# Wonderfest R2 1/350 TOS Enterprise Youtube Video



## RB (Jul 29, 1998)

Short but nice footage of the lit TOS Enterprise from Youtube member ParanormalSupply






Doesn't look like they have the nacelle motors yet but otherwise...WOW!


----------



## Fozzie (May 25, 2009)

RB said:


> Doesn't look like they have the nacelle motors yet but otherwise...WOW!


The motors were installed and working, but they didn't have them on all the time. This was apparently filmed during one of the "down times". A shame as the spinning blades effect was spectacular.


----------



## jheilman (Aug 30, 2001)

Mine shows the fan blades spinning.


----------



## jheilman (Aug 30, 2001)

The nacelle dome lighting is still not quite right, but they are working on it.


----------



## Steve Mavronis (Oct 14, 2001)

Awesomeness!


----------



## Captain April (May 1, 2004)

Yeah, those nacelle lights still need some work, but otherwise, SQUEEE!!!


----------



## Chrisisall (May 12, 2011)

Ehh, I don't need one. It kinda is okay, but ....

No one is buying this. I'll stop.


----------



## Opus Penguin (Apr 19, 2004)

Chrisisall said:


> Ehh, I don't need one. It kinda is okay, but ....
> 
> No one is buying this. I'll stop.


Hee hee ... nice try. We know you'll be first in line


----------



## jheilman (Aug 30, 2001)

As mentioned elsewhere, the blinking LEDs will be random instead of all-off/all-on. That will really help sell the effect. Of course, looks different in person than on video. The blades are more distinct in person.


----------



## jonboc (Nov 25, 2007)

*Can't wait!*

Looks amazing. Love the shuttle bay and bridge. But yeah, they definitely need to frost the inner domes of the engines...the lights should not be seen as points of light...and they need the random blinking effect...but it's certainly doable. GLad I signed up for 2!


----------



## jheilman (Aug 30, 2001)

The domes are frosted. Maybe they could be diffused even more, but the effect is pretty accurate IMHO. Keep in mind the number of passes the original footage went through the optical printer introducing more and more blur. Of course, if that's the look that's desired, you could always add more diffusion coating inside the domes.


----------



## WarpCore Breach (Apr 27, 2005)

Wow, that looks good!!! And it sure looked like the model sure was garnering a lot of attention from attendees from both clips.


----------



## jheilman (Aug 30, 2001)

That thing was the celebrity of the show.  Well that and Joanna Cassidy.

And rightly so. I never heard who won the test shot giveaway. I just know it wasn't me.


----------



## Fozzie (May 25, 2009)

jheilman said:


> I never heard who won the test shot giveaway. I just know it wasn't me.


I read on another forum that it was a fellow named Dan D'Angelo. But I have no way to verify that.


----------



## JeffG (May 10, 2004)

"Captain, the engines are outta phase but they'll be put right before we leave spacedock! "


----------



## Trekkriffic (Mar 20, 2007)

I think the bussard effect would be helped if there were a couple of LEDs always on to compliment the flashers. Hard to say much though just based on a video.


----------



## Fozzie (May 25, 2009)

Trekkriffic said:


> I think the bussard effect would be helped if there were a couple of LEDs always on to compliment the flashers. Hard to say much though just based on a video.


I believe that is the intent. Either Gary or Jamie (I can't remember which) said something to that effect to me.


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

Wait, they were giving away test shots with Joanna Cassidy?!


----------



## Paulbo (Sep 16, 2004)

John P said:


> Wait, they were giving away test shots with Joanna Cassidy?!


Sheesh. Read the post. They're giving away test shots OF Joanna Cassidy.


----------



## Gary K (Aug 26, 2002)

Fozzie said:


> I believe that is the intent. Either Gary or Jamie (I can't remember which) said something to that effect to me.


The intent is to have 5 amber lights (shaped like Xmas bulbs) always on, plus 5 multi-colored flashers, inside each dome. Jamie said they've got to get the correct circuit boards for the production kits.

Gary


----------



## MLCrisis32 (Oct 11, 2011)

gary k said:


> the intent is to have 5 amber lights (shaped like xmas bulbs) always on, plus 5 multi-colored flashers, inside each dome. Jamie said they've got to get the correct circuit boards for the production kits.
> 
> Gary


there are four lights!!!!


----------



## Opus Penguin (Apr 19, 2004)

Gary K said:


> The intent is to have 5 amber lights (shaped like Xmas bulbs) always on, plus 5 multi-colored flashers, inside each dome. Jamie said they've got to get the correct circuit boards for the production kits.
> 
> Gary


This will make it look perfect. So looking forward to this kit.


