SRM profile pics/blueprints etc...

[Mig1]

I know it has been said that there weren't plans to include pictures in the SRM, but I was wondering if you had access to the original art files from The Price of Freedom? It would greatly enhance the ship profiles if you could include the profile shot pages (hell just take the whole pages and insert them) from The Price of Freedom.

Also, there are a great assortment of profile pics already on TrekRPG.net's ship pages, and over at DITL.org they have pretty much everything that is missing here.

So, I guess what I am saying is that many people won't know always remember which ship is which by the name, and it really helps the visuals if there are some kind of images to reference.

Is it at all possible for this to happen? I personnally would rather wait an extra two or three weeks or month or whatever if it meant that the SRM would have imagery of the ships.

Thanks.

[Owen E Oulton]

Noooooooooop! Auuuugh! Ack, phooey! Yuck.

Don't bother. Those illustrations were hands-down the worst ship illos I've ever seen, and I've some really bad ones. The artist was manifestly completely unfamiliar with both Trek ships (compare the Miranda illos with any photo or 3-view of the ship) and with his software (layers on some of the ships were reversed - IIRC, the Apollo was a victim of this). Drawings that bad are worse than no drawings.

[Steve Long]

First, I don't have access to those files.

Second, even if I did, I don't want to take the time, or put the burden on Don, to include them in the SRM manuscript at this point. I am more concerned with getting the manuscript out than prettifying it. Prettifying can come later, if need be.

Third, there are significant intellectual property infringement issues related to using any pictures of canon ships, or previously published LUG images of ships whose appearance has not been canonically established.

Fourth, whether you agree or disagree with Owen's opinions, two of the TPOF ships illustrations are canonically incorrect, so I wouldn't use them in any event.

In sum and in short: there will be no illustrations in the first release of the SRM. Not of canon ships, not of ships without canonically-established appearances. Nothing.

I agree that images of the ships would be nice, and would help people remember them better, but it's just not going to happen this time around.

If time and resources allow, perhaps latter iterations of the SRM, and future SRMs, will have illos. But that's a matter for consideration at a later time.

Steve Long

[Owen E Oulton]

"Fourth, whether you agree or disagree with Owen's opinions, two of the TPOF ships illustrations are canonically incorrect, so I wouldn't use them in any event."

For those who want good charts of Trek ship designs, it's hard to find a better source than the ship comparison charts at <a href="http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/fleet-charts.htm">Bernd Scheider's Ex Astra Scientia</a>. Download 'em, print 'em out, and put 'em in the binder with SD and/or the upcoming SRMs.

And yeah, Steve's right. My opinions are just that, my opinions. Your mileage may vary.

[Dan Gurden]

May I suggest that anyone that wants to add ship profiles to their ship recognition manuals visit; http://www.shipschematics.net

They do pretty much all of the canon (and plenty of non-canon and FASA ship profiles).

Most print out beautifully onto a sheet of A4, but with a decent type face, and a short time with cut and paste, they can all be printed off and should make a fine appendix for the ship recognition manuals...

------------------
Dan.

"A couple of thoughts from a random mind!"

[This message has been edited by Dan Gurden (edited 12-16-2000).]

[Old Soldier]

Originally posted by Owen E Oulton:
[i]And yeah, Steve's right. My opinions are just that, my opinions. Your mileage may vary.

This opinion gets a hundred miles to the gallon.

Most of those images didn't even have details that lined up between the views! If I turned in a drawing like most of those at work, I'd be laughed out of the engineering office if not ostracised by the poor saps who'd have to build whatever it was!

Owen, you called called this one dead on the nose.



------------------
"Any society which is willing to surrender essential liberties in order to gain security, shall in the end have neither."

[Steve Long]

Does this mean the Niagra-class will have 3 warp nacelles in the SRM?

Yes.

Which was the other incorrect one?

The Apollo class, which is the T'pau from TNG, "Unification" -- it's got a sort of "Vulcan aesthetics" design, more Romulan-esque than the typical saucer-nacelle-and-pylon arrangement of typical Starfleet vessels.

Steve Long

[Mig1]

Sweet Mary, thanks for those great links guys.

Ok, I knew I was taking a snap shot when I started this thread, but it was worth a try.

Those links that were posted really would do greatly printed out and maybe even bound with the SRM as a kind of appendix, as was suggested.

I didn't even realise there were problems with the ilios in TPOF.

