# Pondering the new TOS R2 Enterprise



## kdaracal (Jan 24, 2009)

Hey, guys.

I'm thinking and researching the new upcoming release of the 1/350 scale original ship. I haven't done an Enterprise since my youth. (1970's)

I have to admit, I'm intimidated by all the awesome work I see here. But I figure with no "azteking", could a guy rattle-can one out, if I buy some of the bells and whistles? I like the lights, of course. But I also saw the weathered decals. I wonder if you can make them look good? The photos look great. But a shiny decal? Sounds weird. 

I'd LOVE to hear some opinions on the "build-ability" of this kit. I'm not interested in starting any arguments about accuracy. 

I'd build it in regular version with spray cans. I'd probably buy the lights and weathered decals only. 

Opinions? Waste of money for such an expensive kit with my skill level?
Honesty appreciated. 

:wave:


----------



## Fozzie (May 25, 2009)

Not a waste of time at all! Not everyone has the skill, equipment, or desire to use an airbrush and you can get quite a good finish with rattle cans with just a little care.


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

I'm guessing that the kit will be well engineered and will go together well. 

I would expect some putty will be needed here and there, but I would guess no super human modeling skills will be needed to get a great looking Enterprise. At least I hope not.

For me, I think the lighting kit will be a good idea. Other than simple lighting I need a plug and play lighting kit. If I'm blowing $150 on the kit, Blowing another $100 or so on a lighting set designed for her might not be a bad Idea. I could probably come up with a home grown light set up but The spinning nacelle caps scare me.

I don't see the need for the weathering decals, I think the paint on the Smithsonian filming model looks horrible, but thats just me. 

At this point I can't really see a need for the photo etch kit but that could change when I see whats in it.


----------



## SteveR (Aug 7, 2005)

Stock up on spray cans! It's a big one!


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

Thats a good point, at $6-10 for each Tamiya can that will add up fast!


----------



## steve123 (Feb 9, 2009)

Here are the plug and play lighting kits:

























I'd use big cans of white then use the expensive lacquers for the finish coat.

Steve


----------



## Chrisisall (May 12, 2011)

kdaracal said:


> I have to admit, I'm intimidated by all the awesome work I see here.


YOU? I detect an overabundance of humility...:thumbsup: if you want it, go for it, you're MORE than capable of turning out a great Enterprise. Every artist will put his or her unique stamp on this model. Don't rush, experiment along the way, trust your inner Scotty, and you'll surprise yourself, and us too!


----------



## kdaracal (Jan 24, 2009)

steve123 said:


> Here are the plug and play lighting kits:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Hey, will those be needed? Are the lights provided not controlled?

Just asking..........


----------



## kdaracal (Jan 24, 2009)

Thanks for all the input, gentlemen! I really need to put my mind on this one some more............


----------



## kdaracal (Jan 24, 2009)

> _trust your inner Scotty_


I just don't want someone calling it a "garbage scow" or having to haul away as garbage!


----------



## Chrisisall (May 12, 2011)

Just a small thing here, I use rattle cans exclusively, and it just tales some creative masking, spraying legerdemain, and a degree of intrepidity.


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

I use both an airbrush and rattle cans, but with the quality of the Tamiya spray paint it makes it harder and harder to break out the old Paasche.


----------



## Captain April (May 1, 2004)

Thank you, Mr. Spock.

Seriously, there are a number of big cans available in the average hardware department that should do just dandy for the overall color, and for a helluva lot less than a rattle can from Ye Olde Local Hobby Shoppe (I think I might use that if I ever open up my own store...). My personal preference is regular old gray primer, although considering the past issues with PL decals, something in a gloss might be preferable.


----------



## Chrisisall (May 12, 2011)

I am not Spock.


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

Spock?
Thanks I guess. 

