{PREVIEW} T20 GM Screen Cover
- Thread starter hunter
- Start date
Fulacin Highport
SOC-9
Overall, I like it!
My only nits to pick:
That Aslan's face is a bit more humanoid than I would prefer...
The human female is almost an 'animae' looking one - nice, but sorta cartoony...
What happened the dome on the nose end of the Lightning class cruiser?
These are minor points with me; they wouldn't stop me from buying one
------------------
Joe Brown
My only nits to pick:
That Aslan's face is a bit more humanoid than I would prefer...
The human female is almost an 'animae' looking one - nice, but sorta cartoony...
What happened the dome on the nose end of the Lightning class cruiser?
These are minor points with me; they wouldn't stop me from buying one
------------------
Joe Brown
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>
My only nits to pick:
That Aslan's face is a bit more humanoid than I would prefer...
The human female is almost an 'animae' looking one - nice, but sorta cartoony...
[read more realism needed]
[/B]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Ditto, as can readily seen. I would also point out the rarely in Traveller do characters go around in armoured Vac Suits, the discerning Marine/Merc will always favour combat armour or at least Battle Dress (complete with kilt). But the Energy Weapons are just I always imagined them. NO MORE STUPID BACKPACK LASERS, YA!!! Ok, keep them for the Milieu 0 or Milieu Interstellar Wars. (in small print)
Seriously though Hunter, it looks great, if that does not get the D&Der Munchkins come a running. I don't know what will.
Hopefully the Classic Traveller screen may contain a montage/collage of some the best of Classic Traveller art...the Keiths, Rebellion Sourcebook cover, even our own Lucas Graphics was on to something great.
[This message has been edited by kafka47 (edited 05 October 2001).]
My only nits to pick:
That Aslan's face is a bit more humanoid than I would prefer...
The human female is almost an 'animae' looking one - nice, but sorta cartoony...
[read more realism needed]
[/B]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Ditto, as can readily seen. I would also point out the rarely in Traveller do characters go around in armoured Vac Suits, the discerning Marine/Merc will always favour combat armour or at least Battle Dress (complete with kilt). But the Energy Weapons are just I always imagined them. NO MORE STUPID BACKPACK LASERS, YA!!! Ok, keep them for the Milieu 0 or Milieu Interstellar Wars. (in small print)
Seriously though Hunter, it looks great, if that does not get the D&Der Munchkins come a running. I don't know what will.
Hopefully the Classic Traveller screen may contain a montage/collage of some the best of Classic Traveller art...the Keiths, Rebellion Sourcebook cover, even our own Lucas Graphics was on to something great.
[This message has been edited by kafka47 (edited 05 October 2001).]
carrothead
SOC-6
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by kafka47:
Ditto, as can readily seen. I would also point out the rarely in Traveller do characters go around in armoured Vac Suits, the discerning Marine/Merc will always favour combat armour or at least Battle Dress (complete with kilt). But the Energy Weapons are just I always imagined them. NO MORE STUPID BACKPACK LASERS, YA!!! Ok, keep them for the Milieu 0 or Milieu Interstellar Wars. (in small print)
Seriously though Hunter, it looks great, if that does not get the D&Der Munchkins come a running. I don't know what will.
Hopefully the Classic Traveller screen may contain a montage/collage of some the best of Classic Traveller art...the Keiths, Rebellion Sourcebook cover, even our own Lucas Graphics was on to something great.
[This message has been edited by kafka47 (edited 05 October 2001).]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Lets be serious here, how can you say that this will get the D&Ders to come running. Maybe it will get them laughing! Im not impressed at all with this picture and am also not surprised that the art would look like this. I was seriously hoping on something more realistic looking. Dont get me wrong though...Im still buying it!
The art is really in the mind of the gamers imagination anyhow. (But I still dont like the pic)
Ditto, as can readily seen. I would also point out the rarely in Traveller do characters go around in armoured Vac Suits, the discerning Marine/Merc will always favour combat armour or at least Battle Dress (complete with kilt). But the Energy Weapons are just I always imagined them. NO MORE STUPID BACKPACK LASERS, YA!!! Ok, keep them for the Milieu 0 or Milieu Interstellar Wars. (in small print)
Seriously though Hunter, it looks great, if that does not get the D&Der Munchkins come a running. I don't know what will.