Here is a question, how is it that somebody can creat those charts at the links above, and distribute them for free without getting sued, and the SRM developer(s) who are also distributing for free, cannot do the same thing?

I am only asking becuase I don't know. Don't kill me, just enlighten me.

Also, since there will be no ilios in the first realease (if ever) of the SRM, would it be feasable to list the links above as "reccomended reading" or "reccomended material" on the same page as the SRM download link when that page finally happens? That way people who never heard of those places before (like me) could see them.

[Tzeentch]

I COMPLETELY agree. Since most people (like myself) are not rabid fans to the point where I can identify a ship based on name and class the links to Ars Astra and any other sites with visual aides should be mentioned in the recognition manuals.

[Steve Long]

Here is a question, how is it that somebody can creat those charts at the links above, and distribute them for free without getting sued, and the SRM developer(s) who are also distributing for free, cannot do the same thing?

Whether they get sued, or I get sued, is irrelevant. Posting someone's copyrighted images without their permission is (a) illegal, and (b) morally wrong. The fact that these websites and such either fly below Paramount's radar, or are tacitly ignored, does not IMO make what they do right. The fact that someone gets away with violating the law doesn't mean I'm going to do it, too.

Also, since there will be no ilios in the first realease (if ever) of the SRM, would it be feasable to list the links above as "reccomended reading" or "reccomended material" on the same page as the SRM download link when that page finally happens? That way people who never heard of those places before (like me) could see them.

I am not going to put any web links or the like in the SRM. First, links often change or vanish, making the references useless. The fact that the SRM includes many ships whose appearance hasn't been canonically established only further reduces the value of web links as references.

Second, I would prefer not to endorse any particular site or sites by providing references to them. Not only does that get into potentially sticky legal territory, I don't want to start answering questions from people about what is and isn't right on various websites, etc.

If people want web references, there are lots of folks patrolling these boards, and the TrekRPG listserv, who are more than happy to point people towards websites they find enjoyable and useful.

Steve Long

[Tzeentch]

Hmm, thats unfortunante in my opinion. An bibliography in the back containing such information would be very useful.

[Greg Smith]

Originally posted by Steve Long:
Fourth, whether you agree or disagree with Owen's opinions, two of the TPOF ships illustrations are canonically incorrect, so I wouldn't use them in any event.

Steve Long

Steve:

Does this mean the Niagra-class will have 3 warp nacelles in the SRM?

Which was the other incorrect one?


[Qoute]Originally posted by Owen Oulton:
Noooooooooop! Auuuugh! Ack, phooey! Yuck.
Don't bother. Those illustrations were hands-down the worst ship illos I've ever seen, [/QUOTE]

Owen, surely not as bad as those in the Andorian book?




------------------
Greg

"Calm may work for Locutus of Borg here, but I'm freaked and intend to stay that way."

[Steve Long]

I don't take your suggestions as bashing at all, Mig, but as just that -- suggestions. I'm glad you're enjoying SD!

Steve Long

[Mig1]

Thanks for responding to my question Steve.

I hope you don't think I'm bashing. I'm not, I really think what you are doing is marvelous.

I'm just trying to help get the best online reference set for people like myself who cannot visualize all the ships in Star Trek based on name alone.

Thanks again for all the great work!

[darkwing duck1]

Originally posted by Mig1:
Here is a question, how is it that somebody can creat those charts at the links above, and distribute them for free without getting sued, and the SRM developer(s) who are also distributing for free, cannot do the same thing?

1. The charts and schems are not being sold or used in any for-profit way.

2. The charts and schematics are (mostly)the original works of various fans (who have agreed to have their works posted. In fact, in the case of Starship Schematics, that is how his collection has grown - people sending him their work.) All schems are copyrighted to their respective owners, so that even the ones taken from, say, Star Trek Fact Files, are properly credited in accordance with copyright law.

3. The use of previously published schems falls within the bounds of "fair use" according to copyright law, ie: not for profit, properly credited, and not being truly "published" (that is, bound up and printed for wide distribution).

At least that's the take I have on it according to my conversations with various individuals and my research into copyright law.

I certainly disagree with Steve that there is anything immoral about using these images in accordance with the law. If the site owners were selling them, or claiming them as their own works, or anything like that, then I WOULD have a problem with it, but that is not the case (in these instances).



------------------
Deo Vindice!