I use the hardware shop cans for my model rockets, after all a tree will eat them sooner or later. But for a high quality model or my prop replicas I spring
for quality paints. If I'm going to spend $150 on the kit plus another $100+ on aftermarkets I'm not going to skimp on the paint.

I'll probably Prime with Mr. Surfacer and finish with Tamiya, rattle can or airbrush. Gloss, decal, then hit her with a matt coat.


----------



## Chrisisall (May 12, 2011)

mach7 said:


> Spock?
> Thanks I guess.


No, he meant I'm Spock, but I'm not, 
oh whatever.:lol:


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

Chrisisall said:


> No, he meant I'm Spock, but I'm not,
> oh whatever.:lol:


Hey, I want to be Spock! I never get to be Spock!


----------



## jgoldsack (Apr 26, 2004)

Here is the paint you want for the TOS E

http://www.color-swatches.com/ace/colors-for-your-life/shady-cove/d35-4/swatch.html


----------



## Warped9 (Sep 12, 2003)

I'm still undecided which version I want build: series production or enhanced Pike era. By "enhanced" I mean making a _Cage_ version but with some added detail and lighting as if it were for series production.


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

I'll build the production version. 

One thing I am rethinking. I painted my small PL E in the light grey of the filming model. For this one I might go with a more whiter color. More what I saw on screen.


----------



## Warped9 (Sep 12, 2003)

One of the things I dislike about the cgi model in TOS-R was how dark they made the ship look. It rarely looked right to me. I, too, would prefer a lighter overall shade.


----------



## Chrisisall (May 12, 2011)

Warped9 said:


> One of the things I dislike about the cgi model in TOS-R was how dark they made the ship look. It rarely looked right to me. I, too, would prefer a lighter overall shade.


I actually preferred the grey over the white. White is just so, I dunno, SATURN rocket.....:lol:


----------



## Warped9 (Sep 12, 2003)

Chrisisall said:


> I actually preferred the grey over the white. White is just so, I dunno, SATURN rocket.....:lol:


No, not white, but a lighter tone of grey than the way it looked on TOS-R.


----------



## hal9001 (May 28, 2008)

mach7 said:


> Hey, I want to be Spock! I never get to be Spock!


Hey, how come I can't be Spock?

Like someone else said (sorry I fogot who)(too lazy to go back and look), the weathering on the Smithsonian E looks awful!

Besides, I'm sure as powerful as the Federation is they would at least have an orbiting Starship 'car wash', right? Keep her clean is my two cents.

Like some else said too, it should be a well engineered kit.

hal9001-


----------



## CLBrown (Sep 8, 2010)

Those who've joined the "1701 club" and have seen the regular update emails have seen how the kit is going to go together. It's actually a really nicely laid-out design, though I fully intend to supplement the styrene with a rigid internal structure (no matter how nicely made the plastic parts are, they'll inevitably "droop" over time, unless reinforced with material which does not "relax" under constant loading).

Construction should be clean and easy to assemble and should make for a pretty easy build overall. The main issues, frankly, will have to do with how you handle the thing during painting. You'll have to decide whether to paint it in subassemblies then do a final assembly, or put the whole thing together and paint as a unit. I'm leaning, strongly, towards the latter, for the sole reason that I really don't want to have any "imperfections" and doing subassemblies will inevitably leave visible seams where the subassemblies go together (and for this ship, the weathering I normally use to mask those seams simply won't be there).

It's really not going to be too hard to do. If you can find the right paint, "rattle cans" might work... but be aware that no two cans will ever match "perfectly." So you'll want to paint the entire thing in a layer with one can, then do another layer with another can, and so forth, rather than switching cans in mid-layer.

It should look just great even if you don't go too crazy with the build... and it's a well-designed kit.


----------



## kdaracal (Jan 24, 2009)

jgoldsack said:


> Here is the paint you want for the TOS E
> 
> http://www.color-swatches.com/ace/colors-for-your-life/shady-cove/d35-4/swatch.html


Bookmarked!


