Still looks good to me.

smokebailey · January 2019

Someone did a lil reworking with the Enterprise, here.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NQHvhuNXvV0&feature=youtu.be

Looked pretty darn good to me, this 'awful, 60's ship'

ryan218 · January 2019

To be fair, smoke, I don't think you'd find many of us who had a problem with the design of the TOS Connie. The issue is really with the lack of detail (which doesn't mean we want grebling to make a Star Destroyer blush). Even that remaster you're linking isn't exactly like the "60s" ship. For a start, it has the Aztec pattern, which wasn't ever seen until TNG in the '80s. It has lit warp grills, which the original show didn't have. It has service floods, visible phaser banks, etc. And it looks much better alongside today's VFX than the old balsa wood model TOS used while keeping the same basic design.

(On a side not, just about the only thing I don't like about that remaster is the lack of hull panelling. I know people say it looks more hi-tech as one large piece, but the TMP model had large hull panels, as has every Federation design since, including the NX-01. TOS is the outlier. I honestly prefer the various remasters (including the Art Asylum replicas) which featurge the TMP-style hull panel lines. It doesn't have to be all over the place, just a few seams showing where hull segments have been locked together.)

rattler2 · January 2019

I'm with ryan on this.
I don't hate the TOS design. I think its pretty good. But to try and push her in as is next to modern graphics, she shows her age big time. But without her... we wouldn't have any other ship ever seen period.

Give the classic some of the same details like we see in later versions of Trek, like the mentioned aztecing and glowing field grills, and she comes back to life in a big way.

Its the little things that can make big improvements.
I still feel that the Discovery variant is a good incarnation that also stays true to the original, but I understand not everyone agrees. To each their own after all. I respect that.

But like I said, the little details add up.

cheesebasket · January 2019

Expect the look to slightly change with better graphics...then again the Connie was made to work not be the ship equivalent of a fashionista...

i always liked the origional connie because it always has a realistic deflector dish, although the kelvin connie has a decent take on a modern connie IMO

evilmark444 · January 2019

I'll break from the mold, I HATE the TOS version of the Connie and have always thought it was ugly as sin since I first saw it as a kid in the '90s. The ST: Discovery version is superior in every way imaginable, infact I even like it more than the TMP version. That fan recreation does nothing to change my mind on this.

EDIT: So the language filter now changes the three letter abbreviation for Star Trek Discovery to TRIBBLE? How lame.

ryan218 · January 2019

People were using the abbreviation as a disparagement to associate it with venereal disease, and the official abbreviation is ST: DSC (like VOY, DS9, ENT, etc.). Not saying I agree with it (in my opinion, all it's accomplished is making people use even more childish nicknames for the show).

alexmakepeace · January 2019

evilmark444 wrote: »

I'll break from the mold, I HATE the TOS version of the Connie and have always thought it was ugly as sin since I first saw it as a kid in the '90s. The ST: Discovery version is superior in every way imaginable, infact I even like it more than the TMP version. That fan recreation does nothing to change my mind on this.

EDIT: So the language filter now changes the three letter abbreviation for Star Trek Discovery to TRIBBLE? How lame.

Yeah, I agree. The remaster here in this video looks better than the original, but the DISCO Connie beats the TOS Connie and completely blows the Kelvin Connie out of the water. And yeah, I think I like it better than TMP as well. The only TOS ships I've seen that actually look decent are some of the ones from Agents of Yesterday.

artan42 · January 2019

When DS9 did their Tribble time travel episode they vastly improved the D7 by giving it a feather pattern on the hull and a green tint but didn't also improve the basic and lifeless looking Conni.
Adding visible plasma, metallic material, and Aztecing would at least make it fit slightly better in the style of literally every other Starfleet ship in Trek.
As it stands TOS is the embarrassing midlife crises between the ENT and DSC past and the TMP-VGR future. Where for some reason they stripped everything of detail and shape and painted it stupid colours.
Unfortunately the basic and lifeless TOS version persists in DS9 and ENT meaning the DSC version will have to revert at some point.
Though TOS:R ignored DS9s revamp of the D7 so maybe DSC can ignore TOS:Rs devamp of the Conni tough I get the feeling that fanboi pressure is going to force the producers to make necessary changes because any and all change has them breaking out into little fits.

