As we all know, simulating weightlessness on TV shows and movies is expensive. As such, the artificial gravity on most SF spaceships works perfectly -- even if all other system on the ship are damaged, the artificial gravity works perfectly. (Hey! If you want your spaceship to survive a crash, maybe you should make the whole thing out of an artificial gravity generator!) Of course it would be more realistic if the artificial gravity didn't alway work. And I often think, "Why can't they film the actors from the waist up and have tem bob up and down like they're weightless? That shuld be way cheaper than simulating weightlessness the regular way." It's just a thought.
posted by:
|
Michigan
|
-
Re: Too much artificial gravity
Wed, November 15, 2006 - 2:35 PMToo bad the artificial gravity generators, while being stunningly robust, nevertheless produce enough variation in output such that people occasionally get knocked out of their chairs by impacts -- yet not liquified against walls. 8) -
-
Re: Too much artificial gravity
Sat, November 25, 2006 - 7:51 AMThis is conceivable, _if_ the devices (I'd rather call them "inertial compensators" in this application) work by nullifying a _percentage_ rather than absolute quantity of the experienced inertia -- or are set up with reserve power to act as if they could, up to a certain point.
What's weird is that in video SF, you practically _never_ see them fail.
- Jordan -
-
Re: Too much artificial gravity
Mon, July 16, 2007 - 2:35 PMIf you did see them fail, you'd get an R rating or perhaps NC-17.
That's one of the reason they gave the Klingons Pepto-Bismol blood. The MPAA apparently felt that red zero-g blood was too graphic, but pink was ok.
*rolls eyes*
-
-
-
Re: Too much artificial gravity
Sat, November 25, 2006 - 9:28 AMAnd I often think, "Why can't they film the actors from the waist up and have tem bob up and down like they're weightless?
From a production standpoint: The actors would have to have short and/or tightly curled hair otherwise it would be horribly obvious they weren't weightless. Think of Worf's or Ivanova's ponytail just laying there while the actor bobs around. Even a wig done up to simulate micro-g environment would look goofy.
B5, at least, started out with artificial gravity by rotation. -
-
Re: Too much artificial gravity
Sat, November 25, 2006 - 10:09 AMYeah, I guess it would still be hard simulating weightless the way I proposed. But at the same time, there may be ways to make the weightless more realisitic looking without the complications of hanging actors from wires: Slow motion. For years, I wodered why the weightless FX of Lost in Space looked so much better than it did in other SF show. Then I realized why: They film the weightlessness scenes in slow motion.
-
Re: Too much artificial gravity
Sun, November 26, 2006 - 9:23 PM"The actors would have to have short and/or tightly curled hair otherwise it would be horribly obvious they weren't weightless. "
Helmets.
-
-
Re: Too much artificial gravity
Fri, December 1, 2006 - 11:45 PMif you had a artificial gravity generator why not use it for propulsion? -
-
Re: Too much artificial gravity
Sat, December 2, 2006 - 12:22 AMOh, like a carrot-on-a-stick?
I think it would have to significantly outmass your ship, or when you turn it on, it'll just bang against your hull like a drunken prom date. Even if we had an artificial gravity generator, we can't easily get around m1v1 = m2v2.
-