----------



## Trek Ace (Jul 8, 2001)

I just hope that the cycle times for the navigation lights are correct with 1.5 seconds "on" and 0.5 seconds "off", like the average time on the original studio model (at 24 fps film speed, it averaged 36 film frames "on" and 12 film frames "off". Master Replicas had this exactly backwards on their 1/350 display models, with only 0.5 seconds "on" and 1.5 seconds "off".


----------



## John Duncan (Jan 27, 2001)

Wow, after looking at the videos....I might be putting my MR TOS E in the dumpster.






















Not really..... :wave:


----------



## Hunch (Apr 6, 2003)

I cant remember wanting a kit this badly since I first saw the Monster Scenes Frankenstien and Pendulum waaaaay up on the hoppy shop shelf when I was six! To be honest, I didn't think I would EVER get this excited about a kit again. Great time to be a modeler!


----------



## Fozzie (May 25, 2009)

Hunch said:


> I cant remember wanting a kit this badly since I first saw the Monster Scenes Frankenstien and Pendulum waaaaay up on the hoppy shop shelf when I was six! To be honest, I didn't think I would EVER get this excited about a kit again. Great time to be a modeler!


I know what you mean. Hmmm. Looks like I've got about 6 months to finish off my current projects and clear off my modeling table...


----------



## fire91bird (Feb 3, 2008)

Did anyone get a release date for the lighting kit? Will it be available at the same time as the Premier edition?


----------



## robiwon (Oct 20, 2006)

Fozzie said:


> I know what you mean. Hmmm. Looks like I've got about 6 months to finish off my current projects and clear off my modeling table...


The Premiere kit will be out in four months, not six. Get a move on, tick tock....


----------



## Fozzie (May 25, 2009)

robiwon said:


> The Premiere kit will be out in four months, not six. Get a move on, tick tock....


Oh, crap, you're right! LOL


----------



## Opus Penguin (Apr 19, 2004)

fire91bird said:


> Did anyone get a release date for the lighting kit? Will it be available at the same time as the Premier edition?


I would like to know this as well as the cost. I asked at the RC2 site about the photo etch detail parts as well. Jamie stated he couldn't give details, price, or release date, but they are focusing on the grill areas of the ship.


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

MLCrisis32 said:


> there are four lights!!!!




Somebody had to say it!


----------



## idman (Apr 11, 2004)

"She will be mine...Oh yes...She will be mine....":wave:


----------



## Trekkriffic (Mar 20, 2007)

"Over four months away, and it still fills the screen."


----------



## galaxy_jason (May 19, 2009)

Trek Ace said:


> I just hope that the cycle times for the navigation lights are correct with 1.5 seconds "on" and 0.5 seconds "off", like the average time on the original studio model (at 24 fps film speed, it averaged 36 film frames "on" and 12 film frames "off". Master Replicas had this exactly backwards on their 1/350 display models, with only 0.5 seconds "on" and 1.5 seconds "off".


Are you talking about the red and green nav lights on the saucer? I think you have it backwards. The "on" time is shorter than the "off" time..


----------



## galaxy_jason (May 19, 2009)

You may want to look at it directly on youtube. Looks choppy embeded here.

Anyway, to me it looks like a flasher with the duty cycle mostly off. Especially in
the scene next to the Boteny Bay.


----------



## ClubTepes (Jul 31, 2002)

Yup, off longer than on.

I think MR got it right.

I'm not sure if the filming model was on some kind of timed circuit, or if the blinking was literally a stage dude with a switch.

Gary, any thoughts?


----------



## Captain April (May 1, 2004)

Probably a flashing Christmas tree light. They did have 'em in those days, y'know...


----------



## pagni (Mar 20, 1999)

Christ! Are we there yet ?!
....I can taste it !


----------



## Trek Ace (Jul 8, 2001)

I'm familiar with that shot. It was one of the earlier shoots at Dunn's from when the _Enterprise _was first moved over from Anderson. The flash rate on that shot is one of the exceptions. It took a while for the flash rate to become consistent. Usually, there was the same person running the box and the lights would have a consistent rate (the one I described). But, on occasion, a different individual would handle it and there would be anomalies in the timing. Double-printing and step-printing (to extend the shot or speed it up) would also show a different timing.


----------



## WEAPON X (Mar 5, 2006)

Looking good!


----------



## fluke (Feb 27, 2001)

I can't even count how may underwoos I have filled since I have 1st heard about this kit. OH SNAP! I'll be right back


----------



## CLBrown (Sep 8, 2010)

Trek Ace said:


> I'm familiar with that shot. It was one of the earlier shoots at Dunn's from when the _Enterprise _was first moved over from Anderson. The flash rate on that shot is one of the exceptions. It took a while for the flash rate to become consistent. Usually, there was the same person running the box and the lights would have a consistent rate (the one I described). But, on occasion, a different individual would handle it and there would be anomalies in the timing. Double-printing and step-printing (to extend the shot or speed it up) would also show a different timing.


