# scifieric's The Doomsday Machine



## scifieric (May 9, 2005)

Hello everyone!

I'm using TrueSpace 4 to make a personal DVD of The Doomsday Machine with my own special effects. I've always said that it is to remove the distracting bluescreen errors but a substantial motivation is simply to see if I can.

The model is mine and I have a couple of the later WIP images on my website and a blog that follows the animation.

http://www.3dscifi.com website
http://members.tripod.com/eric_re1/ blog

I figure this is as good as I can get. I have three versions for download of this opening shot of the USS Enterprise sailing past the camera from the opening shot of The Doomsday Machine. I used TrueSpace 4's motion blur and photoshop to get as close to "film" as I can.

After this, it's on to the next effect scene in the episode!

01ddm320x240.wmv 2.81MB
http://www.savefile.com/files/7369705

01ddm528x352.avi 3.51MB
http://www.savefile.com/files/9329294

01ddm720x480.avi 3.66MB (DVD Resolution)
http://www.savefile.com/files/1454252

All files in this project:
http://www.savefile.com/projects/540353

All the AVI files are using the Divx 6 codec.

Comments and criticisms welcome.

Thanks for looking in and I hope you enjoy,

Eric


----------



## jheilman (Aug 30, 2001)

The WMV that I could view looked good. Unfortunately DIVX doesn't seem to work on Mac for the current version. I know I have used the DIVX codec in years past. How about making Quicktime versions?? 

What did you use for reference material to build your Enterprise?


----------



## Richard Compton (Nov 21, 2000)

jheilman said:


> The WMV that I could view looked good. Unfortunately DIVX doesn't seem to work on Mac for the current version. I know I have used the DIVX codec in years past. How about making Quicktime versions??


 You should get a Windows system.


.....joke. I just wanted to say that.


----------



## scifieric (May 9, 2005)

*Real Media*



jheilman said:


> The WMV that I could view looked good. Unfortunately DIVX doesn't seem to work on Mac for the current version. I know I have used the DIVX codec in years past. How about making Quicktime versions??
> 
> What did you use for reference material to build your Enterprise?


Thanks for the kind words on the WMV version and I'm sorry that the DIVX doesn't seem to function.

I don't have the appropriate software for making a Quicktime version, so how about for Real Media?

http://www.savefile.com/files/4229831


----------



## scifieric (May 9, 2005)

*Reference Material*



jheilman said:


> The WMV that I could view looked good. Unfortunately DIVX doesn't seem to work on Mac for the current version. I know I have used the DIVX codec in years past. How about making Quicktime versions??
> 
> What did you use for reference material to build your Enterprise?


I forgot to give credit where credit is most definitely due:

Alan Sinclair's wonderful blueprints were my reference for the most part. I did like Charles Casimiro's lower saucer blueprints.


----------



## Four Mad Men (Jan 26, 2004)

Hello Eric! That was well made, I especially like the film grain you achieved. The two things I would suggest are to increase the visibility of the nav lights in the distance and to change the color of the deflector dish. Being able to see the nav lights from farther out, I think, will lend an even greater sense of motion (or perhaps "there-ness") to the ship and the shot.


----------



## scifieric (May 9, 2005)

Four Mad Men, good to see you!
Thanks! I use a toned-down version of Photoshop's film grain with no "highlight".
Good suggestion with the nav lights. The only thing I can think of is increasing the "spill" area around the lights. The lights themselves are the size Alan Sinclair has in his blueprints. What do you think?
I'll work on the color of the dish. In brighter light, it's this close to perfect. (holds fingers REALLY close together)


----------



## Lloyd Collins (Sep 25, 2004)

I watched the Divx version, and it was really good. The effects were done just right for me. It looked better than the original. I would like to see more. What Four Mad Men said, only he would notice that, but I trust his opinions on it.


----------



## Jim NCC1701A (Nov 6, 2000)

Richard Compton said:


> You should get a Windows system.
> 
> 
> .....joke. I just wanted to say that.


You do know that IBM stands for I Buy Macintosh, right?


----------



## Lloyd Collins (Sep 25, 2004)

Has anyone seen Digital Stream's FX for Doomsday Machine? THey wanted to redo some of TOS episodes FX, if Paramount had went with them. They look dated now, and the Enterprise looked to heavy on the weathering, and paneling. 

