Star Trek :: Production Focus

[lebada]

beautificent

[Shletten]

It was about time! Guys do more Production Focuses!

[Rickmeister]

Love those production focus articles. If it would up to me I would go even more indepth. It lacks depth if you ask me. Though still a great read!

[bluemagicuk]

Not enough z depth and too many instances ie- the same info as any other production article with no real usefull technical info :)

[Jockomo]

Thanks for the article! I was wondering how they did the debris, it looked amazing.
I also thought the dynamics in space were very convincing.

Anyone have an idea how they did the explosions and fire?

Also, they mention, "In the old days of film you had gate weave and that saved your butt in tracking every time."

What is gate weave and how can you use it to help tracking? (I assume it's something to do with the gate in the camera but I don't get it.)

[PaulHellard]

Thanks for the article! I was wondering how they did the debris, it looked amazing. I also thought the dynamics in space were very convincing.
Anyone have an idea how they did the explosions and fire?

'Gate weave' is a throwback to film cameras, the sprockets of the negative film would allow some macroscopic float within the film frame. Snapping through the film gate at such a rate, there would always be an element of gate weave, depending on the tightness of the magazine load, the mechanics of the camera gearing, and perhaps even emulsion dust around the gate. The situation is entirely different these days where the film is shot digital, of course.

Perhaps an artist from either ILM or DD would like to come on and discuss this and other elements of the Star Trek production. I have no qualms about turning this into a Meet the Artist to answer live questions. [Cinefex can't do that...]

[JBoskma]

Love those production focus articles. If it would up to me I would go even more indepth. It lacks depth if you ask me. Though still a great read!

If it's depth you're after, just buy Cinefex.

[EDIT] Paul, great idea! I think it would be a good move to start focusing these articles more on the efforts of cgsociety members involved with projects like this. I think it would be a ton more insightful, then these quick company credit overviews.

[angel]

That was a very good read. Great job guys.

[Navstar]

One of the little things I really loved about the many VFX of this movie was the subtle "dust on the lens" effect when shooting ships in space. The beginning of the movie -- the sun is hitting the camera and illuminating the out-of-focus dusty bits on the lens. It's those little details along with the Zoic-pioneered handheld ship shots that make it feel so real.

And, oh yes, the lens flare porn! :cool:

[CodeVeroby]

Awesome ! looking forward to seeing the movie !

[DigitalNeutrinos]

One of the little things I really loved about the many VFX of this movie was the subtle "dust on the lens" effect when shooting ships in space. The beginning of the movie -- the sun is hitting the camera and illuminating the out-of-focus dusty bits on the lens. It's those little details along with the Zioc-pioneered handheld ship shots that make it feel so real.

And, oh yes, the lens flare porn! :cool:

HAHa you know someone had to said the flare word, BTW I saw one flare in the shot with JJ, He's so bright.:buttrock:

All Joking aside great damn entertaining movie.
I would have liked to see more technical details like the others mentioned on the FX.

[bluemagicuk]

If it's depth you're after, just buy Cinefex.


Obviously the article was written this way intentionally as more of a general overview which is totally cool and all, I am simply expressiing my personal interests in what I would like to see in these articles in the future. Something i have seen expressed in many previous threads before. Thought i would join in .

Reader loss is inevitable, resistance is futile. (sorry if that sounds really negative, it is just a joke)

[pimeto]

Oh, this is THE EYE.......

[mjdowswell]

Did they do any miniature work on this film?

[trevanian]

Did they do any miniature work on this film?

Kerner Optical does get a small credit according to a credit roll I saw listed online, but just what they did seems to be unclear, and their site hasn't been updated in a year or so.

I was supposed to write a piece on TREK for HD VIDEO PRO, and contacted Kerner first, but they just passed me onto ILM; their PR guy was evasive about Kerner's involvement (the line from him was, 'don't believe everything you read on IMDB,' even though I had seen Kerner listed on the CINEFEX site.) ILM failed to deliver any interviewees at all, so the whole article got shitcanned in favor of MUTANT CHRONICLES.

[TheANIMAL]

If read the article it says that there was no minature work.

[Peter-Eriksson]

Great Article, and great work on the movie.
But hey ILM, why haven't you updated your homepage?
I guess you are to busy :-)

-Peter

[WyattHarris]

And if you want your Easter eggs, here is one to look for; if you look in the background, there is an animated tribble in one of the cages. Guess you will have to go see the film again.
Aw man, I just might have to with this being my excuse. :D Great film.

[mjdowswell]

Kerner Optical does get a small credit according to a credit roll I saw listed online, but just what they did seems to be unclear, and their site hasn't been updated in a year or so.