Okay, I'll admit that I haven't studied the timing as much as some of you guys seem to have... though it's a fascinating topic. Clearly the INTENT was to model aircraft lamps, which do run on the "brief on, long off" cycle. However, it's entirely possible that this was inconsistent, and even that it may have been reversed at times.

So, Trek Ace... can you please point to places where the timing you claim is the case can be seen? The best approach would be to specify a particular episode and a particular time-stamp during that episode.

(And by the way, for those on the other side of the argument... ie, the posting of Space Seed, above... a "time stamp" would be useful for that as well. Granted, I've watched that episode countless times, but when looking for a particular bit, it's helpful to just skip to the right bit straight away.)

If we can identify the particular clips and shots, and the (approximate) timing of each shot, this would put that topic to rest easily enough, wouldn't it?

As far as I'm concerned, personally, I want my model to be the "short on/long off" cycle... because that's what I expect, from a career observing aircraft running lamps and the like. But if there's a legitimate difference...

... well, that's sort of like arguing that the Enterprise magically transforms from the pilot version(s) to the series version(s) throughout each episode, isn't it? I can accept that, given that it's a representation. I'm one of those who's always trying to figure out what the "theoretical perfect" version... ie, what the models and SFX shots and so forth were attempting, as best as they could, to present.

The trick with that approach is that my conclusions may be different from someone else's conclusions. For example, I view the primary hull grid as being a fine network of applied wires on the hull exterior surface, not as a network of grooves between plate segments... and thus I refuse to accept the "etched gridlines." But another person may, with equal fervor, view the primary hull grid as deep, between-armor-plate grooves, which the original pencil lines were supposed to represent. And since the only "real" ship we have to refer to is the one seen on-screen... neither one can be claimed to be "authoritatively correct." (But it can be claimed that, at a certain level, having actual pencil lines is "authoritatively correct" as far as the model is concerned, albeit not insofar as some hypothetical "real Enterprise" might have been concerned.)

My "Enterprise" may not be the same as YOUR "Enterprise." But in the case of my "Enterprise," the lamps run similarly to modern aircraft running lamps... short-on/long-off.


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

CLBrown said:


> Okay, Clearly the INTENT was to model aircraft lamps, which do run on the "brief on, long off" cycle.


Just to clarify, convention in aircraft is to have 3 position lights. Red on the aircraft left, green on the aircraft right, and white on the tail. These lights are constantly on.

A red rotating beacon on at least the top/center. Mostly a strobe light now.

And white strobe lights, one on each wingtip and sometimes on the tail also.

The beacon and Strobes flash while the position lights are always constant. 

The strobes are typically only on for a very brief instant and off for much longer.

But this is with current technology.


We should check the episode The Tholian Web to see what kind of flashing the lights are doing. I only have the enhanced episode on my computer now. I'll check the bluray later if no one else has.




"The trick with that approach is that my conclusions may be different from someone else's conclusions. For example, I view the primary hull grid as being a fine network of applied wires on the hull exterior surface, not as a network of grooves between plate segments... and thus I refuse to accept the "etched gridlines." But another person may, with equal fervor, view the primary hull grid as deep, between-armor-plate grooves, which the original pencil lines were supposed to represent. And since the only "real" ship we have to refer to is the one seen on-screen... neither one can be claimed to be "authoritatively correct." (But it can be claimed that, at a certain level, having actual pencil lines is "authoritatively correct" as far as the model is concerned, albeit not insofar as some hypothetical "real Enterprise" might have been concerned.)

My "Enterprise" may not be the same as YOUR "Enterprise." But in the case of my "Enterprise," the lamps run similarly to modern aircraft running lamps... short-on/long-off."

Very well put sir!


----------



## RSN (Jul 29, 2008)

CLBrown said:


> Okay, I'll admit that I haven't studied the timing as much as some of you guys seem to have... though it's a fascinating topic. Clearly the INTENT was to model aircraft lamps, which do run on the "brief on, long off" cycle. However, it's entirely possible that this was inconsistent, and even that it may have been reversed at times.
> 
> So, Trek Ace... can you please point to places where the timing you claim is the case can be seen? The best approach would be to specify a particular episode and a particular time-stamp during that episode.
> 
> ...


Off the top of my head, I would look at some of the FX shots used in the third season. Notably, the ones where it is an angle looking at the bridge over the top of the hull. These were much cleaner and clearer shots than those heavily processed shots in the first season. I don't remember the specific episodes, so I hope this helps a little. :thumbsup:


----------



## Prologic9 (Dec 4, 2009)

I took a look at some episodes. I would say anything from a _1on : 1.5off_ to a 1:1 ratio would be fine. I couldn't find any examples where the lights were on longer than they were off. Or any examples where they're off significantly longer than they are on. The remastered version is like this, with _on_ being just a short blip.