Scifieric's looks just cleaned up, that is the way it should be.


----------



## Four Mad Men (Jan 26, 2004)

scifieric said:


> Four Mad Men, good to see you!
> Thanks! I use a toned-down version of Photoshop's film grain with no "highlight".
> Good suggestion with the nav lights. The only thing I can think of is increasing the "spill" area around the lights. The lights themselves are the size Alan Sinclair has in his blueprints. What do you think?
> I'll work on the color of the dish. In brighter light, it's this close to perfect. (holds fingers REALLY close together)


My thoughts exactly, increase the falloff of the lights and I think the shot will be even better. I know what you mean about the dish color as I'm dealing with that now myself. I've actually taken to using a small spotlight whose sole purpose is to illuminate the dish. That solution may not even result in a look we saw in TOS but it does fit my perception (mistaken or not) of what color it should be from shot to shot.


----------



## Four Mad Men (Jan 26, 2004)

Lloyd, Yeah I've seen some of them (might even have copy here somewhere). I recall that they had the impulse engines trailing fire (!!!???). But back then I think everyone was atleast somewhat impressed/excited about the plans.


----------



## scifieric (May 9, 2005)

*You're Hired!*



Lloyd Collins said:


> I watched the Divx version, and it was really good. The effects were done just right for me. It looked better than the original. I would like to see more. What Four Mad Men said, only he would notice that, but I trust his opinions on it.


Wow!

I was aiming for effects that could be confused with the effects of the original, just no bluescreen errors.

Thanks!


----------



## scifieric (May 9, 2005)

*DigitalStream*



Lloyd Collins said:


> Has anyone seen Digital Stream's FX for Doomsday Machine? THey wanted to redo some of TOS episodes FX, if Paramount had went with them. They look dated now, and the Enterprise looked to heavy on the weathering, and paneling.


Yep, I even kept the movies and a lot of the renders that they made. I enjoyed their take on the episode while keeping in mind that Rich Heirling (I may have made a mistake in the spelling of his name) explained to me in an email that what they put together was not supposed to be the final product but only a suggestion of what _could_ be done with (then) modern technology!


Lloyd Collins said:


> Scifieric's looks just cleaned up, that is the way it should be.


THAT was exactly what I was after! Thanks man, that's exactly what I wanted to hear.


----------



## jheilman (Aug 30, 2001)

Richard Compton said:


> You should get a Windows system.
> 
> 
> .....joke. I just wanted to say that.


No Richard, I can't step THAT far down the evolutionary ladder.  

DIVX is an excellent codec and I am surprised the latest version isn't Mac-compatible yet.


----------



## scifieric (May 9, 2005)

*Like No One Will Figure Out What TTwT Stands For*



Four Mad Men said:


> My thoughts exactly, increase the falloff of the lights and I think the shot will be even better. I know what you mean about the dish color as I'm dealing with that now myself. I've actually taken to using a small spotlight whose sole purpose is to illuminate the dish. That solution may not even result in a look we saw in TOS but it does fit my perception (mistaken or not) of what color it should be from shot to shot.


Thanks for the idea of the spot.

Are you using WPThomas's Enterprise or your own? I'd love to see what you're doing with it in either case. Are you making effects for TTwT?


----------



## Four Mad Men (Jan 26, 2004)

(TTwT???) Don't get it.

Well my animation does have my K-7 but it predates the Tribble Trouble by a small number of decades. And I'm actually using my Belmont Class for the animation. It's an animation that will show a critical event that lead to the Battle of Donatu V.

And Lloyd is absolutely correct, the grain you have matches very, very well. That coupled with a cleaner image for the ship and the effect is impressive.


----------



## Jim NCC1701A (Nov 6, 2000)

4MM, I think they're referring to The Trouble With Tribbles...


----------



## scifieric (May 9, 2005)

Four Mad Men said:


> (TTwT???) Don't get it.
> 
> Well my animation does have my K-7 but it predates the Tribble Trouble by a small number of decades. And I'm actually using my Belmont Class for the animation. It's an animation that will show a critical event that lead to the Battle of Donatu V.
> 
> And Lloyd is absolutely correct, the grain you have matches very, very well. That coupled with a cleaner image for the ship and the effect is impressive.