I was supposed to write a piece on TREK for HD VIDEO PRO, and contacted Kerner first, but they just passed me onto ILM; their PR guy was evasive about Kerner's involvement (the line from him was, 'don't believe everything you read on IMDB,' even though I had seen Kerner listed on the CINEFEX site.) ILM failed to deliver any interviewees at all, so the whole article got shitcanned in favor of MUTANT CHRONICLES.

Interesting!...I notice you worked for CINEFEX...I’ve always loved those little books!, so beautifully put together!

Yes, somewhere along the lines somebody did all those lens flare shots with real light and real cameras I believe...but who did those I don’t know.

I honestly find it sad that they didn’t make big miniatures of things like the space station...because instantly when I look at it I can tell that it's CG...it's not that it looks horrible or anything, it looks good...but, I much prefer the look of miniatures...and also with a view to the long run...the long term archive of greats...miniatures dont seem to date / are going to look great on blu-ray and every other format after blu-ray...it's all to do with real light hitting a detailed model.

[mjdowswell]

Interesting!...I notice you worked for CINEFEX...I’ve always loved those little books!, so beautifully put together!

Yes, somewhere along the lines somebody did all those lens flare shots with real light and real cameras I believe...but who did those I don’t know.

I honestly find it sad that they didn’t make big miniatures of things like the space station...because instantly when I look at it I can tell that it's CG...it's not that it looks horrible or anything, it looks good...but, I much prefer the look of miniatures...and also with a view to the long run...the long term archive of greats...miniatures dont seem to date / are going to look great on blu-ray and every other format after blu-ray...it's all to do with real light hitting a detailed model.

However CG is something that is getting better and better, or at least, some areas of it are...its gradually bettering itself...and has a history to it. I find that history fascinating and there are some truly wonderful moments in that history...but I want to know what Gollum or Davey Jones looks like at say 5000x2127 resolution.

I am also a bit of a hypocrite because I myself am making films in CG.

[mjdowswell]

Interesting!...I notice you worked for CINEFEX...I’ve always loved those little books!, so beautifully put together!

Yes, somewhere along the lines somebody did all those lens flare shots with real light and real cameras I believe...but who did those I don’t know.

I honestly find it sad that they didn’t make big miniatures of things like the space station...because instantly when I look at it I can tell that it's CG...it's not that it looks horrible or anything, it looks good...but, I much prefer the look of miniatures...and also with a view to the long run...the long term archive of greats...miniatures dont seem to date / are going to look great on blu-ray and every other format after blu-ray...it's all to do with real light hitting a detailed model.

And the little shuttles and federation ships look great, the light on them is very impressive...it's just the light on the sphere on the station that looks odd.

And now I'm getting into a conversation with myself again...which is embarrassing!

All i'm saying though is that I want to see these shots at 5000x2127 resolution...or 10,000x4255.

[trevanian]

I honestly find it sad that they didn’t make big miniatures of things like the space station...because instantly when I look at it I can tell that it's CG...it's not that it looks horrible or anything, it looks good...but, I much prefer the look of miniatures...and also with a view to the long run...the long term archive of greats...miniatures dont seem to date / are going to look great on blu-ray and every other format after blu-ray...it's all to do with real light hitting a detailed model.

Maybe it is a matter of the shots they featured in the trailer, but I thought the Enterprise in the ads looked very ... painterly ... in that CG way. Just another reason I'm givin' it a miss.

While I think the Cinesite CG spaceship stuff in SOLARIS is really fantastic, for the most part I just don't think CG ships compare to well-shot miniatures, mainly for the reason you cite. Then again, toward the end of the mo-con era, I noticed that a lot of stuff (especially TV) that was shot with models was getting lit and comped in a low-contrast way that made it seem like mediocre CG ... that approach kinda killed the whole idea of originating on film with a real object. The TRIBBLES episode of DEEP SPACE 9 annoyed me for that reason ... I wanted to see the really crisp shadows and brightly keyed old ENTERPRISE, not the low-contrast version they went with. But EVENT HORIZON and SPACE COWBOYS were mostly done with miniatures, and done expertly.

The one interview I did get on TREK before the article died was the production designer, but what I got from him (besides about eleven separate, "I can't talk about that part, mate" non-answers) didn't make me feel good about the movie. He had no history or interest in science fiction or space movies, and doesn't seem to have done much in the way of research outside of seeing 2001 and a few trek movies.

He thought using reflective surfaces was something new for space movie interiors (!?) and had no consideration at all for ANY verisimilitude. It sounded like a total cosmetic approach (he didn't recognize Ron Cobb's name when I mentioned my dream designer for TREK), which, when mixed with bad taste, can't help but look awful.

I just don't see how you can reconcile -- on the same starship -- a bridge set that looks like the Revlon aisle at Target with an engineering section that looks like a 20th century brewery.

[Navstar]

I just don't see how you can reconcile -- on the same starship -- a bridge set that looks like the Revlon aisle at Target with an engineering section that looks like a 20th century brewery.
:beer:

Funniest thing I've heard all week!

