between the secondary hull and the neck. Additionally the circular hatch on the underside is very deliberatly lined up with the underside of the impulse deflection crystal so that a refit style vertical intermix chamber could be slid out on demand (with the primary usage of the ship being modular and good chicks of its engineering being easily swapped out, but it could easily eject the chamber if required.
The majority of starfleet ships don't display this capability anyway, especially in the earlier eras, only some of the big - you might as well say Joe Jennings is a moron because the Miranda class can't separate 🤣
@@RingandRaven, which is why the Defiant suffered such great damage throughout the saucer when Enterprise shot her warp engine off. As Scotty said, “the more you complicate the system, the easier it is to stop up the plumbing.”
So, you think you know Star ship design. Why are your warp engines positioned where they are? They’ll have to create a much larger warp bubble to make sure it surrounds the ship. With your design, this means a giant portion of the bubble above the nacelles doing nothing. Not a very efficient design.
Besides, let’s say you DO separate the saucer from the secondary. You still have the mass of the nacelles to contend with, which is definitely going to affect the handling of saucer. Try setting that mess down on the surface of a planet.
And just what is the mission role that this ship is required to fill that required such a design.
You’re just another CZcamsr that just adds another design to the mix. In reality, the Federation and Starfleet would collapse because the logistics chain cannot support so many variations. Amateurs think in terms of tactics. Professionals think in terms of logistics. Beans, bullets, and bedding…
@kennethcollins7665
Okay you remember this is a piece of artwork for a fictional series? I'm not mocking you here, I'm genuinely suggesting chilling a little.
Buuuuut since I'm also a nerd who likes details, I'll humour you.
1) the Miranda class was in use 111 years if you count the Reliant's (not the Defiant's) name appearing in...Court Martial iirc, and even if that wasn't the class its still significantly outlasted the Constitution and even Excelsior classes. You are correct that more complicated systems are more prone to error, and while Starfleet is canonically much more fond of complicated systems than the rugged simplicity style I would point out that ships that come apart are more complicated than ships that don't. The Miranda is a simpler more compact design than the Constitution, less powerful perhaps (especially with a logically smaller warp core) but likely more rugged hence why it became starfleets workhorse for a century.
2) the nacelles are placed where they are in accordance with a great many other canonical starfleet designs both before and after the Constitution, which prefers starfleets larger vessels to have rear mounted nacelles, with the Roddenberry design rules being visible from the front of the ship, paired, and line of sight with each other, in particular the grilled sections as that was intended circa TMP to be generating a connecting energy field (prior to that in TOS the conception was purely that they were high radiation propulsion units kept away from the crew, much like the conception for the secondary hull itself, along with the saucer originally intended to be landing regularly rather than separating as a last resort)
The nacelles on the Ravenna class have proportionally a little LESS sticking out into empty space than on the TOS Enterprise, which I think you've forgotten the look of.
Warp fields are generated by the nacelles yes but you will note that no depiction of them ever shows the field as symmetrical or centered over the nacelles - they are in fact usually highly asymmetrical and centred on the midsection of the ship and conforming to the hull shape, though often half of the field lines originate from the front of the nacelles. They also extend far beyond the hull.
Oh and once again under your logic you should be championing the Miranda class for being far more efficient.
4) yes that would leave extra mass, assuming of course one cannot jettison the nacelles as described in TOS: The Apple, which was incidentally one of the very few times a little excess mass on the ship actually made a difference considering the inertial and mass lightening capabilities of these ships and standard engines that can reach high c-fractional velocities. But if it makes you feel better I WAS considering the saucer section itself separating, likely taking the impulse section with it. As with every ship in the history of the franchise it is designed aesthetically first with lore informing but not prohibiting it.
Plus the original Enterprise Saucer is....not exactly an efficient aerodynamic design for an emergency landing on a planet.