----------



## kdaracal (Jan 24, 2009)

Warped9 said:


> One of the things I dislike about the cgi model in TOS-R was how dark they made the ship look. It rarely looked right to me. I, too, would prefer a lighter overall shade.


I concur.


----------



## kdaracal (Jan 24, 2009)

> _the weathering on the Smithsonian E looks awful!_


Agreed. Again.


----------



## Opus Penguin (Apr 19, 2004)

I too am a little intimidated but look forward to doing this. I pre-ordered the light kit and photo etched parts. I have even invested in an airbrush, compressor, respirator, and all other accessories to do this model. I am hoping it turns out great because I plan to tackle the Refit next, once I get my experience on this one.


----------



## kdaracal (Jan 24, 2009)

> _You'll have to decide whether to paint it in sub-assemblies then do a final assembly, or put the whole thing together and paint as a unit._


That's always a big decision for all my models.......good food for thought.


----------



## kdaracal (Jan 24, 2009)

> _I plan to tackle the Refit next, once I get my experience on this one._


But the dang azteking. I have seen sooo many beauties on the forum. _Pearl_ this and _mask_ that. What a challenge!


----------



## kdaracal (Jan 24, 2009)

> _I too am a little intimidated but look forward to doing this._


It's a huge dang financial and space commitment!


----------



## Opus Penguin (Apr 19, 2004)

jgoldsack said:


> Here is the paint you want for the TOS E
> 
> http://www.color-swatches.com/ace/colors-for-your-life/shady-cove/d35-4/swatch.html


I plan to get a can of this stuff to have enough for several coats with my airbrush if necessary. I bet ACE will have a flood of requests for this color in a few months.


----------



## Chrisisall (May 12, 2011)

kdaracal said:


> But the dang azteking. I have seen sooo many beauties on the forum. _Pearl_ this and _mask_ that. What a challenge!


Simple is an artistic challenge, complicated is just time.
IMO, it's harder to do an impressive TOS E, than a Refit E.


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

I think I will paint all the parts, build her, and then putty/sand the seams, mask the seams and respray.


----------



## Zombie_61 (Apr 21, 2004)

Chrisisall said:


> Just a small thing here, I use rattle cans exclusively, and it just tales some creative masking, spraying legerdemain, and a degree of intrepidity.


This. When you've used rattle cans as long as I (we?) have, you tend to get pretty creative when it comes to masking and such. The most difficult thing I can think of will be finding a color (or colors) that is (are) a close enough match.

BTW, with all this talk of Tamiya paints, does anyone know if they've resolved their labeling and earthquake/tsunami issues and started shipping to the U.S. again?


----------



## Paulbo (Sep 16, 2004)

Zombie_61 said:


> ...BTW, with all this talk of Tamiya paints, does anyone know if they've resolved their labeling and earthquake/tsunami issues and started shipping to the U.S. again?


Yup: http://www.hobbytalk.com/bbs1/showthread.php?t=365340


----------



## btbrush (Sep 20, 2010)

Or if you prefer to airbrush with an acrylic, bring your swatch into Lowes and we can make you a 1/2 pint sample in Satin for $3. Just sayin'.
Hmmm, a whiter shade of grey. I feel a song coming on.


----------



## Opus Penguin (Apr 19, 2004)

kdaracal said:


> But the dang azteking. I have seen sooo many beauties on the forum. _Pearl_ this and _mask_ that. What a challenge!


THAT is the biggest challenge. But I agree with other posts ... I think it is the time to take doing it, not the difficulty. I plan to have multiple bottles filled with red, green, blue, and gold pearlescent paint so I can switch back and forth. I just hope mine looks half a s good as Trekmodeler's version.

Anyway, back to TOS-E. with the Shady Cove can from ACE, I hope to have the base coat of the model with no problem. Weathering will be another issue. I don't want to use the decals, but with an airbrush I am worried about over weathering (like the current condition of the big E at the Smithsonian). The rust ring won't be an issue with the airbrush. However, I have weathered models using ground pastel chalk and that worked really well. I may stick to what I know. I just haven't decided yet so any weathering suggestions I am open to.