But seriously, my take was that this is the flagship of the Federation, so the bridge looks like an ultimate Apple Store, but all the guts it takes to run it is this big messy physically exhausting industrial factory. The Bridge and Engineering in the Kelvin at the beginning of the movie had a similar dichotomy. Look at IT/server centers. Rows of smooth sleek cabinets with glowy lights, but open the case and it's a mass of ethernet cords, power cables, clattering hard drives and loud fans.

If Engineering was sleek and glossy, being Scotty would be a cupcake job by just pushing a couple buttons. I mean, LaForge on TNG did little more than than a checkout clerk.

[DimeS]

But seriously, my take was that this is the flagship of the Federation, so the bridge looks like an ultimate Apple Store, but all the guts it takes to run it is this big messy physically exhausting industrial factory. The Bridge and Engineering in the Kelvin at the beginning of the movie had a similar dichotomy. Look at IT/server centers. Rows of smooth sleek cabinets with glowy lights, but open the case and it's a mass of ethernet cords, power cables and loud fans.



Exactly. My advice for trevanian would be to actually see the movie before judging it. Sometimes things like story, character, and editing, not to mention visual effects, can overcome huge obstacles like the production designer not knowing who Ron Cobb is.

[trevanian]

Exactly. My advice for trevanian would be to actually see the movie before judging it. Sometimes things like story, character, and editing, not to mention visual effects, can overcome huge obstacles like the production designer not knowing who Ron Cobb is.

Not if the story, character, and editing are even bigger problems than the look of the production. There are seven people I know who saw this thing whose opinions and views reflect my own re: trek in most ways, and all of them told me pretty much the same thing ... that I'd kick the screen in if I saw it, that it pretty much repudiates TREK's basic nature of characters making their own choices in favor of a MATRIX/SW mythological take on the characters with destiny directing the plot coincidences.

They also all disliked the movie (though it took two of them a second viewing to decide it was bad and not just a matter of expectations.) I'll take the views of people I respect over a massmind opinion every time.

[mjdowswell]

I just don't see how you can reconcile -- on the same starship -- a bridge set that looks like the Revlon aisle at Target with an engineering section that looks like a 20th century brewery.

The thing about this is...it's 100% right...it’s painfully, painfully true.

I love the colours that they’ve managed to get in these brewery shots, their very vibrant and fun...but, it can't be denied...that the solid fact of the matter is…they shot this on location in a brewery...and it looks like, well...a brewery!

I know that I’m only really repeating what has been said but…there’s a huge clash of styles going on here…

Bridge = Clean, white, compact

Corridors = Clean, white, compact

Main engineering = Oranges, extremely spacious to the point where you cant see the walls, looks like a brewery.


Main engineering really should have been a set...and should have been clean and white.

And lets take the classic Wrath of Khan here as a example...the story and characters are five star...and the set design is all 5 star too. It's all these combined elements that go towards it being a classic.

I wonder if on the new Star Trek they simply ran out of money because of the 900 + effects shots?

[juanxer]

This movie, I'm told, hadn't that much money available, really. I am sure if they could have allowed themselves the luxury they would have done an Engineering set with a better sense of geography and some machinery as iconic as TNG-onwards' warp cores. We'll see what happens in ST:XII.

But I liked the idea of Engineering being vast and full of people and things. Not quite up to that point, but it felt fresh.

(STII:TWOK inherited ST:TMP's sets. These guys had to start from scratch)

[trevanian]

(STII:TWOK inherited ST:TMP's sets. These guys had to start from scratch)

TWOK was also done for 13 mil, which was a pittance even in 1982 dollars, not at all comparable to 160mil for a current pic.

And that 13 includes a mil for overtime because Paramount didn't schedule time for sets to be built and struck in a regular fashion, so production would have come in even lower if the studio hadn't shot themselves in the foot.

[Jedman67]

Slight necro, i know, but as much as some dislike the new trek, JJ is an excellent director/producer. If he wanted to build a studio set for engine room, he would have done so. He wanted the industrial look, he found it in a brewery. IMO, it should have been dressed better. Walls, doors, comparment, visible 23rd century components.
But cheesy TNG style engineering? i dont think so...
It almost looks like it could have been used to power a starship.

Still wonder what they used for the shuttlebay on the ship- definitly looks better than on the series.

[trevanian]

Slight necro, i know, but as much as some dislike the new trek, JJ is an excellent director/producer. If he wanted to build a studio set for engine room, he would have done so. He wanted the industrial look, he found it in a brewery.

Well, concept artist John Eaves, who is the only TREK vet who survived not getting fired off the show, sez on his blog that budget was insanely tight all along, and that the engineering brewery things were because they had no money to build those sets. Guess that excellent director/producer wanted to spend his money on ice monsters instead.

[CGTalk Moderation]

This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.