5) ah, a loredump! Despite the visuals taking precedence I actually personally enjoy lore and making it make sense, so the Ravenna class is an offshoot of the fleetwide upgrades prior to the TMP era (hence the mixed design philosophy) with a specific attempt to take the mission capabilities of the Constitution class and fit them into a smaller, more compact space frame, creating a ship that could serve as mid range explorer, colony support, and fast response, taking a little of the pressure off the Constitution class which was intended for deep space frontier missions but was frequently being called back further into federation territory for requisite missions. The class is of comparable length, but not as tall with a shorter warp core than the Connie refit would have, but compensating with proportionally larger nacelles and a large cooling system in the pylons. This coupled with the smaller engineering section (with more of its volume given over to cargo and auxiliary craft) results in a capital vessel with a slightly higher top speed but a lower cruising speed, 2/3s the crew (and deck numbers in fact, that worked out very nicely in scaling) and in general wouldn't have the long term endurance of the Constitution. Essentially any one of those 'only ship in the sector' missions of the Enterprise's could be accomplished almost as well with a Ravenna, but it would not be as suitable for a five year deep space mission away from starbase support.
6) yes I am throwing another design into the mix because I...like doing spaceship art. Oh the calamity.
I wouldn't get too proud of your hard sci-fi 'reality' for trek, because if you go down that route you quickly end up questioning how polities of hundreds of worlds each with billions of people and literally humanly incomprehensible quantities of raw materials solely in their own systems could ever even notice a fleet of 40 ships being destroyed.
But even if we scale things back to the much more TV budget friendly, you are still talking about a semi-post scarcity setting with extremely advanced computer aided design and matter synthesis (even before full on replicators exist), not to mention the fact that starfleet engineers tinker with the ships every week for fun, inevitably resulting in every ship being notably different a month after it leaves space dock.
Items are standardised because it simplified logistics yes (well done dear for remembering that quote), however this ALSO results in designs using parts not intended for this use and with inevitably lower performance. As manufacturing is made easier by technology you will have a significant increase in bespoke items designed for specific niches, rather than making everything out of one size fits all items.
This incidentally is something we are beginning to see more of already in the real world with the increasing presence of 3D printer devices meaning that the actual design of an item is no longer a barrier to manufacturing.
All designs are trade offs of pros and cons depending on the context of what is needed at what cost.
For a historical example cloaks were the go-to warm clothing item for millennia precisely for logistical reasons, because the limiting factor was the cost of cutting, sewing, tailoring, and generally assembling a garment - a simple circle was much cheaper than a complex coat.
The instant machine sewing was invented the cost of production plummeted and coats because preferable to cloaks because the limiting factor was now the cost of the fabric. Technology advanced, the pressures on the logistics changed, and what was once efficient was now inefficient.
@@RingandRaven, I guess autocorrect got me on Reliant and made it defiant. No, I just get a perverse pleasure on busting people who take Trek too seriously and come out with ridiculous designs they really can’t defend and always some how can outdo the Enterprise, which was supposedly the top tier of Star Fleets ships, which was why there were only 12 of them. And the personas they came up with, make Kirk and Picard seem like pikers. Nu Trek with Discovery is full of that nonsense.
I’ve been in the Fandom since 66 and remember the write in campaign started by Bjo Trimble that got us a third season of TOS. I got burned out by decades of folks who forgot it was supposed to be fun and thought they could do it better (and they couldn’t) so every now and then, I’ll challenge someone to defend their dissertation, as it were. After all, it seems to be all about the aesthetics and not really about practically. Face it, have you ever seen a garbage scow or a space going dedicated tow truck? Those aren’t glamorous or get legendary crew members.
You did good. You’ve defended just about every point I challenged. There used to be a Star Fleet International design section where fans would submit designs, and if approved, they were put into an internet database and became beta canon. I still think your nacelles are too high on the vertical plain, but still think this design would be a worthy contender for submission. I’ll see if I can find the link if you want to submit it. I don’t do video games, but think you can also do the same with Star Trek Online.
And I’m quite fine mentally. Between motorcycles, RC helicopters, model trains, and target shooting, and my grandkids, I have plenty. I still enjoy trek, just not as much as I used too…
Look up “Advanced Starship Design Bureau”
Warp engines date it, looking less roddenberry, it's ugly, and it stinks.
I mean...yes those warp nacelles quite literally date it that is the point, but the original style nacelles makes it LESS Rodenberry? Sure that makes sense
@@RingandRaven Dude, 45 yr sci fi fan and critic..its butt ugly.🤷🏾♀️🤷♂️