The Trouble with Tribbles! Jim NCC1701A was right on target.

Do you have a thread for your animation or something on your site? I'd love to see what you have planned!

I'm embarrassed to say that it’s taken me years to get this close to “reality” in my images. I’ve been helped by very generous people like yourself and Vektor (on SciFi-Meshes) with some spot-on suggestions.

All done in TrueSpace 4 and Photoshop!

Now to figure out how I’m going to matte the view screen in TrueSpace! LOL!


----------



## Four Mad Men (Jan 26, 2004)

Since your post title was "Like No One Will Figure Out What TTwT Stands For" my "Don't get it" coupled with the use of the term "Tribble Trouble" was my idea of a joke. My singular humor strikes again. Anyway...

I don't have an actual animation thread yet but will start one. Right now everything I'm doing can be seen in my K-7 and Cairo threads.

I'm glad to have helped, now perhaps you can help me. When you have an animation's worth of frames do you post process each image individually in photoshop? Or is there some way to automate the process? Although, on the other hand I may not want to know as my copy is so ancient that it probably can't do it.

As for the viewscreen, I'm assuming Truespace has alpha mask capability?


----------



## scifieric (May 9, 2005)

Four Mad Men said:


> Since your post title was "Like No One Will Figure Out What TTwT Stands For" my "Don't get it" coupled with the use of the term "Tribble Trouble" was my idea of a joke. My singular humor strikes again. Anyway...
> 
> I don't have an actual animation thread yet but will start one. Right now everything I'm doing can be seen in my K-7 and Cairo threads.
> 
> ...


I figured it was a joke, but just checking! :lol:

As for Photoshop, I am using Photoshop 7. You can automate a list of particular activities and apply them to a directory, a subdirectory or opened files.

I open a copy of an image from the animation and then look at the history area and click the Actions tab. Click the Create New Actions button on the bottom (looks like a "New Layer" icon) then click the Record button. Everything you do, including saving and quitting (the image file) will be recorded. *Make certain that you type in your variables as you do this * because if you don't, Photoshop will use defaults the next time you start up! For example, my film grain is 2, 0, 0 (the last zero is highlight) and this just places the right amount of noise into the image.

I save a copy of the image instead of overwriting the original in case I make a mistake.

Click the stop record button on the bottom of the actions tab. You can now apply this list of activities to anything you want. At this point, since this particular animation was 441 frames in length (a little much to open all at once, although I did do that a couple of times :freak: ) I set the action to a directory. File - Automate, select the name of your action and pick folder.

I hope that's clear enough. If it isn't (not feeling tip-top at the moment) I'll write a tutorial complete with images!

*edit*
Whoops, forgot to say that yes, TrueSpace has transparency ability. I'm probably going to do the masking and so forth in Photoshop since the screen isn't exactly regular. Its either that, or I will build a new viewscreen area and try to make it look as much like the original as is possible!


----------



## Lloyd Collins (Sep 25, 2004)

With years of sniffing glue and putty, my brain is ...well...almost dead. It used to be Tech talk like about would go over my head, now it goes straight up to space. In other words...CLUELESS!

But as long as you and 4MM understand, I will see pretty pictures, and videos, and that is what I like. Time for my medication and nap.


----------



## scifieric (May 9, 2005)

:lol: :tongue: 

Lloyd, that made me laugh out loud! *still chuckling*


----------



## Jim NCC1701A (Nov 6, 2000)

Four Mad Men said:


> Since your post title was "Like No One Will Figure Out What TTwT Stands For" my "Don't get it" coupled with the use of the term "Tribble Trouble" was my idea of a joke. My singular humor strikes again.


Shoulda known, what with you modeling the K-7 and all.
Oh well, just trying to be helpful ;-)


----------



## Four Mad Men (Jan 26, 2004)

Eric, Jim: No problem guys. Lloyd, I too laughed out loud. However I still say "Meds man Meds".

Thanks for the tutorial Eirc but I'm almost ashamed to admit that I have Photoshop 3.0 and it very much lacks most of what you mention. Perhaps I'll download "The Gimp" and see if it has something similar. I've tried to use it before but the UI is sufficently differnt from Photoshop that I didn't really like it. However if it can process multiple files automatically I might keep it around just for that.

