The Wand Company TOS Tricorder is coming!

[blspro]

So no video playback?

Yeah - I'm a little concerned about the references to ONLY "images and data" in the 'Functions' chart. We've known from the start that they're not going to *record* video, which I am fine with. But it's beginning to sound like the Tricorder will not have software/codec which even reads/plays video, which is a GREAT disappointment to me IF true. After all, that is one one its ONLY major functions we DID see on the show. And TWC has a monitor which works and everything. Hell, even most people who build their own these days make it so theirs can play video. Given these facts, to leave out any and all video functions would certainly diminish their claims to the status of "replica".

Of course, they do say "Our tricorder does more than just sense and record data from the environment", so that leaves a bit of *hope* that capability IS still there.

 

[NakedMoleRat]

I’ve nothing to complain about with this tricorder.

 

[JiminSTLouis]

Yeah - I'm a little concerned about the references to ONLY "images and data" in the 'Functions' chart.

They did say the Tricirder Will also contain:

“a small collection of historical archive files”.

These could very well be episode clips.

They also said:

“(and then leaving the other exciting tricorder functions buried in somewhere else in the user interface)”

and:

“Our tricorder does more than just sense and record data from the environment. Its capabilities will be explored in detail in future posts”

I would reserve any disappointment until all updates are delivered and we know what all the functions are going to be.

 

[blspro]

They did say...

“Our tricorder does more than just sense and record data from the environment. Its capabilities will be explored in detail in future posts”

I would reserve any disappointment until all updates are delivered and we know what all the functions are going to be.

Since my post only expresses "concern" - as I *explicitly* put it - about the wording of the information we HAVE been provided; since I *explicitly* said *IF* video playback is not included, *THEN* I will be disappointed; and since I *explicitly* included in my post the VERY quote you reference here and *explicitly* said that gives us "a bit of *hope* that [video playback] capability IS still there", I'm not certain why you felt the *need* to admonish to do EXACTLY what I have ALREADY just done.

 

[enterprise0216]

I agree with everyone's point of view. Some disappointed here and there across this thread. Many of us had great ideas and even though the Tricorder was meant to have certain features. It's always great to see what can be squeezed into it technology wise. However, keeping what we saw on the Star Trek episodes screen accurate works for all of us. Yes of course i would have loved to have a record video and playback. You never know what TWC may come up with something and spring a last minute surprise. If it turns out the disc themselves contains little clips to play that is something. I guess when it comes down to it for us fans. It better to get something than nothing at all.

I am a always encourage to come to this thread and just read what everyone has to say on the subject good, bad, crazy, to insane. The end result is the same great discussions on a topic we all want to see come to life and in our hands! As the old saying goes, "Keep at it!"

 

[asalaw]

Video playback or no (and the jury's still out on that), I'm still incredibly excited. I can't wait to have this thing in my hands.

 

[Inquisitor Peregrinus]

How often outside of "City on the Edge of Forever" did we see the screen playing back video? Not challenging, actually curious. It wasn't something I specifically watched for, and I just realized that any time it did it had to be composited in to a static insert shot, so I don't know how often they would have gone for the extra expense that entailed unless it was important to the story, as it was in "City...".

Also, having just watched that episode with some friends who are only now getting into TOS, for reasons, Spock was recording the Guardian's history playback, but needed to build a computer in their room to be able to process and play it back on the tricorder's screen. I'm not sure what to make of that...

 

[NakedMoleRat]

Let’s hope that they get the correct shade of black on the simulated Kydex.

 

[Funky]

Any word on expected date for pre-orders?

 

[blspro]

How often outside of "City on the Edge of Forever" did we see the screen playing back video? Not challenging, actually curious. It wasn't something I specifically watched for, and I just realized that any time it did it had to be composited in to a static insert shot, so I don't know how often they would have gone for the extra expense that entailed unless it was important to the story, as it was in "City...".

Indeed it was an extra expense to show *anything* on the Tricorder screen, and required a special plate shot of the Tricorder hood section to display content on that screen. That's why it is not typically shown in close up usage.