----------



## jbond (Aug 29, 2002)

I would definitely go with pastels rather than the weathering decals; pastels are easy to control and you can get some great, subtle effects with them.

...and speaking of "structural integrity"...I'm beginning to think it's a dream. I have a Master Replicas Enterprise which has always looked great...it has a metal armature supporting everything. Recently I had photos taken of it for a poster for Geek magazine, and from 10 feet away or so there is noticeable nacelle droop. Nothing radical but it's there.


----------



## CLBrown (Sep 8, 2010)

jbond said:


> ...and speaking of "structural integrity"...I'm beginning to think it's a dream. I have a Master Replicas Enterprise which has always looked great...it has a metal armature supporting everything. Recently I had photos taken of it for a poster for Geek magazine, and from 10 feet away or so there is noticeable nacelle droop. Nothing radical but it's there.


OUCH! That sorta sucks... 

It's entirely practical to avoid that, but doing so means having a SUPER-ROBUST internal structure... ie, "total overkill" is how it will seem to most folks. The model, as provided, will look good for a long time... but the torsional loads which the pylons will see will be constant and unavoidable, and ALL PLASTIC "flows" under load unless it's so cold that it's in the "glass" state... in which case, any shock or impact will shatter it.

My own solution is going to involve a hardwood interior framework... nearly solid, in fact... with cutout areas for internal "setpieces" and so forth, and with the kit parts applied as a skin over that. I'm going with hardwood because the stiffness to weight ratio is actually significantly better than sheetmetal armatures will be... and that it's easier to work with than metal (I can use both fasteners and adhesive, as appropriate, to put the frame together). Well-cured hardwood won't warp over time (by contrast, using pine 2x4 type material would be a disaster waiting to happen!)

Most people will be happy with the kit parts "as supplied"... it's about as robust of a structure as you could accomplish using injection-molded styrene... but I want mine to be around long after I'm gone


----------



## Trekkriffic (Mar 20, 2007)

jbond said:


> I would definitely go with pastels rather than the weathering decals; pastels are easy to control and you can get some great, subtle effects with them.


Yes. Pastels work well. Especially if you do your initial basecoat, apply the weathering rather heavily, then overspray with more of your basecoat to mute them. I've also gotten some good results using water based gel ink pens. My 1/1000 build was a good practice run for how I will weather the big girl.



CLBrown said:


> My own solution is going to involve a hardwood interior framework... nearly solid, in fact... with cutout areas for internal "setpieces" and so forth, and with the kit parts applied as a skin over that.


Now that sounds like a great idea!


----------



## steve123 (Feb 9, 2009)

Well if nothing else, you got the debating society out the the doldrums..
Now if you were actually building one...


Steve


----------



## kdaracal (Jan 24, 2009)

Lots of great ideas and no bickering! I love it! Thanks to all. 

(But I did notice some rivets missing on the interior of the shuttle bay docking area.........)

Sorry. I'm being an a** again.


----------



## Trekkriffic (Mar 20, 2007)

Opus Penguin said:


> I plan to get a can of this stuff to have enough for several coats with my airbrush if necessary. I bet ACE will have a flood of requests for this color in a few months.


Here's what Shady Cove looks like airbrushed on over weathering pastels:

http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r259/Trekriffic/TOS Enterprise 1-1000 scale/IMG_1443.jpg
http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r259/Trekriffic/TOS Enterprise 1-1000 scale/IMG_1456.jpg


----------



## Opus Penguin (Apr 19, 2004)

Very nice. Glad to see I am on the right track.


