# Refit Nacelle Grill Analysis



## marc111 (Nov 10, 2005)

So I wanted to get the blue glowing lines correct on my refit. First to restate the starting point. These are the inner grills. There are 5 lines and they are the grooves between the flats, not the flats themselves.

Looking at the extreeme angles that you can see the glow from I believe both the botoms and the walls of the grooves glow when at warp. At the front all of the lines go right up to the slanting endwall of the grill. 

It is at the rear that we have to figure out the shape. They end at the rear along an overall rounded arc that seems to be symmetrical from top to bottom about the center line.

After looking at a lot of video footage I can only seem to find 3 views of the inner grills when at warp. All three are found in STTMP.

View 1 is looking upwards towards the rear from the front side of the engineering hull up past the pylon to the rear of the grill.
View 2 is looking from the rear upwards towards the nacellle
View 3 is from the rear with thecamera just at the height of the nacelles right at the moment after the asteroid explodes and the Enterprise is framed in normal space against the explosion.

Each of these views distorts the pattern in a different way. For anyone interested I placed tape markers on a nacelle and grill and then photographed the nacelle from as close as I could get to matching the film angles. I then compared my marks to the original footage and any reference details on the nacelles close to the area. From this I have concluded that the pattern is indeed symmetrical from top to bottom. I have also created a set of measurements to use when masking the nacelle.

Each measurement is from the tip of the grill on the clear plastic PL kit grill part. (The tip of the grill itself, NOT the tip of the overall part that includes the glue border.)

Marking the lines from top to bottom as A to E the dimensions to the start (tip) of the glowing line are the distance specified in from the tip:

A 1.875"
B 1.637"
C 1.472"
D 1.637"
E 1.875

If anyone has a view of the E at warp that is a simple near orthographic side view, please post it here as it would provide a really good check point. 

I haven't been able to find one.

Hope this is of use,
Mark


----------



## Gunstar1 (Mar 1, 2007)

I won't be lighting it, but I'd be happy to help figure it out - shouldn't be hard with what I can do with perspectives in Adobe CS2 and I already have all relevant STTMP screencaps - I might take a peek at other movies if it looks the same. (though I won't be lighting it, the surface sheen needs to represent the same area even when unlit - theoretically...)

Mark! When will you update your site?! I've been waiting to see the final look of some of the physical modifications.


----------



## marc111 (Nov 10, 2005)

I hope to have some updates soon.

Any help with the grills is appreciated.

I have gotten slightly sidetracked with some finicky painting details. It took me forever to get a masking of the fantail I was satisfied with so I could do the final primer touchup and real "white" paint coat to the exterior. Its been holding up final assembly of the shuttlebay. I have also been spending time masking the deflector clear part to get it primed light blocked and painted.

Which mods were you curious about so I make sure to get pictures up?

Mark


----------



## marc111 (Nov 10, 2005)

Well I goofed. Even with creful measurement it is tricky trying to check throug perspective / lens distortion. Once I had the masking in place it became apparent that the tips were forming lines that were too linear. 

I searched some moe and found a shot of the ship passing while at warp that had enough characteristincs that I was able to set up the exact same camera shot and correct the numbers. I then correctd the masking anit came out as a match to the movie still. It also seems to look right when viewed in ortho.

The new numbers are:

A 1.658
B 1.470
C 1.410
D 1.470
E 1.658

I will post a pic tomorrow.

Mark


----------



## bigjimslade (Oct 9, 2005)

marc111 said:


> View 1 is looking upwards towards the rear from the front side of the engineering hull up past the pylon to the rear of the grill.
> View 2 is looking from the rear upwards towards the nacellle
> View 3 is from the rear with thecamera just at the height of the nacelles right at the moment after the asteroid explodes and the Enterprise is framed in normal space against the explosion.


Is there supposed to be a photo here?


----------



## marc111 (Nov 10, 2005)

OK here are the analysis photos as promised.
First the best view I could find from STTMP








Now my Kit view using the dimensions I posted above.









My secondary STTMP view








And the corresponding Kit view









To finish things off this is how the grill lines look with a true orthographic shot ( something I could not find in any of the movies.









I think this looks good and hopefully this is helpful
Mark


----------



## bigjimslade (Oct 9, 2005)

I searched through my library of screen caps and was surprised to see how few had the warp engine grill illuminated.