Hopefully the Classic Traveller screen may contain a montage/collage of some the best of Classic Traveller art...the Keiths, Rebellion Sourcebook cover, even our own Lucas Graphics was on to something great.
[This message has been edited by kafka47 (edited 05 October 2001).]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Lets be serious here, how can you say that this will get the D&Ders to come running. Maybe it will get them laughing! Im not impressed at all with this picture and am also not surprised that the art would look like this. I was seriously hoping on something more realistic looking. Dont get me wrong though...Im still buying it!
I was hoping that the Traveller d20 would keep the "hard edge" look that I've come to expect from the GURPS Traveller stuff. Unfortunately, this graphic looks way too cartoonish, more like something from GDW during "The New Era".
Oh, and put boots on the Aslan and the Vargr - Aliens wear shoes too...
DonM.
Oh, and put boots on the Aslan and the Vargr - Aliens wear shoes too...
DonM.
carrothead
SOC-6
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by DonM:
I was hoping that the Traveller d20 would keep the "hard edge" look that I've come to expect from the GURPS Traveller stuff. Unfortunately, this graphic looks way too cartoonish, more like something from GDW during "The New Era".
Oh, and put boots on the Aslan and the Vargr - Aliens wear shoes too...
DonM.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I agree with your view 100%. This is the year 2001 I'm sure we can do better than this.
I was hoping that the Traveller d20 would keep the "hard edge" look that I've come to expect from the GURPS Traveller stuff. Unfortunately, this graphic looks way too cartoonish, more like something from GDW during "The New Era".
Oh, and put boots on the Aslan and the Vargr - Aliens wear shoes too...
DonM.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I agree with your view 100%. This is the year 2001 I'm sure we can do better than this.
Secrect Cow Level
SOC-12
I like it a lot. It captures the feel of TRAVELLER quite well. I wonder what all the critics of this painting were thinking it should look like?
Gallowglass
SOC-12
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Secrect Cow Level:
I like it a lot. It captures the feel of TRAVELLER quite well. I wonder what all the critics of this painting were thinking it should look like? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I like the artwork too, but I think I can sympathise with some of the reservations. Artwork is a very subjective thing, if its of the required quality (*cough* 2300 Kafer Dawn *cough* 'nuff said
). This piece is certainly well executed, but I think some people are reacting to the style, which (like the T20 artwork that used to form the title page of the website and that I believe is used in the GRIP edition) is a bit too Space Opera and not Hard SF enough for some.
I sympathise as I say, but it is a well executed painting, it's relevant and if there are some miniatures of some of Bryan Gibsons pen and ink work (which I find much more Hard SF in feel) on the screen as well, the combination will cover the range of styles of Traveller quite nicely.
I like it a lot. It captures the feel of TRAVELLER quite well. I wonder what all the critics of this painting were thinking it should look like? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I like the artwork too, but I think I can sympathise with some of the reservations. Artwork is a very subjective thing, if its of the required quality (*cough* 2300 Kafer Dawn *cough* 'nuff said
I sympathise as I say, but it is a well executed painting, it's relevant and if there are some miniatures of some of Bryan Gibsons pen and ink work (which I find much more Hard SF in feel) on the screen as well, the combination will cover the range of styles of Traveller quite nicely.
SteveBryant
SOC-1
Hello All!
Steve Bryant here. I'm responsible for the image that you're all debating about. I'd like to address some of your comments.
Fulacin Highport: "That Aslan's face is a bit more humanoid than I would prefer..."
Ironically, the image that my studiomate, Jason Millet, created for the T20 book cover is getting the critique that it looks too lion-like... <g>
Fulacin Highport: "The human female is almost an 'animae' looking one - nice, but sorta cartoony..."
I'll have to take exception with that one. I believe that what you mean is that she looks "comic-booky," rather than "cartoony." She adheres to standard human proportions (6-7 heads tall) and her hands, eyes and feet are proportionate (no "big hands, big eyes, big feet" that's found in anime) so that makes the anatomy actually more naturalistic than comic booky or cartoony. I believe what you're reacting to is the presence of a hard black line around the figures, etc. This is definately a comic book thing.