Unrelated, it's hilarious the forum censor is not treating the edgelords special acronym as the bollocks it is and either forcing them to use the correct form of abbreviations used for all other series or else have it highlighted how pathetic their 'exceptionalism' one TV series out seven is.

smokebailey · January 2019

ryan218 wrote: »

To be fair, smoke, I don't think you'd find many of us who had a problem with the design of the TOS Connie. The issue is really with the lack of detail (which doesn't mean we want grebling to make a Star Destroyer blush). Even that remaster you're linking isn't exactly like the "60s" ship. For a start, it has the Aztec pattern, which wasn't ever seen until TNG in the '80s. It has lit warp grills, which the original show didn't have. It has service floods, visible phaser banks, etc. And it looks much better alongside today's VFX than the old balsa wood model TOS used while keeping the same basic design.

(On a side not, just about the only thing I don't like about that remaster is the lack of hull panelling. I know people say it looks more hi-tech as one large piece, but the TMP model had large hull panels, as has every Federation design since, including the NX-01. TOS is the outlier. I honestly prefer the various remasters (including the Art Asylum replicas) which featurge the TMP-style hull panel lines. It doesn't have to be all over the place, just a few seams showing where hull segments have been locked together.)

to me, smoothness is more. *holds up a modern ipad* all smooth, no greebles or kibble.
I go with the Doug Drexler way of thinking.

smokebailey · January 2019

I personally think the disco connie would work for a different class ship.

smokebailey · January 2019

ryan218 wrote: »

To be fair, smoke, I don't think you'd find many of us who had a problem with the design of the TOS Connie. The issue is really with the lack of detail (which doesn't mean we want grebling to make a Star Destroyer blush). Even that remaster you're linking isn't exactly like the "60s" ship. For a start, it has the Aztec pattern, which wasn't ever seen until TNG in the '80s. It has lit warp grills, which the original show didn't have. It has service floods, visible phaser banks, etc. And it looks much better alongside today's VFX than the old balsa wood model TOS used while keeping the same basic design.

(On a side not, just about the only thing I don't like about that remaster is the lack of hull panelling. I know people say it looks more hi-tech as one large piece, but the TMP model had large hull panels, as has every Federation design since, including the NX-01. TOS is the outlier. I honestly prefer the various remasters (including the Art Asylum replicas) which featurge the TMP-style hull panel lines. It doesn't have to be all over the place, just a few seams showing where hull segments have been locked together.)

I prefer seeing no phasers visible. I prefer seeing something far advanced beyond the standard way of thinking.
The TOS remastered is fine. I am not big on Aztecing, I feel it's sorta overrated. I personally prefer a smooth as glass surface. And I picture the hull being luminescent as well, no need for exterior spot lights.

I like to go with Arthur C. Clark's three laws

When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong.

The only way of discovering the limits of the possible is to venture a little way past them into the impossible.

Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.

To me, the connie of TOS says those.

I always seen the tos hulls and stuff not being welded together by sweat guys with welding torches (that bit in the first JJ trailer makes me LAUGH....like ship building is gonna stay the same after 1950), but:

Woven - Like a spider web, or silk worms. In the TOS Novel, Wounded Sky, which was the basis for one of my favorite, all time Trek episodes ever, Where No One Has Gone Before, the Starfleet ships and stations had hulls that were made from crystalline threads being woven together, and making them mega strong (Seeing how the Enterprise took a nuclear blast in Balance of Terror, or Anti-Proton in The Doomsday Machine, it would have to be mega strong).