----------



## marc111 (Nov 10, 2005)

That was my problem as well. Big Jim. Did you come across any that were better than the ones I found? I.e. more orthographic. It's a real pain trying to undistort a view.

Mark


----------



## Gunstar1 (Mar 1, 2007)

Attached is an image that is perfect in this case - a pre-production composite shot of the ship, but as far as TMP goes (or any movie image for that matter) the warp lighting shape and length is consistent (they never had any reason to modify it - I did verify this with movies I-V). The image is perfect in that it was taken in such a way that distortion is really only taking place on one axis - the length - so that we can take measurements as a percentage of the whole length. So in this case, imagine that the length of the grille from the most forward angled edge (top) to the very middle end (of the back curve) is 100%. All these measurements start at that same starting reference point (as if that forward end was not angled) and end at the furthest point of termination (they are all angled/curved) 
(oh - my initial measurements in Illustrator were up to 4 decimal places)

1st (top and shortest line): 79.72%
2nd : 81.578%
3rd (Middle and longest): 81.81%

Mark, I don't have time right now to complete the conversion (to the PL kit length), but I think this will give a slightly different measurement (I think this lit part calculation will be a little shorter than what you are showing)

Hopefully this helps, if you haven't already made your permanent mask.


----------



## marc111 (Nov 10, 2005)

Thank you Gunstar1. This picture is helpful but has a worrysome distortion as well. As you look at the back of the nacelle you can see that the curve of the black rear contoru of the grill is foreshortened, making it look like a blunter curve. Also this distortion shows up in the proportions of the rear of the nacelle behind the grill vs the length of the grill. I believe this is lens distortion adding to the normal perspective distortion of the viewing angle.

The proportions of the lines relative to each other that you came up with are close to mine. Even closer when I take some the perspective distortion into account. Where I see a slight discrepancy is that the distance from the tip of the center stripe tip to the back tip of the grill is approximately .3 inches more in your calculations. I think this is inclrrect.

One of the other comparison points I used was the where the center tip falls along the length of the bulge under the nacelle. I.e. how far rearwards did it fall relative to the distance between the point where the rear pylon edge meets the bulge and its tip where it tapers into the hull. The other views seem to agree that the tip falls basicly 1/2 way along this length.

There also seems to bs a bit less camera distortion in the other views as the rear of the nacelle matches in better when compared to other features.


I also spent a fair bit of time with the best view up on my widescreen TV as a stilll frame and holding the enginnering hull, pylon, nacelle assembly at the proper distance and angle to make it visually identical to what I saw on screen. When this was done all of the proportions and distances lined up nicely.

Based on your observations and my own I think I am going to stick with the final set of numbers I gave above as it looks right when I test it. It also foreshortens to pretty exact matches when I try the other views.

Regards,
Mark


----------



## Gunstar1 (Mar 1, 2007)

That's fine - I was trying to convey that because of the camera focal length evident in the pre-production photo, "foreshortening" is about as minimal as it could be. The problem with going with a screencap (of which I have over 300 dedicated to the ship itself from TMP) is that the camera used in filming STTMP is entirely different from anything used anywhere - they custom-made a periscope attachment so that the Enterprise (and anything else) WOULD be very distorted to create the illusion of the ship being bigger than an 8ft model.

From your masking sample the lit area looked a little too long as compared to your tv-photos, so I was just trying to prove that.

The .3"? I think you missed that I used a vertical line as reference for the start point for all grille lines (whereas it is actually a 50% angle) - it's easier to measure from a vertical imaginary line than from an angled real one.


----------



## marc111 (Nov 10, 2005)

Thanks, I appreciate being able to bounce ideas. I need to relook at things again I think. Stay tuned. I agree on the camera distortion. One of my points is that it is evident on the preproduction view too. The nacelle from the grill on back is shortened compared to the real proportions.

Mark


----------



## Gunstar1 (Mar 1, 2007)

Correct, but because of the focal length of the camera and distance to the engine vs distance to dish, the dish is much more distorted than the nacelle. The upper and lower edges of the grille area are pretty much parallel (compared with real parallel lines in Illustrator)

Anyway.... I suppose I should stop beating this dead horse. At least we both agree that the lit area should be much shorter than what people have always made it to be.