As far as the screen goes I see a few ways of doing that short of modeling the whole area around it. Which is not necessarily a bad idea and might infact be a great idea. But here they are just the same (Most are just variation on a theme):

1) Using the animation as a background image just create a mesh that is the screen portion and map your new effect animations to it as a texture.
2) Use an alpha mask to overlay the "bridge wall" from the show over your animation effects.
3) Use an alpha mast to overlay your animation over the "bridge wall" from the scene.
4) Render your animation as RGB+Alpha and composite the two together using Photoshop or heck even blenders Sequencer.

Having said all that I would be curious to see what can be done with a fully CGI viewscreen.


----------



## scifieric (May 9, 2005)

Good grief, don't be ashamed. I wouldn't have Photoshop if my boss hadn't bought it for me so that I could teach him! Great program, though.

One of the interesting problems with TrueSpace 4 is that you do not necessarily know what is going to end up inside the actual screen area unless your screen resolution is exactly the same your output settings or perhaps a multiple. Unfortunately, I can't get that exactly with my video card. So, if I use the original image as a background, I will have a variable in size and scale (although as I write this, a work-around occurs to me). If I create a new version of a background with extra pixels and the original image in the middle, I can clip each image in the end with the automatic feature in Photoshop. I can maintain the correct proportions if the original image is 720x576.

That way, all I would have to do is create an animated "screen" in proportion and map my animated sequence as the texture. Then I can manually "track" against the background since film is never really "static".

What I've been thinking up until now is to mask the area on the original images in Photoshop and place my new animation in the background through an alpha mask or even a simple deletion of the original screen! Then all I have to do is to automate the sequence. I just run the individual images through TrueSpace as a background and you get an AVI file.

I still wonder about a fully animated screen and bridge area. I'd be able to reflect whatever is on the screen onto the shiny handrail. I would just want to match the flashing light sequences since the bridge usually has a sound effect matched to the light sequence.

Thanks for the ideas 4MM! I'll post here when I'm done with the new sequence or perhaps even to show what I've tried (and failed or succeeded).


----------



## Lloyd Collins (Sep 25, 2004)

Ok, enough shop talk, and back to work! 
I can see it now,"Nothing up my sleeves, Presto!" As if it was that fast. Waiting with baited breath! Darn, he passed out again.


----------



## MGagen (Dec 18, 2001)

Not wanting the PC folks to think they have all the fun, I should mention that the DIVX clips played just fine on my Mac with the latest Tiger OS.

Mark


----------



## scifieric (May 9, 2005)

Lloyd Collins: Yessir! (Hunkers down and begins hand drawing 3D images quickly) :lol:

Cheers Mark! Don't let us Microsoft Zombies have all the fun. Of course, I'm more interested in what you thought of what you saw ... (puts away fishing pole for now ...)


----------



## jheilman (Aug 30, 2001)

Mark - is the Divx codec built into Quicktime in Tiger? If you didn't pay $19.95 for it, it must be. They need a free download for those of us under 10.4.


----------



## m5multitronic (May 27, 2005)

I realize that this is a little off-topic, as far as this thread has gone, but I do know a thing or two about the Doomsday Machine. As far as I know, no one else on the planet has a 1/2500 scale (5'7") DM mounted on the wall of their Star Trek room, with 1/2500 scale models of the _Enterprise_ and the _Constellation_ to go along with it.

Alright, even I can see that I'm just blowing my own horn when it's really not called for. Excuse me. Nothing to see here, folks. Move along. Forget I said anything....


----------



## ClubTepes (Jul 31, 2002)

You know, I really hate it when someone has the same idea I do and gets theirs done first. 

Actually really great job. I look forward to seeing more.

About the same time the Star Wars special edition came out, I was actually lucky enough to talk to Mike Okuda, and one of the topics that came up was whether or not there was any interest/plans to redo some effects in any TOS episodes.

I thought quite seriously about doing something for myself, on my own utilizing a scratch built 1/350 TOS Enterprise and a little help from some of my friends in the film biz. Shortly after that I found out PL was going to do 1/350 scale Trek, so I put my scratch on hold thankful that a real company was going to put one out (damn RC2 buy-out) During that time I started to get into Lightwave and started to realize that a lot more was possible with CG than a 1/350 scale model.