I apologize, Joe, if it appears that I'm trying to jump all over you here, I just wanted to clarify something that I find to be an important distinction.
At the outset with Hunter and the RPG Realms products, when we were discussing budget, look and branding, we reached the conclusion that we would like to have topnotch comic-style art rather than mediocre paintings for the cover. (The budget amount for the covers wouldn't allow us Brom, Elmore, etc for the entire line and we rated consistancy high on our priority list).
Carrothead: "Lets be serious here, how can you say that this will get the D&Ders to come running. Maybe it will get them laughing! Im not impressed at all with this picture and am also not surprised that the art would look like this. I was seriously hoping on something more realistic looking."
Thanks for the kind words. It's always great to know that hard work is appreciated. Seriously, though, how will it get them "laughing?" I deleted the big red shoes on the woman's feet (they were in the sketch--honest!).
DonM: "I was hoping that the Traveller d20 would keep the "hard edge" look that I've come to expect from the GURPS Traveller stuff. Unfortunately, this graphic looks way too cartoonish, more like something from GDW during "The New Era"."
You got me, Don! I was on staff at GDW at the start of the TNE project. Bear in mind that this image is only one image from the T20 line. There's a lot of room for both hard science and space opera (I won't address the defination of the word "cartoony" here--see above) visuals in the line. If you have any specific examples of the kind of images that you feel are particularly evocative of the look that you would like to see, feel free to email them to me (72dpi is fine) at sbryant65@aol.com. I won't copy them, recreate them or in any way infringe on their copyright, but I will look at them and if you tell me what you like and don't like about them, I'll do my best to incorporate those qualities that you like into the overall look of T20.
carrothead: "I agree with your view 100%. This is the year 2001 I'm sure we can do better than this."
Good to know, carrothead. By saying "we" can do better than this, I get the impression that you're an illustrator as well. Please feel free to send me your samples at sbryant65@aol.com.
Secrect Cow Level: "I like it a lot. It captures the feel of TRAVELLER quite well. I wonder what all the critics of this painting were thinking it should look like? "
Thanks for the kind words, Cow. I'm trying not to take some of the cheap shots personally. I have to remember that on the Internet, people (myself included) write things that they would never have the balls to say to someone face-to-face.
Gallowglass: "I like the artwork too, but I think I can sympathise with some of the reservations. Artwork is a very subjective thing, if its of the required quality (*cough* 2300 Kafer Dawn *cough* 'nuff said ). This piece is certainly well executed, but I think some people are reacting to the style, which (like the T20 artwork that used to form the title page of the website and that I believe is used in the GRIP edition) is a bit too Space Opera and not Hard SF enough for some. I sympathise as I say, but it is a well executed painting, it's relevant and if there are some miniatures of some of Bryan Gibsons pen and ink work (which I find much more Hard SF in feel) on the screen as well, the combination will cover the range of styles of Traveller quite nicely."
Thanks for the kind words, Gallow. I agree with you that there are elements of both hard science and space opera in the tapestry that makes up the Traveller universe and that T20 will showcase all facets of it. It's hard for me to just look at the ref screen as a whole, because it's not. It's a part of the entire product line that we're trying to put together here.
I don't mean to go off on a tangent here. I appreciate all of you that have stayed with me throughout my rambling here. No one--at any level of publishing--sets out to produce a piece of crap. I know that it's easy to look at the final product and say "I would have done better." Heck, I catch myself doing it all the time with movies, tv shows and comics. But the bottom line is that no one TRIES to do something that sucks. And one man's trash is another man's treasure.
Just bear in mind that all kinds of considerations come into play when critiquing someone's work (no, we're not just talking about the T20 ref screen image here).
Personal tastes--what I think is cool you may find trite. Or vice versa.
Budgetary considerations also come into play. A publisher has limited resources to produce a book so a balance must be struck between what a freelancer does and what a staffer creates. The publisher, of course has greater control over what a staff person does, but the publisher is also providing insurance and other benefits to that person. A freelancer is cheaper, but is also approached in more of a hands-off manner. A delicate balancing act, to say the least.
Sometimes a freelancer will work for a cheaper price if they have a bit more freedom.