Off-hand, I cannot recall which other episodes did have either static or video playback on the screen (though I do recall there being such occasions EDIT: I seem to recall Plato's Stepchildren having a 'live' Medical readout on the screen). And, unfortunately, when one tries to do a google search, one simply comes up with either reference to TWC or amateur built Tricorders (such as those I previously alluded to) which include video screens and/or playback functions. Searching for the instances of TOS video screen usage is not immediately easy or producing results - not even the one we are familiar with ie CotEoF.

Also, having just watched that episode with some friends who are only now getting into TOS, for reasons, Spock was recording the Guardian's history playback, but needed to build a computer in their room to be able to process and play it back on the tricorder's screen. I'm not sure what to make of that...

In the episode, Spock states: "Locked in here [the Tricorder] is the exact place and moment of his arrival. Even the images of what he did. If only I could tie this tricorder in with the ship's computers for just a few moments." To which Kirk says "Couldn't you build some form of computer aid here?" So the question is: WHY do they need additional "computer aid"?

Later, Spock declares at least part of what he is "trying to construct is a mnemonic memory circuit". Once he gets his work far enough along, he states "I've slowed down the recording we made from the time vortex." These paultry few sentences are the ONLY references we are actually given as to the purpose of the tie-in to some other computing source. Moreover, we see that the manipulation of the playback etc is done by the three control dials in the hood. Spock manipulates them to, as he indicates, 'run the video images again' - indicating those functions are already built into the Tricorder's control knob functions.

Given all of that, it would appear the answer to the question WHY did they need additional "computer aid" was: for more advanced manipulation of the raw data than one would *normally* be able to do with the screen and the buttons - the same way your phone used to need additional "computer aid" to do more than simply play back the videos it had taken. Recall that it used to require another computer (and additional software) to "slow down" recordings (slomo) or edit recordings, or to even 'zoom in' on images etc. (while maintaining high resolution) from a smart phone.

For the example of City, recall that the tricorder was recording ALL of the history that was flashing by at an INCREDIBLE rate of speed. Spock even expressed concern about the "speed with which the centuries are passing" but explicitly identified the fact "Our tricorder is capable of recording even at this speed". But, as we know, to make such highly detailed recordings like those Spock later revealed, would usually require some great form of compression for the vast amount of data, and as such would likely require more 'computing power' as it were than normal to even view that vast and fast amount of data at a 'regular' speed for human comprehension. Moreover, recall that Spock mentions nothing about having to completely *reprogram* the Tricorder itself, writing missing software and codecs needed to read and display video. All those things appear to be there already.

In other words, the function and capability to access and play video on the Tricorder is shown to exist. It simply seems to have needed additional 'computer power' to do more with the given data than the basic functions (play/fast forward/rewind etc) that appear to be normally operated by the Tricorder's built-in controllers.

 

[JiminSTLouis]

Hey look! here's yet another thread I was thoroughly enjoying that has had all the fun sucked out of it. It's like clockwork.

I apologize for my part in sending this thread south. I was just trying to say don’t be discouraged with the functions because we don’t know what they are yet. I never meant to imply not to discuss or contemplate functions because I quoted a specific member‘s post. And I did cut-n-paste specific comments from TWC blog because not everyone is following it.

 

[Lost in Trek]

Unless something has changed with the Wand license they do not have a license to creat prop replicas. They have a license to create replicas with some form of functionality... Lucky for us they go above and beyond to create a replicas/collectable that is pretty accurate.

I can say with absolute certainty that the discs were never color coded on the original props. I personally believe there is sufficient evidence to believe one disc was removable... But only one. So to argue about the correct colors assigned to a discs that were never removable and weren't color coded seems pretty nitpicky to me.

The current level of technology available to Wand today does not allow for a Tricorder replica that can do all the things that the fictional Tricorder could do. I for one am pretty happy with whatever they are able to incorporate into the design. And keep in mind they have a price point they are aiming for as well that will also limit what they can and cannot do.