Oh I forgot - I'd love to see some shots of your modified nacelles per previous discussions, as well as the bridge dome/abc deck alterations and impulse engines


----------



## bdavis007 (Sep 7, 2008)

Mark, are you planning on backlighting to illuminate the blue lines you've laid down? Why did you choose to paint the blue rather than leave these lines untouched and backlight with a strong blue?


----------



## MartinHatfield (Apr 11, 2004)

bdavis007 said:


> Mark, are you planning on backlighting to illuminate the blue lines you've laid down? Why did you choose to paint the blue rather than leave these lines untouched and backlight with a strong blue?


Actually, that looks like strips of blue tape to me. Similar to what I plan to do with my refit, except I had planned on using Letraset line tape for masking those lines for lighting. I was just gonna put a thin film of transparent blue/purple on the inside of the grill piece.


----------



## marc111 (Nov 10, 2005)

First Gunstar1: Your analysis sent me looking for any better photos I could find in my archive and I found 2. One seems to be another publicity shot at almost the same angle as the one you analyzed ( just more of a real photorather than box art). The second is also a publicity shot but from a rear angle.

Both are confirmed to be publicity shots from the studio spotlighting. Analyzing both of these using the pictures imported into visio for accurate dimensioning yielded 2 diffferent results. Adding measurement for the rear of the grill to nav light and for the pylon to end of the bottom bulge as checks only served to point out where the camera distortion was greatest rather than confirming numbers. In thinking about this and your discussion I noticed one other length clue that I had not paid enough attention to. That is the placement of the center tip vs the shape of the outer contour of the grill area. The grill both slopes outward and tapers in, in that ovaloid fashion as it approaches the rear tip. I have observed in most of the views excepting at least one where perspective is bad, that the center tip seems to be placed a small bit forward of where the taper stops and the slope of the grill flattens out. To the best of my judgement holding the kit up in the same positions as the photos as well as looking at the photos directly this would place the center tip 0.2 inches forward of my numbers. Almost where your numbers would place it. I am getting tired of remasking those lines but I will be moving the tips further forward. Interestingly the deltas between the tips look reasonable as they stand. The new number set then becomes:
A 1.858
B 1.670
C 1.610
D 1.670
E 1.858

As to the blue lines in the pictures: You are correct they are blue masking tape. The tape was cut to 0.060 inch strips and then pressed down into the grooves. The rear tips of the tape were also had their corners trimmed off for a more rounded look. This is masking prior to painting. Only the grooves glow blue. Thus the front of the part must be primed and light blocked. I will use a coat of black followed by silver and then a translucent purple overcoat. Additionally the rear is masked to allow light to the groove area and the rest light blocked.

Finally as to construction details, I hope to have a good update available this weekend. The holiday will let me get some more assembly and painting done.

Regards,
Mark


----------



## GKvfx (May 30, 2008)

Sorry I'm a little late to this thread.... Let me try to explain what these images are.

As the Enterprise model was under construction, Abel & Co. did a series of lighting tests - testing the exposure ranges for the various incandescent, neon, and strobe lighting on the model. At this point, there was no paint on the model, and the neon in the warp nacelles, saucer, and engineering hull caused the entire structure to glow. These are a couple of frames from a series of exposure wedges. If the slate is accurate, this stuff was shot in the late summer of 1978 - before Trumbull took over the Enterprise shots.

One frame just has the warp neon 'on' with no additional lighting, the other has some external light shining onto the nacelle to balance out the exposure (likely to see if they can combine the neon pass with the beauty pass).

You *cannot* trust the color or exposure of these images. The filmstock they used has shifted in the 30 years since this was shot and has not been corrected. Also, I chose the best exposure for detail - something kinda bright. But on the photo on the left, you can get an idea of the spread/pattern of the grill/neon.

One other caveat - since this was taken well before the Enterprise went before the cameras 'for real', there is the possibility that they revised something. At this point, the model featured an entirely different bridge dome and planetary sensor which was later changed. I don't know if they revised the warp grills. 

Hope this helps.


----------



## marc111 (Nov 10, 2005)

Thanks GKvfx. This is interesting. Two things stand out to me, indicating that yes indeed they made some changes prior to buttoning up the nacelles. 

First the ends of the lines are in an almost perfect vertical line. Looking at the movie shots this is definately not the case for the finished view. Even accounting for distortion and perspective the straight line of tips just wouldn't come out like we see it.