----------



## kdaracal (Jan 24, 2009)

Trekkriffic said:


> Here's what Shady Cove looks like airbrushed on over weathering pastels:
> 
> http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r259/Trekriffic/TOS Enterprise 1-1000 scale/IMG_1443.jpg
> http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r259/Trekriffic/TOS Enterprise 1-1000 scale/IMG_1456.jpg


Looks dang close to me.


----------



## CLBrown (Sep 8, 2010)

kdaracal said:


> Looks dang close to me.


Shady Cove is a bit more on the purple/blue range than the color I THINK I see. "Concrete" has that slight olive tint which, to my eye, better matches the color of the model.

But the model isn't EXACTLY what was seen on-screen, either. What was seen on-screen was alternatively whitish, or pale blue, most of the time. So... "Shady Cove" will do the trick just fine, I think. It's pretty close. But I really think that "Concrete" is a better match. For what it's worth...


----------



## Trekkriffic (Mar 20, 2007)

CLBrown said:


> Shady Cove is a bit more on the purple/blue range than the color I THINK I see. "Concrete" has that slight olive tint which, to my eye, better matches the color of the model.
> 
> But the model isn't EXACTLY what was seen on-screen, either. What was seen on-screen was alternatively whitish, or pale blue, most of the time. So... "Shady Cove" will do the trick just fine, I think. It's pretty close. But I really think that "Concrete" is a better match. For what it's worth...


You probably already know this but Shady Cove is one of the shades the esteemed Paul Newitt considers closest to "concrete". It seems to take on different tonal qualities depending on the lighting used and the background. 

Here is my 1/1000 model against a neutral backdrop with natural lighting:
http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r259/Trekriffic/TOS Enterprise 1-1000 scale/IMG_1681.jpg

More of a flat neutral light grey color

And here it is in my paint booth with a strip of blue painter's tape behind it and with a fluorescent light above:

http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r259/Trekriffic/TOS Enterprise 1-1000 scale/IMG_1452.jpg

To my eye it seems to have a slightly bluish tint.

And here she is outside against a background of... well... concrete...

http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/...prise 1-1000 scale/Outdoor Shots/IMG_1486.jpg


----------



## Chrisisall (May 12, 2011)

Looks just right to me.:thumbsup:


----------



## Captain April (May 1, 2004)

I'm not terribly beholden to having a greenish shade in the hull mix, since the green is only there to help separate the ship from the bluescreen. Something approximating typical battleship gray should do just dandy (and looks pretty close to my eye to what the ship generally looked like on screen).


----------



## Warped9 (Sep 12, 2003)

Hmm... The Shady Cove looks pretty good. It's chameleon like aspects lend it something of an otherworldly element to it, makes me think of a futuristic alloy other than naval ship or aircraft hull steel.


----------



## jaws62666 (Mar 25, 2009)

Trekkriffic said:


> You probably already know this but Shady Cove is one of the shades the esteemed Paul Newitt considers closest to "concrete". It seems to take on different tonal qualities depending on the lighting used and the background.
> 
> Here is my 1/1000 model against a neutral backdrop with natural lighting:
> http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r259/Trekriffic/TOS Enterprise 1-1000 scale/IMG_1681.jpg
> ...


Isnt Shady cove a rattle can from Ace. How do you airbrush it ?


----------



## fire91bird (Feb 3, 2008)

jaws62666 said:


> Isnt Shady cove a rattle can from Ace. How do you airbrush it ?


I was wondering the same thing except I hear "Ace Hardware" and I'm thinking thick, Latex house paint.


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

Trekkriffic said:


> And here she is outside against a background of... well... concrete...
> http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/...prise 1-1000 scale/Outdoor Shots/IMG_1486.jpg


:lol: 

Anyhoo, I just ordered a spray can on Tamiya light ghost gray laquer in anticipation. That's been my go-to color for the ol' girl.


----------



## Opus Penguin (Apr 19, 2004)

fire91bird said:


> I was wondering the same thing except I hear "Ace Hardware" and I'm thinking thick, Latex house paint.