Wand is doing s fine job as far as I am concerned.

 

[Trooper_trent]

I apologize for my part in sending this thread south. I was just trying to say don’t be discouraged with the functions because we don’t know what they are yet. I never meant to imply not to discuss or contemplate functions because I quoted a specific member‘s post. And I did cut-n-paste specific comments from TWC blog because not everyone is following it.

No apology needed. You did nothing wrong from what I saw. I totally agree that complaining about functions is ridiculous. It HAS functions and it doesn't even need to. Anything they do is a bonus.

 

[Gregatron]

Personally, my take has always been that the Jewelrama disc (McCoy hero prop) represents a "blank" data disc, and the moire disc (Spock/TMOST hero prop) represents one that contains data/recordings. But that's just me.

I'm not losing any sleep over TWC taking some artistic license with an in-universe function of the prop which was never shown onscreen. My own personal (static) prop replica features the moire disc mounted on the tricorder, and a removable disc featuring a holographic sticker to simulate the Jewelrama.

I eagerly look forward to what will surely be another awesome TWC product!

 

[Gregatron]

Star Trek is a dead franchise? ****. Better tell CBS before they make another season of Discovery or Picard or Strange New Worlds...

The current offerings make me cringe with how bad they are too much of the time, but there is enough return on that investment that they're continuing. We're not seeing the same falloff we did post-Voyager, when the guy making decisions about Star Trek didn't like science-fiction, cancelled Enterprise, and killed the films.

I just keep doing what I can to express my dissatisfaction with the creative decisions and their execution with people who can even remotely do something about it. I know a couple people who are working on them, and have talked to more. They're honestly trying. Most of what I (and, I'm sure, a lot of you) hate is coming from people higher up who don't give a **** about Trek.

But it sure ain't a dead franchise.

And NakedMoleRat, as a proud nit-picking Trekkie dork, I am wondering if you are aware of the site you're on...

I'd rather not inspire yet more thread-drift, but suffice it to say that I do not say what I say lightly. All signs point to a deeply unhealthy franchise, with appallingly bad, loss-leader show on a failed streaming service (most normal/civilian people I've spoken to about don't even know that these new shows exist), no merchandise to speak of (aside from licensed products for the older shows and movies), and an aging core fanbase which will eventually age out completely, and/or has been alienated away completely by awful products. The Franchise Apocalypse continues, and nothing is safe. The core pillars of nerd culture as it has existed for the past 80 or so years are being shattered, one by one.

I vote with my wallet, and I saw the writing on the wall in 2009. It's gone, and it's never coming back. Just endless waves of deconstruction and retconning by the inheritors of this once-great franchise, who do not respect or understand what they've been handed. To them, it's just a "platform" for "activism", or a stepping-stone to bigger and better Hollywood projects.


Even in this corner of the galaxy, two plus two equals four.

That is all.

We now return to our regularly scheduled thread.

 

[Lost in Trek]

Your point here is not clear, unless you are just railing against people being "nitpicky".

Are you trying to argue that, on TOS, Starfleet did NOT have a palette to the color of its machines and instruments, etc - to its physical products? If so, I must disagree. If not, then your argument is indeed unclear - unless its that one should *not* be concerned with any form of continuity or integration with what IS known in-universe about particular things, places, races, etc. And if that is the case, then I must *also* disagree.

As to "nitpicky", as I referenced in my comments to Gregatron, RPF is a forum DEDICATED to concern over MINUTE details - such as *his* concern over whether a fillister screw in his Blade Runner pistol is 100% accurate or is off by 1-2 mm or whether it should sit above the cylinder cover or be recessed into the screw housing. Talk about "nitpicky"!

So, as Inquisitor Peregrinus said to MoleRat, in referencing 'nit-picking': "I am wondering if you are aware of the site your on" or the issues about *minutia* etc that people raise here ALL the time.

