The only thing missing from the NX-01 was the "Star Drive", that would get fitted on in a latter Re-fit.Then one needs to factor in the importance of people’s complaints. I recall lots of complaints about the NX-01 design, which didn’t affect the production of the show at all.
That's the thing. There are complaints about everything. No matter what direction a design goes in, there's going to be countless people finding fault with it. Either it's too different or not different enough.Then one needs to factor in the importance of people’s complaints.
It's only in hindsight that I think the NX-01 design was a tough call. They wanted a ship that looked like it came before NCC-1701, but didn't look too retro, and could still easily be recognizable to even casual audiences as a Star Trek ship (saucer and nacelles). Looking back, I think ENT's art department did a great job coming up with something that had to meet their bosses' demands.I recall lots of complaints about the NX-01 design, which didn’t affect the production of the show at all.
IMO, it's not so much that Star Trek art departments can't come up with some really spectacular and innovative designs that fit a certain aesthetic, but that they are bound by what the producers want to see. They don't have the same creative freedom that fans do. There are probably countless designs that might be considered totally inspired that end up in the garbage bin because the higher ups gave it a no vote and wanted something more traditional or whatever.Dont get me wrong. I also prefer a consistent design lineage for my Trek ships. But I’ve seen some fantastic fan-made designs that look much more original than what I’m seeing CBS/Paramount putting out, and I’m not confused as to what they’re supposed to represent.
Indeed, yes. People want more familiar with the touchstones. I think this became even more difficult when you have multiple production teams working more independently of each other and not just drawing from a centralized database of prebuilt models.They can't really win in that department. If they make a ship that is too different from what came before, people would be calling them out on that as well.
In real life, most naval ship classes follow a general design or configuration with only minor differences between them, IMO.
Pretty much, yes. Higher ups are looking for things that they think fans and audiences will gravitate towards.They don't have the same creative freedom that fans do. There are probably countless designs that might be considered totally inspired that end up in the garbage bin because the higher ups gave it a no vote and wanted something more traditional or whatever.
There isn't a traditional main shuttlebay after of the bridge. Here, the two noted bays are low on the secondary hull and where we expect one to be on Akira and/or Steamrunner class ships, on the forward rim of the saucer.
He did the initial sketches, but IIRC the show designers did changes from there.Eaves designed the Protostar.
Voyager-A was designed by Ben Hibon.Who designed VoyAger? Were Sternbach or Eaves involved?
Amour likely to help with collisions. Enterprise F has it as well and its specifically said to be Armour around parts of the ship that may be more targeted in battle or might get damaged in a collision like say raming an romulan ship..Certifyably Ingame has posted their analysis of the Voyager-A.
I wonder the deal is with the contrasting nose plating - the USS Prodigy sorta doubles down on this too. Armor? Heat or FTL shielding for forward motion? Pure aesthetics?
Mark
Yes, that is certainly a factor. Now with that said, there still are certain designers that tend to just recycle the same things over and over no matter who the person in charge happens to be, or what they allegedly say that they want to see. Their overall design aesthetic never seems to change despite whatever production they happen to be working on.IMO, it's not so much that Star Trek art departments can't come up with some really spectacular and innovative designs that fit a certain aesthetic, but that they are bound by what the producers want to see. They don't have the same creative freedom that fans do.
It's not really that different from any artist having a particular style or motif in their work. They have a certain look that they can become known for, regardless if one likes it or not. Still, in the case of production designers, someone still has to sign off on their work as being what they're going with. If they didn't like it, they'd ask for changes or (in an extreme case) hire someone else to do the job.Yes, that is certainly a factor. Now with that said, there still are certain designers that tend to just recycle the same things over and over no matter who the person in charge happens to be, or what they allegedly say that they want to see. Their overall design aesthetic never seems to change despite whatever production they happen to be working on.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.