You can get it in a paint can, like a pint of it, that is not spray. Someone else on the forum posted how they got theirs already and posted a picture of it. I can't remember if it was oil based, acrylic, etc. or what type it is. I am thinking of swinging by ACE today to check it out and maybe buy some.


----------



## Fozzie (May 25, 2009)

jaws62666 said:


> Isnt Shady cove a rattle can from Ace. How do you airbrush it ?


I tried to buy it in a rattle can and they told me that color was not available as a spray paint.


----------



## CLBrown (Sep 8, 2010)

Captain April said:


> I'm not terribly beholden to having a greenish shade in the hull mix, since the green is only there to help separate the ship from the bluescreen. Something approximating typical battleship gray should do just dandy (and looks pretty close to my eye to what the ship generally looked like on screen).


Agreed. It all comes down to "what does the ship in my mind's eye look like?" 

For me, I want my ship to have that "aluminum oxide" look, like we see on well-used aircraft hulls. It's similar to what's seen on-screen, but not identical... but it screams "real" to me. That's also the effect I went for on my CG Enterprise... which is the "version" I'm going to build. That is... the version I carry around inside my head!


----------



## kdaracal (Jan 24, 2009)

Shady Cove or Concrete? I'm doing some test styrene....too close to say. I'm getting all screwed up because I've been watching the CGI crap on Netflix. It plays with my mind. I'm glad they tried, though. It shows a desire to hit some angle shots that were impossible back in the day. But the Enterprise has no "weight". The planets and view screen effects are kinda cool, though.


----------



## Trekkriffic (Mar 20, 2007)

Opus Penguin said:


> You can get it in a paint can, like a pint of it, that is not spray. Someone else on the forum posted how they got theirs already and posted a picture of it. I can't remember if it was oil based, acrylic, etc. or what type it is. I am thinking of swinging by ACE today to check it out and maybe buy some.


"Shady Cove" is an oil based enamel and only comes in a can ($9.99 per quart at my local ACE hardware). It's pretty thick so you have to mix it with thinner to airbrush it. 
It's recommended for use as a paint for outdoor farm equipment like tractors and such so it's tough stuff.

Here's the can I bought:
V









If I wanted something in a rattle can I'd probably go with Light Ghost Grey or Flat Gull Grey.


----------



## Opus Penguin (Apr 19, 2004)

Trekkriffic said:


> "Shady Cove" is an oil based enamel and only comes in a can ($9.99 per quart at my local ACE hardware). It's pretty thick so you have to mix it with thinner to airbrush it.
> It's recommended for use as a paint for outdoor farm equipment like tractors and such so it's tough stuff.
> 
> Here's the can I bought:
> ...


Is it a smooth texture or will the paint require wet sanding or fine grit sanding to make it smooth? Also, what type of thinner do you use to thin it and clean the airbrush?


----------



## Trekkriffic (Mar 20, 2007)

Opus Penguin said:


> Is it a smooth texture or will the paint require wet sanding or fine grit sanding to make it smooth? Also, what type of thinner do you use to thin it and clean the airbrush?


It's quite smooth so long as you get it thinned enough with airbrush thinner at about 20 psi pressure. I do prefer using actual "airbrush" thinner rather than plain old mineral spirits. Normally I thin enamels like Model Master in the ratio of 1:1 but with this stuff you may want to go with a 2:1 or 3:2 thinner to paint ratio. I go by the old "make it the consistency of low-fat milk" maxim myself. 

Here are a couple of pics showing how smooth it came out on the 1/1000 model. This was the first coat over Tamiya white Fine Surface Primer and without any fine sanding:

http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r259/Trekriffic/TOS Enterprise 1-1000 scale/IMG_1391.jpg
http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r259/Trekriffic/TOS Enterprise 1-1000 scale/IMG_1374.jpg

It would be interesting to experiment with spraying it over a grey primer to see what that does to the final color tones.