And the authors and artists have budgetary considerations to make as well. Those of us doing it fulltime have to balance between quality and experimentation (a failed experiment can result in a choice between a crappy piece of work or having to rework an image entirely--not good for the checkbook when you have a wife, baby and a mortgage. Or we can go with what we know and avoid experimentation entirely.
Details in editing can be missed due to an author being late. Sometimes a late book can't be pushed back any further due to the necessity of the publisher needing to PUBLISH in order to stay in business.
Sometimes an artist is picking up the ball where another artist dropped the ball and has to draw 20 illustrations over a weekend.
Sometimes a family member goes into the hospital in the midst of a project.
All of these things can and do happen. There are a heck of a lot more examples that I could add as well. The bottom line is this: just remember that PEOPLE produce the books that you buy, the movies you watch, etc. And that those people busted their asses to create something that they love. Something that you may just dismiss out of hand.
Thanks for listening--
Steve
Steve Bryant here. I'm responsible for the image that you're all debating about. I'd like to address some of your comments.
Fulacin Highport: "That Aslan's face is a bit more humanoid than I would prefer..."
Ironically, the image that my studiomate, Jason Millet, created for the T20 book cover is getting the critique that it looks too lion-like... <g>
Fulacin Highport: "The human female is almost an 'animae' looking one - nice, but sorta cartoony..."
I'll have to take exception with that one. I believe that what you mean is that she looks "comic-booky," rather than "cartoony." She adheres to standard human proportions (6-7 heads tall) and her hands, eyes and feet are proportionate (no "big hands, big eyes, big feet" that's found in anime) so that makes the anatomy actually more naturalistic than comic booky or cartoony. I believe what you're reacting to is the presence of a hard black line around the figures, etc. This is definately a comic book thing.
I apologize, Joe, if it appears that I'm trying to jump all over you here, I just wanted to clarify something that I find to be an important distinction.
At the outset with Hunter and the RPG Realms products, when we were discussing budget, look and branding, we reached the conclusion that we would like to have topnotch comic-style art rather than mediocre paintings for the cover. (The budget amount for the covers wouldn't allow us Brom, Elmore, etc for the entire line and we rated consistancy high on our priority list).
Carrothead: "Lets be serious here, how can you say that this will get the D&Ders to come running. Maybe it will get them laughing! Im not impressed at all with this picture and am also not surprised that the art would look like this. I was seriously hoping on something more realistic looking."
Thanks for the kind words. It's always great to know that hard work is appreciated. Seriously, though, how will it get them "laughing?" I deleted the big red shoes on the woman's feet (they were in the sketch--honest!).
DonM: "I was hoping that the Traveller d20 would keep the "hard edge" look that I've come to expect from the GURPS Traveller stuff. Unfortunately, this graphic looks way too cartoonish, more like something from GDW during "The New Era"."
You got me, Don! I was on staff at GDW at the start of the TNE project. Bear in mind that this image is only one image from the T20 line. There's a lot of room for both hard science and space opera (I won't address the defination of the word "cartoony" here--see above) visuals in the line. If you have any specific examples of the kind of images that you feel are particularly evocative of the look that you would like to see, feel free to email them to me (72dpi is fine) at sbryant65@aol.com. I won't copy them, recreate them or in any way infringe on their copyright, but I will look at them and if you tell me what you like and don't like about them, I'll do my best to incorporate those qualities that you like into the overall look of T20.
carrothead: "I agree with your view 100%. This is the year 2001 I'm sure we can do better than this."
Good to know, carrothead. By saying "we" can do better than this, I get the impression that you're an illustrator as well. Please feel free to send me your samples at sbryant65@aol.com.
Secrect Cow Level: "I like it a lot. It captures the feel of TRAVELLER quite well. I wonder what all the critics of this painting were thinking it should look like? "
Thanks for the kind words, Cow. I'm trying not to take some of the cheap shots personally. I have to remember that on the Internet, people (myself included) write things that they would never have the balls to say to someone face-to-face.
Gallowglass: "I like the artwork too, but I think I can sympathise with some of the reservations. Artwork is a very subjective thing, if its of the required quality (*cough* 2300 Kafer Dawn *cough* 'nuff said ). This piece is certainly well executed, but I think some people are reacting to the style, which (like the T20 artwork that used to form the title page of the website and that I believe is used in the GRIP edition) is a bit too Space Opera and not Hard SF enough for some. I sympathise as I say, but it is a well executed painting, it's relevant and if there are some miniatures of some of Bryan Gibsons pen and ink work (which I find much more Hard SF in feel) on the screen as well, the combination will cover the range of styles of Traveller quite nicely."