Well, you're just wrong. The walls of the transporter room were purple in the third season. The doors and transporter console looked far more red in the third season, some of the Swarovski crystals in the comms were red, the watch crowns used in the trics were blue, red and yellow... Also the sewing pins used for lights on the Midgrade trics...
The emergency button on the intercom panels were red, not the orange/red of the panels.

Indicator lights were various colors...

And again, there were no discs that were color coded so who know what colors they would have used. It's a pointless argument because it simply wasn't part of the prop on the show. This is a function completely made up by Wand...

If you really want to play this game they shouldn't be color coded at all. Each should have a different moire pattern. That would better align to the comms and hero trics.

But again, I really don't care as its all made up by Wand.

 

[Trooper_trent]

Great. You are NOT concerned about functions. As noted, that is certainly your prerogative. Of course, some of us do not share *your* opinion (which is *supposed* to be OUR prerogative, though apparently it isn't) and we ARE concerned about functions. But *I* am certainly not going to turn around and declare your lack of concern - ie YOUR opinion - is "ridiculous".

In other words, I'm not going to personally attack YOU just because you don't share MY ideas.

Get it?

You've mistaken my comment as an invitation to debate. It was not. Nor is every comment a personal attack.

...MOVING ON...

I'm actually pretty excited about all of these. The atmosphere functions sound really interesting. I'm very curious to see what the "readings graphed in real-time" looks and sounds like.
I also can't wait to see what the STATUS functions entail. I wonder what, if any, level of interactivity their will be with the ship systems status.
Everything I'm seeing from them is absolutely brilliant. It's more that I would have ever hoped for in a commercially available replica. They're knocking it out of the park, again.

 

[Inquisitor Peregrinus]

To distill it to a neutral essence...

The wardrobe, set, and art-design people who worked on TOS used colors to aid visual storytelling -- now that they were broadcasting in living color on NBC. Some were bright, primary colors. Some were color-tinged grays. Some were muted "pastel" shades. Some became more associated with non-Federation types, for narrative clarity (see: The origin of the red lighting, and brown, bronze, and gold tones for Klingons...). The Starfleet uniforms were supposed to be the same colors as the new color phosphors -- red, green, and blue -- but the velour they used for the Command division was more of an avocado gold that photographed more mustard-y than green. The fabric they used for Kirk's alternate uniform tops was a much more vivid green. And, when they got to the third season, they decided to keep the Command color the same dull gold audiences had gotten used to, when they switched to new fabric.

But I spoke up in support of blspro's observation that the data-entry and data-storage setpieces -- the recorder tapes and the banks of eight rocker switches on just about every desk and console on the ship, regardless of any other function (or none) -- were very muted colors, compared to the brighter stuff elsewhere on the ship and our characters. He, and I, saw a parallel with the data-storage discs in the tricorder, once TWC decided to co with color-coding over moire patterns.

Some people don't see the distinction, and/or don't care. I feel they shouldn't beef in the borscht of those of us who do. I agree that getting anything is nice. Since it is not a finalized, released, take-it-or-leave-it product, we feel free to voice our concerns, objections, hopes, and desires. If not all are met, or even listened to, it doesn't automatically reduce the finished piece to a useless, worthless brick for us. But, as a wise man once said, "What isn't tried won't work." Since those people don't care, so long as we just get a nice tricorder, fine -- sit back, relax, and let us tilt at windmills, because we enjoy it. We -- and TWC -- want to see what can be done to cram as much functionality as we can into this thing without exploding the price point. One of the things I'm going to suggest is an add-on upgrade unit or three for extra things some of us want to see that aren't vital for everyone -- such as video playback -- as with their Pip-Boy 2000 kit (not in kit form, here, obviously, but perhaps something that can be plugged into the lower compartment).

 

[CessnaDriver]

The comms had times where the antenna would stop at an angle and other times just fly all the way back as clearly the stop had broken. How far back does the hood angle on the trics go back as "normal". The MR offering didn't seem to go back far enough. Did we see anything extreme on the show? Basically if it can angle back a little farther than the MR I think that's about right would it not?

 

[NakedMoleRat]

To me, the head swiveling just past the 90 degree point is ideal.