----------



## Zombie_61 (Apr 21, 2004)

kdaracal said:


> ...I'm getting all screwed up because I've been watching the CGI crap on Netflix. It plays with my mind. I'm glad they tried, though. It shows a desire to hit some angle shots that were impossible back in the day. But the Enterprise has no "weight".


For the ship to have weight, there has to be gravity. Since no gravity exists in space, the ship is essentially weightless. But I understand what you mean. With our current understanding of physics and propulsion in space, the Enterprise in the remastered episodes is a bit too nimble and easy to maneuver; perhaps things will be different in the 23rd century.

In my opinion the "cosmetics" of the Enterprise in the remastered episodes is another problem. Compared to the original effects shots, the overall color is too dark and in many shots the primary hull appears to be too thick. The effects in the remastered episodes are slowly growing on me, but I still prefer the original effects shots flaws and all.


----------



## NTRPRZ (Feb 23, 1999)

I used good old camoflague gray on my AMT Enterprise, built about 1,000 years ago (or at least it seems like that). Due to the size of this new kit, I'd go with whatever is at least one shade lighter.


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

Just because there's no gravity, doesn't mean objects don't have mass, which is also expressed in units of weight. Mass is still subject to Newton's laws, even in space - if you have a 190,000 metric ton spaceship, it still takes more than 190,000 metric tons of force to change it's rest state or motion vector.


----------



## SteveR (Aug 7, 2005)

Yes, mass would be the right term. Substance. 

I thought the old girl was made of concrete back in the day.


----------



## ClubTepes (Jul 31, 2002)

John P said:


> Just because there's no gravity, doesn't mean objects don't have mass, which is also expressed in units of weight. Mass is still subject to Newton's laws, even in space - if you have a 190,000 metric ton spaceship, it still takes more than 190,000 metric tons of force to change it's rest state or motion vector.


John said 'vector'. hehehehe

Very good point.
And don't forget how the stresses pass through the spaceframe.

You have a thruster go off on the saucer and the torques pass through the neck to the nacelle struts to the back of the nacelles, etc.


----------



## kdaracal (Jan 24, 2009)

What about the speculation on the blue-ish tint to the neck area?


----------



## Opus Penguin (Apr 19, 2004)

The production version looks the same color as the ship so I plan to paint mine the same since that is the version I am doing.


----------



## MGagen (Dec 18, 2001)

Captain April said:


> I'm not terribly beholden to having a greenish shade in the hull mix, since the green is only there to help separate the ship from the bluescreen.


I won't argue with your aesthetic judgement for personal paint choice, but your contention that the greenish tint was chosen to separate the ship from the blue screen strikes me as unlikely. 

The ship was painted this greenish gray for the first pilot, and the model was filmed exclusively against a black backdrop. The blue screen matte process wasn't used until the second pilot.

M.


----------



## Captain April (May 1, 2004)

Just because the effects shop tried to skip a step by going with a black backdrop doesn't mean the model builders didn't plan for use in front of a bluescreen.


----------



## jbond (Aug 29, 2002)

I'm not sure they planned very well since there are a number of shots with incredible blue spill problems. They seemed to get their act together as far as composites go by about midway through the second season.


----------



## hal9001 (May 28, 2008)

Zombie_61 said:


> ...but I still prefer the original effects shots flaws and all.


Bless you my son!

hal9001-


----------



## MGagen (Dec 18, 2001)

Captain April said:


> Just because the effects shop tried to skip a step by going with a black backdrop doesn't mean the model builders didn't plan for use in front of a bluescreen.


What evidence is there that some future blue screen use was the reason the greenish gray color was chosen? It all sounds like baseless conjecture to me. You made a statement as if it were common knowledge that this was the case. Where did you get your information?

M.


----------



## Captain April (May 1, 2004)

Just my gut instinct. It's not like bluescreen composites were some exotic process at the time. If anything, trying a black backdrop was the departure from the norm (and, again, I understand why they tried it, to try and save a step in the composite process, just as Doug Trumbull used much the same process for his portion of the effects for TMP, although by '79, a lot of refinements had been worked up).