Thanks for the kind words, Gallow. I agree with you that there are elements of both hard science and space opera in the tapestry that makes up the Traveller universe and that T20 will showcase all facets of it. It's hard for me to just look at the ref screen as a whole, because it's not. It's a part of the entire product line that we're trying to put together here.
I don't mean to go off on a tangent here. I appreciate all of you that have stayed with me throughout my rambling here. No one--at any level of publishing--sets out to produce a piece of crap. I know that it's easy to look at the final product and say "I would have done better." Heck, I catch myself doing it all the time with movies, tv shows and comics. But the bottom line is that no one TRIES to do something that sucks. And one man's trash is another man's treasure.
Just bear in mind that all kinds of considerations come into play when critiquing someone's work (no, we're not just talking about the T20 ref screen image here).
Personal tastes--what I think is cool you may find trite. Or vice versa.
Budgetary considerations also come into play. A publisher has limited resources to produce a book so a balance must be struck between what a freelancer does and what a staffer creates. The publisher, of course has greater control over what a staff person does, but the publisher is also providing insurance and other benefits to that person. A freelancer is cheaper, but is also approached in more of a hands-off manner. A delicate balancing act, to say the least.
Sometimes a freelancer will work for a cheaper price if they have a bit more freedom.
And the authors and artists have budgetary considerations to make as well. Those of us doing it fulltime have to balance between quality and experimentation (a failed experiment can result in a choice between a crappy piece of work or having to rework an image entirely--not good for the checkbook when you have a wife, baby and a mortgage. Or we can go with what we know and avoid experimentation entirely.
Details in editing can be missed due to an author being late. Sometimes a late book can't be pushed back any further due to the necessity of the publisher needing to PUBLISH in order to stay in business.
Sometimes an artist is picking up the ball where another artist dropped the ball and has to draw 20 illustrations over a weekend.
Sometimes a family member goes into the hospital in the midst of a project.
All of these things can and do happen. There are a heck of a lot more examples that I could add as well. The bottom line is this: just remember that PEOPLE produce the books that you buy, the movies you watch, etc. And that those people busted their asses to create something that they love. Something that you may just dismiss out of hand.
Thanks for listening--
Steve
Fulacin Highport
SOC-9
"I apologize, Joe, if it appears that I'm trying to jump all over you here, I just wanted to clarify something that I find to be an important distinction."
-----------
Not a problem! I couldn't agree more - and I should have been more specific! It WAS the black line that did me in on her!
One of the best things about the internet is that it lets us all communicate; one of the worst things is that it's NOT un-ambiguous... you cannot pick up on my tone of voice, or my general attitude just from reading a post. So, mis-communication becomes easy.
I try not to post a message unless I actually have something to say, and I try to never write a message that I wouldn't repeat face-to-face with someone.
So, with all that aside, what *did* happen to the dome on the nose of the cruiser?
I'm more of a gearhead - and in the physical modeling sense; look at the bottom entries on this thread for details: http://www.farfuture.net/ixs/Forum4/HTML/000042.html
------------------
Joe Brown
[This message has been edited by Fulacin Highport (edited 09 October 2001).]
-----------
Not a problem! I couldn't agree more - and I should have been more specific! It WAS the black line that did me in on her!
One of the best things about the internet is that it lets us all communicate; one of the worst things is that it's NOT un-ambiguous... you cannot pick up on my tone of voice, or my general attitude just from reading a post. So, mis-communication becomes easy.
I try not to post a message unless I actually have something to say, and I try to never write a message that I wouldn't repeat face-to-face with someone.
So, with all that aside, what *did* happen to the dome on the nose of the cruiser?
I'm more of a gearhead - and in the physical modeling sense; look at the bottom entries on this thread for details: http://www.farfuture.net/ixs/Forum4/HTML/000042.html
------------------
Joe Brown
[This message has been edited by Fulacin Highport (edited 09 October 2001).]