Second, the tips are back within the ovaloid curved narrowing at the rear of the grill pattern. They never show up that far back in the movie shots.

Thanks for posting this. Its rare to get to see "in process" shots.

Mark


----------



## marc111 (Nov 10, 2005)

OK one last view. I was looking for a view to confirm the rear contour of the grill outline and accidently found this. It is a portion of one of the 1992 exhibit photos. It is close to an ortho in the necessary dimensions. I added reference lines and used visio to size the picture to match the kit part. What I noticed in this photo is that the grooves along most of their length match the color tones of the flats. However at the back the grooves show up distinctly dark. This might be light masking showing up. Hmmm.








When I match it to the kit nacelle piece the grill opening matches. If my masking conclusion is correct then it should show a pattern that can be compared to my previous numbers. I then overlaid my grill with the tape masking. Results:

1) The point of my center tape mask matches the forward end of the dark groove. Conclusion the pattern is starting at the proper place.

2) The middle two line tips then match the end of the dark line as well to within less than .01 in.

3) The outer line is less distinct so there is some question here. My distance seems ok but I cannot prove it from the photo.

I think these really are masking lines showing up. It also look likes if they are, they confirm my final pattern numbers remarkably closely.

Regards,
Mark


----------



## GKvfx (May 30, 2008)

Another thing - and I don't want to come off as a jerk here - the appearance of the grills, especially when lit, will have a lot to do with how they are photographed. Exposure, filters, and filmstocks can all affect the amount of glow around the grills. Also, you'll be viewing the model with your own two eyes. That alone will give you a different look.

From what I've seen so far, I think you've got it.

Gene (who has spent way too much time in the past over analyzing things)


----------



## Gunstar1 (Mar 1, 2007)

Here is that model, pre-final Taylor/Probert redesign:









not what should be used in this case.


Mark I think those measurements are good now - I think that pic you found pretty well proves it too - the image I originally posted is part of a production publicity photo composite that was used for numerous things back in '79. Certainly not "box art". Looks grainy because it was scanned from an old printed document.


----------



## marc111 (Nov 10, 2005)

Thanks Gunstar1, I appreciate seeing the other pre movie view. I am going with those final numbers. Now that you let us know the source I can see why the nacelle photo looks like it does. The graininess led me to believe it was a "box art" scan. Thanks for the correction. The grills are now primed and awaiting painting. I am working on fixing the left/right mistake on the torpedo piece.

Regards,
Mark


----------



## CaliOkie (Dec 31, 2007)

My understanding from what I have read over the years is that you will not find the lights lit in the nacelles after ST-TMP. By the time TWOK was filmed that neon light system was burned out and deemed too expensive to replace. Every time you see warp nacelle lights after ST-TMP they are produced with special effects animation.

When the model kit first came out, they included a nice glossy photo of the model that appeared to be photographed for publicity purposes. All the lights are on in the photo, but the angle prevents a good view of the inner nacelle lights. 

Interestingly, the area around the rectangular airlock on the side of the saucer is painted the same orange/gold color that is found in the triangles above and below the attitude control thrusters. This may have been how the model appeared in the first movie, but, if you look closely, that area is never seen in that one. This was changed before TWOK to a light grey color.

I have never seen anyone model it with that color. It would be interesting to see if anyone can answer that question definitively -- was that area orange/gold during filming of the first movie, or was it painted even before then. 

Of course, minor changes were no doubt being made right up to filming. And, if I am not mistaken, some painting was done on the model with each successive sequel -- a major paint change occurred between III and IV and again between IV and V.


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

Gunstar, that image you posted always had me wondering why the models have the inboard slats flat, when they are quite clearly concave in shape. 

I found an image that explains the lighting at the front of the slats: you can see that the slats move in 90 degrees and curve into the concave shape! 

Magnify the image and look closely and you'll see what I mean!


----------



## Gunstar1 (Mar 1, 2007)

You are saying that they start out flat and then transition to concave as they head towards the back? No, that is an illusion created by the dead-center flash from the camera, making it seem like there is no concave curve due to absence of shadow.