So currently, I'm in the midst of creating the CG models. (though I still have a lot to learn).

As far as style though, a lot of people are trying to recreate the same shots, just with better FX. I personally have a bit of an issue with this as some things such as angle, perspective, scale, etc. are out of wack due to the shooting of a large miniature on a small stage.
I'm planning my personal approach to motion to be more of a realisic nature.

I have one question I hope you'll or someone else can answer......
As far as the footage of actors taken from the episode, was it ripped from DVD or how exactly did you grab that footage.

I'm wondering if there is a way to grab footage from a DVD into a workable/editable format that still retains a decent resolution.

Thanks.
Again, great work.


----------



## scifieric (May 9, 2005)

I did rip the video off the DVD. I own three versions of this episode and since I will not sell the result (it's all for my own viewing/use) nor mass distribute the original, from what I've read, I'm not infringing upon copyright. There are a bunch of programs out there but what I like (ease of use) is WinAVIvideo Converter.

http://www.winavi.com/

I'm surprised to hear that there are that many other people "trying to recreate the same shots, just with better FX" since as far as I can see on different boards, most people seem to do their own take on the original instead of duplicating. I would love to see how other people are doing this and if I come even close in quality. I'm very worried about the quality of my shots.

Thanks for the reply and I would love to see your models!


----------



## Garbaron (Apr 23, 2004)

One of my dreams is that Paraborg decides to re new the FX shots for TOS and ST V with CGI versions. But that’s to remain a dream forever I guess.


----------



## Lloyd Collins (Sep 25, 2004)

The FX for TOS, I prefer just like scifieric is doing. Make it look cleaned up, but the same as TOS. As for ST V, a rework is needed.


----------



## SteveR (Aug 7, 2005)

Very nice.

But ... the perspective looks a little odd as the ship is in the middle distance ... almost as if it's a scaled-down version of a wide angle shot. It could be that the ship is tilted nose up, but travelling "level", giving a bit of an odd look to the ship.

Looks nice otherwise.


----------



## scifieric (May 9, 2005)

*Wide Angle*

Thanks for the compliment SteveR,

I'll admit they're not the same but they are as close as I could reasonably make them.

It is a wide angle shot. That's the only way that I could get it to act like the original. I think the original was made starting off as a wide angle shot, and as they dollied in closer, they also reduced the angle of the lense. Just guessing and I have no idea how to check it out. The original sort of changes proportion through the shot and this was my best guess.

How could I get closer? I am definitely open to suggestions!


----------



## scifieric (May 9, 2005)

Garbaron said:


> One of my dreams is that Paraborg decides to re new the FX shots for TOS and ST V with CGI versions. But that’s to remain a dream forever I guess.


That's why I bought my software, to make this dream a reality ... if only for me!


----------



## scifieric (May 9, 2005)

*Like Minded*



Lloyd Collins said:


> The FX for TOS, I prefer just like scifieric is doing. Make it look cleaned up, but the same as TOS. As for ST V, a rework is needed.


Thanks Lloyd, obviously I'm of the same opinion as you on this one. I really want it to look like the original but with fewer errors.

Star Trek V ... so ... could we make this one a winner with some CGI?


----------



## ClubTepes (Jul 31, 2002)

scifieric said:


> I did rip the video off the DVD. I own three versions of this episode and since I will not sell the result (it's all for my own viewing/use) nor mass distribute the original, from what I've read, I'm not infringing upon copyright. There are a bunch of programs out there but what I like (ease of use) is WinAVIvideo Converter.
> 
> http://www.winavi.com/


Thanks for the info. I'll give it a try.

My models are all mostly in the mesh stage. Skining and texturing are my next hurdles, though I've gone through and done a few shots with the basic models in LW's layout to get the feel of how I wanted them to play out.


----------



## SteveR (Aug 7, 2005)

scifieric said:


> How could I get closer? I am definitely open to suggestions!


Overlay them, one over the other, in your compositing app. It's easier to tweak that way.


----------



## SteveR (Aug 7, 2005)

... or use the clip as a background TGA sequence in LW and tweak the mesh & camera there.