SteveBryant
SOC-1
Fulacin Highport:" So, with all that aside, what *did* happen to the dome on the nose of the cruiser?"
Joe, I apologize in advance for the following reply.
I don't know.
I'm not a technical guy--please note that all tech stuff in T20 will probably be handled by the incomparable Bryan Gibson--I may have missed the dome when I was working from my reference. The reference may not have had it on there, either.
I'm not sure how I missed it; I just know now that I missed it.
By the way, thanks for not taking offense at my whole "comic-booky-cartoony-anime-naturalistic-realistic" diatribe. It's great to be able to discuss some of this stuff.
Take Care--
Steve
Joe, I apologize in advance for the following reply.
I don't know.
I'm not a technical guy--please note that all tech stuff in T20 will probably be handled by the incomparable Bryan Gibson--I may have missed the dome when I was working from my reference. The reference may not have had it on there, either.
I'm not sure how I missed it; I just know now that I missed it.
By the way, thanks for not taking offense at my whole "comic-booky-cartoony-anime-naturalistic-realistic" diatribe. It's great to be able to discuss some of this stuff.
Take Care--
Steve
hunter
Ancient - Absent Friend
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Fulacin Highport:
So, with all that aside, what *did* happen to the dome on the nose of the cruiser?
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
This is the pic Steve worked off of (Azhanti cover).
I assume you mean the dome at the end of the spinal mount?
I think Steve saw that as an opening to the spinal mount tube rather than a dome. I can't fault him, looking at the pic it does kinda look like that.
Hunter
[This message has been edited by hunter (edited 09 October 2001).]
So, with all that aside, what *did* happen to the dome on the nose of the cruiser?
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
This is the pic Steve worked off of (Azhanti cover).
I assume you mean the dome at the end of the spinal mount?
I think Steve saw that as an opening to the spinal mount tube rather than a dome. I can't fault him, looking at the pic it does kinda look like that.
Hunter
[This message has been edited by hunter (edited 09 October 2001).]
Fulacin Highport
SOC-9
I wasn't saying "HEY - WHAT THE H___?" I was just curious... like I said, I'm just another gearhead
------------------
Joe Brown
------------------
Joe Brown
hunter
Ancient - Absent Friend
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Fulacin Highport:
I wasn't saying "HEY - WHAT THE H___?" I was just curious... like I said, I'm just another gearhead
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Oh I realize that, I just want to make sure we have the ship correct. If it is a dome at the end, we need to fix the pic.
Actually I just got off the phone with Marc on this to get the 'official' word. According to Marc the spinal mount tube is OPEN not domed. The pic above is a bit misleading. So it looks like the pic on the Ref Screen cover is correct.
Hunter
I wasn't saying "HEY - WHAT THE H___?" I was just curious... like I said, I'm just another gearhead
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Oh I realize that, I just want to make sure we have the ship correct. If it is a dome at the end, we need to fix the pic.
Actually I just got off the phone with Marc on this to get the 'official' word. According to Marc the spinal mount tube is OPEN not domed. The pic above is a bit misleading. So it looks like the pic on the Ref Screen cover is correct.
Hunter
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by hunter:
It looks like there should be a dome cap. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Is it a fixed dome? If it opens, it might be a nice visual effect to show the dome splitting apart as it's opening...
------------------
--
J.P. Gill
http://www.RPGgazette.com
It looks like there should be a dome cap. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Is it a fixed dome? If it opens, it might be a nice visual effect to show the dome splitting apart as it's opening...
------------------
--
J.P. Gill
http://www.RPGgazette.com
The dome is actuallt on the top deck of the ship itself. Decks run perpendicular to the thrust axis. The large tube on the bottom, with the dome, are actually decks. The dome is fixed and part of the ship hull. The smaller tube at the top is the spinal mount, uncovered. (AHL deckplans)
Just my .o2CR
Kerby
"Lurking for a better understanding"
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by J.P. Gill:
Is it a fixed dome? If it opens, it might be a nice visual effect to show the dome splitting apart as it's opening...
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Just my .o2CR
Kerby
"Lurking for a better understanding"
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by J.P. Gill:
Is it a fixed dome? If it opens, it might be a nice visual effect to show the dome splitting apart as it's opening...
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