Here is a better view










When seen in the movie, the darkness of the grilles plus the neon thru the grille slats, and the fact that the warp light goes even underneath that forward cover, all can give the illusion of flatness


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

No, look very closely at the edges of those slats. They are already concave as they head forward. If you look at the CU image, you'll see that as they get right up to that block, they curve inboard individually. Note that the edges at the block are curved, not straight. Tomorrow, I'll overlay the image with lines to make what I am seeing clearer.


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

Ok, here is the CU with lines and curves put in with Paint. Compare this with the one without the lines in extreme close up: the curving of the slats as they hit the forward block is noticeable.


----------



## starseeker2 (Jun 13, 2008)

Inverted, with the brightness and contrast messed with, is your second attachment from above. It's much easier to see elusive detail by messing with the image, even if it's just a simple inversion.


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

Thanks, Starseeker! That does make it clearer.... It's interesting how they constructed it. Now for the correction pieces from our friendly garage kit makers....


----------



## marc111 (Nov 10, 2005)

I think I am still at the mildly skeptic level. The VERY slight possible turn outwards to the flats could be an artifact of the photograph to my eyes. It is so minor that It would be silly to adjust on the PL Kit scale.

My 2 cents
Mark


----------



## Raist3001 (Oct 23, 2003)

marc111 said:


> It is so minor that It would be silly to adjust on the PL Kit scale.


Guy who pays a ginormous amount of attention to detail say what? 

Nice to hear that there is a detail to minor for you to adjust Mark


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

It may be a minor detail to others, but it is the only way to reconcile a set of concave engine grill slats to the form dictated by the forward engine block. You'll notice that in the other postings where the front of the slats are lit, there is a clear concave structure visible. It is because of the slats turning toward ship's centerline that this is visible this way.


----------



## marc111 (Nov 10, 2005)

charonjr, Trust me I understand minor details and how once noticed, they can bug you. I thought more about your pictures and I was not seeing as much evidence in them as you did. However it did cause me to go back and look through my picture files. I came up with this detail from a photo of the studio model. Now unless I am missing something this seems to show the flat outer surface of the "slats" of the inner nacelle grill as running straight and true with no curveture towards the ships centerline at all. They simply run directly under the outer white surface leaving a cresent gap between them and the outer detail. This is just like on the outside grill except the cresent here is dark and on the outside grill it is lit.

What do you think?

Raist. Even I have a limit I think. Although if you look at my torpedo port thread you may be asking where it is. (g)

Regards,
Mark


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

Thanks, Mark.... Analyzing....


----------



## starseeker2 (Jun 13, 2008)

Most detail I could pull out of it.


----------



## starseeker2 (Jun 13, 2008)

Let me make that larger...


----------



## marc111 (Nov 10, 2005)

Thanks Starseeker. They still look straight and flat to me with a cresent shaped gap to the outer vertical flange. Probably an internal wall that looks black on film.

Thoughts?
Mark


----------



## starseeker2 (Jun 13, 2008)

I always assumed that tho the grills were different, that the mechanics of them, outside and inside, would be the same. On the outside, all the fine grill lines are parallel and straight and simply end where they meet the lens. I personally don't see any curvature on either the out or in, except just the bottom thick grill line on that one shot of the inside. ??? Everything else there seems straight. Given that there are about 994 other things on the nacelles that need to be fixed, most of them very noticeable, I don't know if I'd add #995 to my list.


----------



## starseeker2 (Jun 13, 2008)

Another outside shot, showing the uneven light source, and another inside shot of limited use. The two long streaks are shadows cast by the raised grills. From ILM Art of Special Effects, from Khan.


----------



## ZStar (Sep 7, 2005)

Here is another angle. It isn't the steadiest of images but I think it is sufficiently close up that it shows the area in question. I have really boosted the gamma to bring out the shadowed details. I don't see the grills curving outward from the nacelle centerline. It looks to me like the grills run straight behind the cowling leaving a curved gap similar to the lighted one on the outboard side.


----------



## Gunstar1 (Mar 1, 2007)

I think it's safe to say the last nail is in the coffin on this one.

Next issue......


----------



## Antimatter (Feb 16, 2008)

TMP had no illumination on the grills. It was only in the directors version that it appeared.


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

Thanks Z-Star!

Pull the nail out of that coffin. If you look at Z-star's image, you'll notice that each slat casts a lower shadow that gets thicker as the slat curves outward. For this to happen the inbetween depressions would have to be flat as you've described. But the shadows could only do what they do if the slats themselves curved outward. 