----------



## jheilman (Aug 30, 2001)

Don't know that TrueSpace supports that feature.


----------



## Four Mad Men (Jan 26, 2004)

The shots are indeed very close. While there is some difference in camera positions I don't know that I'd worry very much about it. It certainly doesn't look like the ship is tracking in a different direction than the saucer is pointing.

However if you do want to correct it (and again I don't know that I would) here is how I lined up my CG effects with the Kongo miniature...

Two caveats here. One is the the ship never moves in the shot and two the nacelles we're visible. Basically created two CG nacelle caps in Blender. Then I took a frame from the animation and used that as a background image. Then finally, from within camera view mode I "flew" the camera around (i.e. moved it) until the CG caps lined up with the miniature caps.

You, of course, have the issue of the ship moving but I don't think that's too terrible given the simple way the camera was moved in the original series. But again, I really wouldn't worry about it. Looks great so far and I look forward to more.


----------



## scifieric (May 9, 2005)

My pleasure ClubTepes! I am by no means an expert so please ask around but I'm happy with it. You can download it for a free trial.

Do you have any images posted?


----------



## scifieric (May 9, 2005)

Hello SteveR, I did consider that when I started but I'm happy enough with the results at the moment although another fellow who is making his own version of The Doomsday Machine (you wouldn't think that two people working on the same sort of project would have radically different outcomes, but we do) has made a case for extending my intro shot to match the sound. I'm considering it but I have another idea for the situation. I have the music, I have the effects and the timing but I need a nice long rumble sound effect and I might just try to match the sound and move up the "rumble" to coincide with the effects shot.

Who knows but knowing me, if I learn some more as I go through the episode, I may go right back to the begining and start over again!


----------



## scifieric (May 9, 2005)

Thanks jheilman and 4MM!

I appreciate SteveR's suggestions but I'm trying to figure out exactly what I'm going to do about the asteroids.

I have a couple of ideas but they are a little more difficult to model than I thought. Then again, I'm not just making normal asteroids. I'm hoping I'll have something this weekend.


----------



## Lloyd Collins (Sep 25, 2004)

I noticed that, whenever anyone wants to do a FX rework, they pick The Doomsdays Machine. I wonder,why? I know that it is one of my favorites, so I like to see them.

As for the sound effects, you can't get better than the Star Trek sound effect CD, from GNP/Crescendo records.


----------



## Chuck_P.R. (Jun 8, 2003)

Anybody notice that in one side profile shot the Doomsday machine is just a few times larger then Decker's stolen shuttlecraft.

Yet later it's big enough to swallow a Constitution Class starship? 

Apparently Class F shuttlecrafts cause serious spatial distortions.


----------



## scifieric (May 9, 2005)

Lloyd Collins said:
 

> I noticed that, whenever anyone wants to do a FX rework, they pick The Doomsdays Machine. I wonder,why? I know that it is one of my favorites, so I like to see them.
> 
> As for the sound effects, you can't get better than the Star Trek sound effect CD, from GNP/Crescendo records.


Why? Because it's one of the space-scene-effects-battle shot-heavy episodes! Star Trek was pretty cutting-edge for its time and had more SFX shots per episode than prior series. Remaking the effects for most of the episodes would consist of a few shots of the Enteprise crossing the screen or orbiting a planet. Every now and then they fired phasers at a Klingon ship.

Probably the second episode in popularity for SFX remake is Balance of Terror for pretty much the same reasons!

Yeah, I've got the Star Trek sound effects CD but there's no "Enterprise travels left-to-right" sound on it. I can make the warp engines sound like they are malfunctioning! :lol:


----------



## scifieric (May 9, 2005)

Chuck_P.R. said:


> Anybody notice that in one side profile shot the Doomsday machine is just a few times larger then Decker's stolen shuttlecraft.
> 
> Yet later it's big enough to swallow a Constitution Class starship?
> 
> Apparently Class F shuttlecrafts cause serious spatial distortions.