A good shot is the rear view closeup looking over the saucer. You can find this shot in _Miri_ and _Doomsday Machine_. (and a ton of others)


----------



## galaxy_jason (May 19, 2009)

OK, watch the "original" on the left. You can see examples of both long-of and short-off in the same episode! 






Safe to say either is correct but in looking through many episodes I think 
long-off short-on is the way to go....


----------



## RSN (Jul 29, 2008)

galaxy_jason said:


> OK, watch the "original" on the left. You can see examples of both long-of and short-off in the same episode!
> 
> COMPARISON-The Tholian Web - YouTube
> 
> ...


This was the shot I was thinking of!! :thumbsup:


----------



## Gregatron (Mar 29, 2008)

Prologic9 said:


> I took a look at some episodes. I would say anything from a _1on : 1.5off_ to a 1:1 ratio would be fine. I couldn't find any examples where the lights were on longer than they were off. Or any examples where they're off significantly longer than they are on. The remastered version is like this, with _on_ being just a short blip.
> 
> A good shot is the rear view closeup looking over the saucer. You can find this shot in _Miri_ and _Doomsday Machine_. (and a ton of others)



This shot was step-printed so as to be in slow-motion most of the time. "The Corbomite Manuever" is the best place to see it without the slo-mo.


----------



## Joeysaddress (Jun 16, 2006)

Did anyone get hi definition photos of the model and if so can you post them?


----------



## jheilman (Aug 30, 2001)

Joeysaddress said:


> Did anyone get hi definition photos of the model and if so can you post them?



Scroll down to post #44. :thumbsup:

http://www.hobbytalk.com/bbs1/showthread.php?t=363965&page=3


----------



## Joeysaddress (Jun 16, 2006)

Thanks!


----------



## Nova Designs (Oct 10, 2000)

Want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want want


----------



## Gregatron (Mar 29, 2008)

Looks like James Small also did a second pilot build using a test shot. Sweet!

And so nice to see the blue neck...

http://www.modelermagic.com/?p=42476


----------



## Opus Penguin (Apr 19, 2004)

Gregatron said:


> Looks like James Small also did a second pilot build using a test shot. Sweet!
> 
> And so nice to see the blue neck...
> 
> http://www.modelermagic.com/?p=42476


Hmmmm .... no grid lines :tongue:


----------



## Edge (Sep 5, 2003)

Opus Penguin said:


> Hmmmm .... no grid lines :tongue:


Pretty cool!

You can see some faint grid lines on the bottom and very faint on the top.


----------



## Prologic9 (Dec 4, 2009)

Edge said:


> Pretty cool!
> 
> You can see some faint grid lines on the bottom and very faint on the top.


But they don't appear to be recessed. 

Have they been greatly diminished, or removed? It seems unlikely that they would fill the lines in given the purpose of the test-shot model.


----------



## Paulbo (Sep 16, 2004)

Prologic9 said:


> But they don't appear to be recessed.
> 
> Have they been greatly diminished, or removed? It seems unlikely that they would fill the lines in given the purpose of the test-shot model.


It's the same generation test shot as was seen at Wonderfest - no difference in tooling or the size of the gridlines.

I have two guesses: 1) Jim used some heavy primer and sanded it down to diminish the appearance of the grid lines, 2) the gridlines are not the horrible horrible horrible abomination that people have said they were.


----------



## MLCrisis32 (Oct 11, 2011)

Gregatron said:


> Looks like James Small also did a second pilot build using a test shot. Sweet!
> 
> And so nice to see the blue neck...
> 
> http://www.modelermagic.com/?p=42476


It just doesn't seem like that tiny stand could hold that beauty up. Man I wish I had more money and room for these models. (I'd love to do a 1/350 Refit but again money and space).


----------



## Trek Ace (Jul 8, 2001)

That's a great build.

It incorporates features of all three primary versions of the model (1st Pilot, 2nd Pilot and early Production version. It's very unique in that the particular configuration shown never existed on the model at any one time.

I would like to have that one, myself.


----------



## Nova Designs (Oct 10, 2000)

I'm sure he filled what lines were there... but MAN that looks amazing!!!


----------



## onigiri (May 27, 2009)

I wonder if anyone will do an aftermarket lower saucer to do the 3 ft miniature.


----------



## swhite228 (Dec 31, 2003)

onigiri said:


> I wonder if anyone will do an aftermarket lower saucer to do the 3 ft miniature.


I hope so.


----------

