Well, I'm not talking about "just the gridlines."I wouldn't want to even think about trying to apply gridlines as a decal. No way and no how. I'd leave them off.
We KNOW that there is going to be a "weathering decal set." It is entirely reasonable to assume that this will include the weathering streaks, the "rust ring," and the like. Whether it reflects the best possible reproduction of the filming state of the model, or the "as seen in the smithsonian today" version, it still unclear (though we know what we'd prefer, I'm certain!).
If there is going to be a big decal sheet with the primary hull weathering... it really only makes sense to have the lines on those sheets, doesn't it?
I can see why you'd want to avoid a decal sheet with nothing but gridlines, though... and that's not what I was suggesting.
Oh, no question... and I know that he has not, HIMSELF, called himself that. I was not saying anything about him... only about the "overly fawning" treatment that a subset of those who post here, or elsewhere, seem to be showing. I just wanted to bring him back down to the same planet as the rest of us in the eyes of those people who are, evidently, in the process of elevating him to Godhood.At no time did Gary Kerr imply he was infallible, but he has carefully studied the 11 footer firsthand. I'd say that makes him more of an authority than a lot of us who have only seen the filming miniature onscreen through the veil of faded f/x prints and low CRT television resolution.
For the record, most people who are elevated to that level in somebody else's eyes end up hating it eventually. Better to think of him as a fellow fan with a lot of expertise. But not to treat him as an "unimpeachable, unquestionable source" as some seem to be doing.
That's all I'm sayin...
I do wonder if, perhaps, they planned on having a light like those on the port and starboard, but ended up leaving it out. The diameter from the P-hull center, and the diameter of the shape itself, does tend to lend itself to that assumption.Calling the upper saucer detail a bow light is really nothing more than a shorthand form of description so we all understand what is being discussed. I also don't accept it as a bow light per se simply because it isn't domed light the port and starboard running lights. I can accept it as a hatch or a sensor of some type. But I'm not bothered by anyone referring to it as a bow light for the sake of specifying what detail they're talking about.
Maybe they put it in, then realized that from certain angles it ended up looking like a "clown nose" on the final ship and they removed it?