Grown - I can see either a nano base or some sorta of culture, even, growing on the frame. I think one of the Dr. Who stories said a Tardis can be essentially grown.

Printed - Kinda like Leeloo was printed in the 5th Element.

Manifested - A beam of energy sweeping over the frame, even making the frame as well, and each sweep, more matter is being manifested, think like a replicator on steroids. Or no energy beam, and the stuff just starts to appear.

starkaos · January 2019

smokebailey wrote: »

ryan218 wrote: »

To be fair, smoke, I don't think you'd find many of us who had a problem with the design of the TOS Connie. The issue is really with the lack of detail (which doesn't mean we want grebling to make a Star Destroyer blush). Even that remaster you're linking isn't exactly like the "60s" ship. For a start, it has the Aztec pattern, which wasn't ever seen until TNG in the '80s. It has lit warp grills, which the original show didn't have. It has service floods, visible phaser banks, etc. And it looks much better alongside today's VFX than the old balsa wood model TOS used while keeping the same basic design.

(On a side not, just about the only thing I don't like about that remaster is the lack of hull panelling. I know people say it looks more hi-tech as one large piece, but the TMP model had large hull panels, as has every Federation design since, including the NX-01. TOS is the outlier. I honestly prefer the various remasters (including the Art Asylum replicas) which featurge the TMP-style hull panel lines. It doesn't have to be all over the place, just a few seams showing where hull segments have been locked together.)

to me, smoothness is more. *holds up a modern ipad* all smooth, no greebles or kibble.
I go with the Doug Drexler way of thinking.

Smoothness is the boring way to show futuristic. The Iconian ships and the ships from Jupiter Ascending look far better than the TOS Constitution. The only smooth ship I have ever liked is from Flight of the Navigator.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1G13KzEJqBw

alexmakepeace · January 2019

Also, ipads are all style over substance and they're probably going to look dated in the next five years.

But I don't think the problem with the TOS Enterprise is the lack of greebles, it's more that it's sort of awkward and gangly in its shape.

Unknown · January 2019

This content has been removed.

smokebailey · January 2019

alexmakepeace wrote: »

Also, ipads are all style over substance and they're probably going to look dated in the next five years.

But I don't think the problem with the TOS Enterprise is the lack of greebles, it's more that it's sort of awkward and gangly in its shape.

Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.

To me, it's elegant. And with the above line, it might look fragile, but with material and techniques beyond what we think of, could be mega strong.

Same for the Universe class.

jonsills · January 2019

smokebailey wrote: »

To me...

See, Smoky, that's the part you need to concentrate on. "To me". That means you're expressing an opinion. Your opinions aren't facts. Hell, my opinions aren't facts, as well-reasoned as I may think them to be.

Full disclosure - I've always had a soft spot for the Great Gray Lady; there's always something special about your first. I loved the TMP revamp. And I want a Disco Connie with the fire of a thousand Wolf-Rayet suns, but if it goes into a lockbox I'm sadly probably not ever getting one (I have really bad luck with RNGs, and have given up trying).

markhawkman · January 2019

starkaos wrote: »

Smoothness is the boring way to show futuristic. The Iconian ships and the ships from Jupiter Ascending look far better than the TOS Constitution. The only smooth ship I have ever liked is from Flight of the Navigator.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1G13KzEJqBw

The interesting thing with THAT ship is that it's hull is covered with mimetic polyalloy. So the smooth surface isn't aesthetic, it has a functional reason for being there.

Unknown · January 2019

This content has been removed.

legendarylycan · January 2019

isn't most of a nuclear weapon's damage caused by the blast and heat wave? both of which need atmosphere to propagate and which does not exist in space

so claiming being able to survive a nuclear detonation in space as evidence of resilience is...foolish, at best

alexmakepeace · January 2019

smokebailey wrote: »

alexmakepeace wrote: »

Also, ipads are all style over substance and they're probably going to look dated in the next five years.

But I don't think the problem with the TOS Enterprise is the lack of greebles, it's more that it's sort of awkward and gangly in its shape.

Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.

To me, it's elegant. And with the above line, it might look fragile, but with material and techniques beyond what we think of, could be mega strong.

Same for the Universe class.

I didn't say the TOS Enterprise looked fragile, I said it looked awkward. The Universe class totally does look fragile, though.

jonsills wrote: »

smokebailey wrote: »

To me...

See, Smoky, that's the part you need to concentrate on. "To me". That means you're expressing an opinion. Your opinions aren't facts. Hell, my opinions aren't facts, as well-reasoned as I may think them to be.

Full disclosure - I've always had a soft spot for the Great Gray Lady; there's always something special about your first. I loved the TMP revamp. And I want a Disco Connie with the fire of a thousand Wolf-Rayet suns, but if it goes into a lockbox I'm sadly probably not ever getting one (I have really bad luck with RNGs, and have given up trying).

Dude, you don't get lockbox ships by opening lockboxes. That way lies madness. You grind for EC and then buy the ship off the exchange.

starkaos · January 2019

markhawkman wrote: »

starkaos wrote: »

Smoothness is the boring way to show futuristic. The Iconian ships and the ships from Jupiter Ascending look far better than the TOS Constitution. The only smooth ship I have ever liked is from Flight of the Navigator.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1G13KzEJqBw

The interesting thing with THAT ship is that it's hull is covered with mimetic polyalloy. So the smooth surface isn't aesthetic, it has a functional reason for being there.

And its transformation is why I used a video of it instead of just an image. The ship is voiced by Paul Reuben which is better known as Pee-wee Herman. There are the White Star and Vorlon ships from Babylon 5, but they use a mottled smooth look rather than just a smooth look.

seaofsorrows · January 2019

evilmark444 wrote: »

I'll break from the mold, I HATE the TOS version of the Connie and have always thought it was ugly as sin since I first saw it as a kid in the '90s. The ST: Discovery version is superior in every way imaginable, infact I even like it more than the TMP version. That fan recreation does nothing to change my mind on this.

Well said, and totally agreed. The original Connie is horrendous in every way.. Discovery actually made it look kinda cool.

legendarylycan · January 2019

that's because now it looks like a real starship, not like a model made out of plastic and balsa wood...oh wait - the original model WAS made out of plastic and balsa wood!

jonsills · January 2019

"It's only a model." "Shh!"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQCArh_R9dY

Unknown · January 2019

This content has been removed.

alexmakepeace · January 2019

coldnapalm wrote: »

I don't know what you are talking about...they both look ugly to me. I mean why would I want a space ship the shape of a pizza cutter?

The merchandising, of course!
712AbB4CnmL._SY450_.jpg

markhawkman · January 2019

coldnapalm wrote: »

I don't know what you are talking about...they both look ugly to me. I mean why would I want a space ship the shape of a pizza cutter?

I remember reading somewhere that the design concept for the TOS Connie was basically "rockets strapped to a flying saucer".

khan5000 · January 2019

I like all the Connies but TMP the best...Disco Connie second

smokebailey · January 2019

shadowfang240 wrote: »

that's because now it looks like a real starship, not like a model made out of plastic and balsa wood...oh wait - the original model WAS made out of plastic and balsa wood!

Define 'real'.

Just because it looks like dirty, brushed steel does not look real to me.

legendarylycan · January 2019

frankly, i don;'t give a TRIBBLE what you find real or not - you took leave of reality long ago

smokebailey · January 2019

shadowfang240 wrote: »

that's because now it looks like a real starship, not like a model made out of plastic and balsa wood...oh wait - the original model WAS made out of plastic and balsa wood!

Define 'real'.

Just because it looks like dirty, brushed steel does not look real to me.

shadowfang240 wrote: »

frankly, i don;'t give a TRIBBLE what you find real or not - you took leave of reality long ago

Whatever you say, oh wise one, whatever you say.

Still looks good to me.

Comments