Don't let it bend your mind, Chuck_P.R.! The Star Trek universe operates at the scale and speed of plot. LOL! Perhaps you are correct about the Class F Shuttlecraft being the big cause. The interior is larger than the exterior ala Dr. Who Tardis. The shuttle fits comfortably within the ship with room to spare when we see the inside of the shuttlebay but the shuttlebay is way to small for what we see! Thank goodness it gets to a good size to take on the Doomsday Machine! That was Decker's whole strategy. :lol:


----------



## scifieric (May 9, 2005)

*Slow, slow progress*

Didn't want you to think I forgot. I just took a long time to remember!  









This AVI file uses the Xvid codec: http://www.xvidmovies.com/codec/

AVI Doomsday Viewscreen 

Here is the Real Media version at 640x480 at the suggestion of Prof Moriarty:
http://pacsadminpro.com/movies/SysL370m2.rmvb

And the WMV version of the same:
http://pacsadminpro.com/movies/SysL370m2.WMV

I think that the avi is the best of the three.

I need to remake the asteroids, they're too smooth. I'll change that a bit.

Tell me what you think.


----------



## heiki (Aug 8, 1999)

First off, I love your effort!


My thought would be that if the sun is in their eyes, would you see anything detail on the dark sides of the space junk? Next, would there be exposed hot inner cores glowing red in this shot.

After this scene, would you be having the enterprise flying around the debri field?


----------



## Nova Designs (Oct 10, 2000)

Lloyd Collins said:


> I noticed that, whenever anyone wants to do a FX rework, they pick The Doomsdays Machine. I wonder,why? I know that it is one of my favorites, so I like to see them.


Not me! I'm doing a couple that no one else has touched. And I won't show them until they are done... which could be a while considering my current schedule.


----------



## Nova Designs (Oct 10, 2000)

BTW, I always thought that viewscreen shot would be better represented by some kind of graphical overlay of the entire system displaying the destoyed 7 planets instead of showing rubble.... but that's just me.


----------



## scifieric (May 9, 2005)

heiki said:


> First off, I love your effort!
> 
> My thought would be that if the sun is in their eyes, would you see anything detail on the dark sides of the space junk? Next, would there be exposed hot inner cores glowing red in this shot.
> 
> After this scene, would you be having the enterprise flying around the debri field?


Thanks heiki! You're very encouraging.

The original series never let physics or reality get in the way. LOL! I was trying to make it look like one of their old matte paintings and perspective was always off and such. You are right, but I'm not aiming for reality and I've probably gone over-the-top considering my original goal, but I was having fun. I will be remaking this section and I'll keep your ideas in mind. I'm getting a lot of input from people and it's all very encouraging!

A couple of other people want to see the hot, glowing cores of forming junk and although I may do that, this is the first of at least four systems that the Enterprise finds (we are with the crew when they find this first system, L370 and they find the Constellation in system L374 with a throw-away line by Kirk "Every solar system in this sector ... blasted to rubble.") So, I want to show that this particular event happened a while ago and when they get to L374, I have a different effect in mind to show that this is a more recent event. I may or may not show glowing hot rubble, but I've been influenced by a lot of different media and I want to try something else _first_.

I may chicken out and not show too much rubble after a few initial scenes but I think I can explain it away visually. The Doomsday Machine does hie out of the system and head for the Rigel colony, so I'm going to show it exits the system. Let's see if I get away with it!


----------



## scifieric (May 9, 2005)

Nova Designs said:


> Not me! I'm doing a couple that no one else has touched. And I won't show them until they are done... which could be a while considering my current schedule.
> 
> BTW, I always thought that view screen shot would be better represented by some kind of graphical overlay of the entire system displaying the destroyed 7 planets instead of showing rubble.... but that's just me.


Oh man, thanks for looking and commenting! I love looking at your work.

Could you be enticed to _tell_ your fans which ones you are ... considering?

I had a similar idea for the view screen and then adjusted the idea and thought about placing such a display above Spock's station so that we associate such a technical readout with our favorite Vulcan. I just haven't gone that far yet and I was wondering if it would also cross the line. I originally didn't want to just upgrade the effects to look modern. I only wanted to get rid of the blue screen errors ... but I'm having too much fun to turn all the way back.

I was going to make this scene much closer to the original and just have a couple of "rocks" that were obviously paper mache over tinfoil, just like the Yonada world ship. But I was having a rough time getting that sort of look so I went with actual photos of asteroids composing most of the debris field with a few modeled asteroids for motion.

I appreciate the comments!