Additionally, the curved brightness reflecting of the slats is indicative of the curve's beginning.


----------



## Gunstar1 (Mar 1, 2007)

Antimatter said:


> TMP had no illumination on the grills. It was only in the directors version that it appeared.


You must never have seen or owned the original version then. I grew up watching it hundreds of times.

If you doubt all the photographic and film evidence pre-silly-director's edition, there is no point in debating the issue.


----------



## Gemini1999 (Sep 25, 2008)

Gunstar1 said:


> You must never have seen or owned the original version then. I grew up watching it hundreds of times.
> 
> If you doubt all the photographic and film evidence pre-silly-director's edition, there is no point in debating the issue.


I'd have to agree with you there. I've still got my VHS copy of TMP, which I watched a couple of weeks ago. The blue illumination on the inboard section of the nacelle grills was always there from the very beginning.

Bryan


----------



## ZStar (Sep 7, 2005)

charonjr,

I think the appearance of curvature is an optical illusion. I believe that the brightening that you are seeing and attributing to outward curvature is the result of a sloppy post TMP paint job and image distortion. In the attached image I have marked the two most prominent patches. It looks to me like airbrushed paint blew by the cowling and any masking to put a light colored dusting on the grill area parallel to the cowl. Image compression techniques often tend to thicken the bright edges of boundaries. I have often seen apparent shape distortions at high contrast edges in images. Those kinds of artifacts are common due to the combination pixelation and compression of digital images.


----------



## Antimatter (Feb 16, 2008)

Can you post a grab from the original?


----------



## ZStar (Sep 7, 2005)

Antimatter,

Are you asking me? 

The image I posted is clipped straight from the original. The left hand part has my arrows indicating what I believe are patches of over spray. The right hand part is unaltered. I think the over spray follows the whole edge of the cowl to varying degrees. I was pointing out what I think are the two most prominent patches in this particular image.

I apologize if I was being dense as neutronium. I'm reaching the end of my day. It just occurred to me that you might have been asking for a link to the original image. It can be found on the st-bilder website. Here is the link to his TOS-E and Refit thumbnails. Go to page 7, scroll down, second row up, on the far right.

http://www.st-bilder.de/html/constitution2.html


----------



## woof359 (Apr 27, 2003)

when looking at the pictures I noticed there wernt any side bosses on the secondary hull of red pin striping.


----------



## Antimatter (Feb 16, 2008)

Gunstar1 said:


> You must never have seen or owned the original version then. I grew up watching it hundreds of times.
> 
> If you doubt all the photographic and film evidence pre-silly-director's edition, there is no point in debating the issue.



Do you have a screengrab you could post? I've looked and never saw it in the original.


----------



## Antimatter (Feb 16, 2008)

ZStar said:


> Antimatter,
> 
> Are you asking me?
> 
> ...


No, Sorry.


----------



## Gunstar1 (Mar 1, 2007)

Antimatter said:


> Do you have a screengrab you could post? I've looked and never saw it in the original.


Man, no way will I take the time to transfer a vhs to my computer just for a screencap to show someone to prove a point. 

Here's an easier way - STII is full of stock footage from STTMP. Attached is a shot used in TWOK just before Enterprise runs into Khan. It was originally shot for 2 shots in TMP - just before E goes into 1st successful warp, and just after, sped up. This cap is taken from the STII dvd to which no changes were ever made.


oops - sorry that was a sloppy capture, but I ain't doin it again!


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

Working on this.... (what's that horse doing over there?)


----------



## Antimatter (Feb 16, 2008)

Gunstar1 said:


> Man, no way will I take the time to transfer a vhs to my computer just for a screencap to show someone to prove a point.



What else have you got to do? :wave:


----------



## bdavis007 (Sep 7, 2008)

*Just another pic*

I found these full model lit in-front-of-blue-screen shots that I wasn't sure if had been seen.


I also found a exterior lit, no warp shot from the rear of the unlit nacelles that is too dark for my stupid scanner to get right - but it is clear the outside black surface and the recessed "vents" where the neon is revealed are flat from front to back and there is now bowing from top to bottom.