----------



## Bay7 (Nov 8, 1999)

The Doomsday Machine certainly seems a popular episode to re-do - I came across yet another attempt on youtube last night (it's not that 90's version).

I like the asteroid effects as kirk walks in front of the viewscreen and the altered transporter - although, I think it still needs that pre-glow or after glow that ToS had.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D9XHmj-dPEY


Nice work on yours so far though!

IMO, you can update a few rough looking effects with the ToS but most of them still hold up - and the set design hasn't really dated - the one thing that really needs doing is the music - some of it is just plain awful.

I often wonder what ToS would be like with no music whatsoever.

Mike


----------



## scifieric (May 9, 2005)

Interesting take on TOS, I must say. I like the glow on the damaged Constellation's engines but I was not planning on changing the transporter effect.

I have been debating adding to the monitors and screens. It will take more time and look better in the end but would go against my original thought to have the episode look "cleaned-up" as opposed to updated.

Thanks! I'l probably going to watch that a few times.


----------



## Nova Designs (Oct 10, 2000)

scifieric said:


> Oh man, thanks for looking and commenting! I love looking at your work.
> 
> Could you be enticed to _tell_ your fans which ones you are ... considering?


Thanks, I've been working on "Balance of Terror" and "The Corbomite Maneuver" A little out of the mainstream for sure, but they are two of my favorites. I'm not too deeply married to the low-budget look, so it will have some updates that will still retain the spirit and style of TOS while not looking like, say, a giant popcorn ball, or a ship on wires. 



scifieric said:


> I had a similar idea for the view screen and then adjusted the idea and thought about placing such a display above Spock's station so that we associate such a technical readout with our favorite Vulcan. I just haven't gone that far yet and I was wondering if it would also cross the line. I originally didn't want to just upgrade the effects to look modern. I only wanted to get rid of the blue screen errors ... but I'm having too much fun to turn all the way back.


Actually I think if you did the display in the correct style I think that would be a very nice idea. I have no doubt at all that if the technology had existed on the 60s--and it was cheap enough to do--there would have been a lot more use of those small overhead displays.


----------



## Captain_April (Oct 20, 2002)

Bay7 that some kockout stuff, great work!. Different from what Scifieric is doing but just as good. I toyed with redoing the effect myself, I went so far as doing previs storyboards,low res animations of the opening shot and the battle with the Doomsday Machine. I love your Doomsday Machine(Very close to the original). I did the samething( I always thought that the design was so off the wall that it truely looked Alien).


----------



## Guest (Jun 3, 2006)

To echo the good captain, knockout stuff indeed !
Kudos to both of your efforts they are more than a bit spectacular and really add to the origonal episode for my personal tastes.
Here's to you both and long may it all continue, excellent work there.


----------



## scifieric (May 9, 2005)

Wow, thanks guys! You're very encouraging.


----------



## lisfan (Feb 15, 1999)

wow i wish i had some of your talent.


----------



## scifieric (May 9, 2005)

lisfan, you're very kind. It's taken me ... years to get this far. I've seen some amazing work on this and other forums and board. I wish I had some of their talent! LOL!

Of course, you never know what you can accomplish until you try!


----------



## scifieric (May 9, 2005)

This is for Richard Compton (but all are welcome):

http://pacsadminpro.com/movies/digitalstream/digitalstream.html

Hello Richard. Tell me when you're done and I'll take it down.

Enjoy!

Eric


----------



## Bay7 (Nov 8, 1999)

Captain_April said:


> Bay7 that some kockout stuff, great work!. Different from what Scifieric is doing but just as good. ).


Hey - not my work - I just found it, is all - I'd love to be able to do something like this to these guys standards!

Mike


----------



## Dr. Brad (Oct 5, 1999)

I know that we could take issue with this or that detail, but man, it was fun watching those clips, Eric. Nice work. If Paramount ever decides to redo the effects in even a limited number of episodes, I'd line up to buy them! I know, it'll never happen...

Brad.


----------



## scifieric (May 9, 2005)

Bay7, you make me feel good!

Dr. Brad, thanks! I really appreciate it. Since I've been waiting for years for Paramount to do this and it hasn't materialzied (if you'll pardon the expression) I've decided to do it myself!


----------