----------



## Gunstar1 (Mar 1, 2007)

your blue screen shots did not post


----------



## bigjimslade (Oct 9, 2005)

ZStar said:


> charonjr,
> 
> I think the appearance of curvature is an optical illusion. I believe that the brightening that you are seeing and attributing to outward curvature is the result of a sloppy post TMP paint job and image distortion. In the attached image I have marked the two most prominent patches. It looks to me like airbrushed paint blew by the cowling and any masking to put a light colored dusting on the grill area parallel to the cowl. Image compression techniques often tend to thicken the bright edges of boundaries. I have often seen apparent shape distortions at high contrast edges in images. Those kinds of artifacts are common due to the combination pixelation and compression of digital images.


What I'd be curious to know is what they did to block light except from the groves. The high parts look purple, the same color as the rest.


----------



## bigjimslade (Oct 9, 2005)

starseeker2 said:


> I always assumed that tho the grills were different, that the mechanics of them, outside and inside, would be the same. On the outside, all the fine grill lines are parallel and straight and simply end where they meet the lens. I personally don't see any curvature on either the out or in, except just the bottom thick grill line on that one shot of the inside. ??? Everything else there seems straight. Given that there are about 994 other things on the nacelles that need to be fixed, most of them very noticeable, I don't know if I'd add #995 to my list.


IMHO, the grill lines are all parallel to the ground. They appear to be machined--something that would be difficult to do if they were not so aligned.


----------



## bigjimslade (Oct 9, 2005)

starseeker2 said:


> I always assumed that tho the grills were different, that the mechanics of them, outside and inside, would be the same. On the outside, all the fine grill lines are parallel and straight and simply end where they meet the lens. I personally don't see any curvature on either the out or in, except just the bottom thick grill line on that one shot of the inside. ??? Everything else there seems straight. Given that there are about 994 other things on the nacelles that need to be fixed, most of them very noticeable, I don't know if I'd add #995 to my list.


IMHO, the grill lines are all parallel to the ground. They appear to be machined--something that would be difficult to do if they were not so aligned.


----------



## bdavis007 (Sep 7, 2008)

Gunstar1 said:


> your blue screen shots did not post


I see it as a thumbnail in the post and they embiggen quite nicely when clicked... I'm not sure what else to do...


----------



## bdavis007 (Sep 7, 2008)

bigjimslade said:


> What I'd be curious to know is what they did to block light except from the groves. The high parts look purple, the same color as the rest.


The material is a grooved flat black material. I would guess the neon light comes in from one the sides of the recessed vent to prevent a hot spot in the light source. I'm not sure how you'd machine that but it's like a "Z" with all right angles with the top horizontal part of the "Z" being the exposed surface of the nacelle strip.


----------



## Gunstar1 (Mar 1, 2007)

bdavis007 said:


> I see it as a thumbnail in the post and they embiggen quite nicely when clicked... I'm not sure what else to do...


you have 2 images posted - both are screen shots from the dvd - I see no shots of the ship in front of a blue screen


----------



## SteveR (Aug 7, 2005)

bdavis007 said:


> The material is a grooved flat black material.


Actually, it was coated with engineer's blue layout ink, which makes it purple. In TMP, check the shot right after drydock as the sun pokes out behind the Earth and the big E. You can see a purple highlight on the ribs.

As for letting light through, the material may be a series of bars with space between -- not a solid grooved piece. Or the bars may be epoxied to a long piece of clear acrylic or plexi for stability.


----------



## bdavis007 (Sep 7, 2008)

Oh, sorry - I have a bad habit of referring to those simple 2-3 layer composite shots as blue screen shots when the lit model is simply sitting in front of the blue screen and all the action is in the VFX composite...


----------



## Gunstar1 (Mar 1, 2007)

That's ok (that's what I figured) - I just got excited when you said shot in front of a blue screen as if it was a production photo while they were filming - something which I have maybe seen only one of ever.


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

Sorry guys,

I haven't had a chance to do any further work on this. When and if I can find definitive proof, I'll write again. But I am still intrigued by the possibility of the "bend".

I think my main point, otherwise, is that the inner grill/slats are a concave feature all the way to the "lens". The models released so far have have shown this to be a flat feature with the exception of the AMT/Lesney Enterprise.

I don't remember if the 1/350 Enterprise does the same: flat, as opposed to concave?

Maybe someone could post a pic of the clear inner grill part (mine are in storage due to moving).


----------