----------



## swhite228 (Dec 31, 2003)

Captain April said:


> Just my gut instinct. It's not like bluescreen composites were some exotic process at the time. If anything, trying a black backdrop was the departure from the norm (and, again, I understand why they tried it, to try and save a step in the composite process, just as Doug Trumbull used much the same process for his portion of the effects for TMP, although by '79, a lot of refinements had been worked up).


While traveling matts were old hat by 1966 blue screen as we know it was just 8 years old at the time with the 1958 film The Old Man and the Sea being one of the first films to utilize the process. Up to that point both the background and forground cameras had to be locked off so there would be no movement of the cameras, just the actors. The late 50s and early 60s saw advancement of the process to the point that you could have movement of the camera

The credit for the bluescreen creation goes to Larry Butler, who won an Academy Award for special effects for the 1940 movie The Thief of Bagdad.

The black backdrop was still in use well into the 70s, Space 1999 effects are an example of the black background effects method.


----------



## Captain April (May 1, 2004)

And the first pilot was produced in 1964.


----------



## kdaracal (Jan 24, 2009)

I wish I could see the original show, (without cgi), on my modern 1080p screen. I think those screen colors would satisfy me. I wouldn't mind normal restorations, as long as they stay true to the original show. _Or maybe that is not possible_.

In any case, a traditional restoration, in 1080p, would fulfill my desire to see what it was "meant" to look like!


----------



## Warped9 (Sep 12, 2003)

When I think of TOS enhanced I envision most of the original shots cleaned up, completed (showing a finished 11footer) and updated with very few changes except where the story dictated the original shot was inconsistent with the story. A lot of the new sequences just look wrong to me.


----------



## Zombie_61 (Apr 21, 2004)

Warped9 said:


> When I think of TOS enhanced I envision most of the original shots cleaned up, completed (showing a finished 11footer) and updated with very few changes except where the story dictated the original shot was inconsistent with the story. A lot of the new sequences just look wrong to me.


When I first heard the original episodes were going to be remastered, I read an article about it in which someone from CBS Digital said something to the effect that they were going to faithfully duplicate the original effects shot-for-shot without making any changes. Some time later I saw one of the first episodes that had been remastered (Balance of Terror) and, sure enough, at least one of the shots had been altered slightly. So much for faithful duplication.

From what I've seen of other remastered episodes, for the most part they did stick to their original plan, but some of the effects shots were "improved"; some slightly, others drastically. But, as I stated in post #63, the Enterprise doesn't quite look right or move properly in the remastered effects. And none of the remastered effects do anything to improve the episodes from a storytelling perspective, so I still prefer the original effects shots.


----------



## Trek Ace (Jul 8, 2001)

The model color had nothing to do with the compositing process. A color palette was established, and the models were painted to match.

On the first pilot, the models were first shot against black, and were hung on wires. An 18mm lens was used to hold depth-of-field and give scale on the tracking shots. Those shots were then step printed onto a high-contrast b&w stock to create mattes, which were then bipacked with the backgrounds, leaving an unexposed "hole" or silhouette, into which the ship was then exposed, creating a composite.

Bluescreen was used for the second pilot onwards, and required a different, and more complicated printing process to create the mattes and final comps. For the last year, a better film stock was introduced that was more sensitive and fine-grained, which resulted in better-looking comps overall.

All _Enterprise_ models, including the_ Constellation_, were painted the same color.


----------



## enterprise_fan (May 23, 2004)

I have been reading all the comments on what color the model was when it was first captured on film for broadcast in the 1960's. Does it matter what color it was back then? I don't claim to be a color expert but if the model was filmed using the bright lighting of the day wouldn't it appear white-er when composited over a black background? If you plan to display your model inside a big box with a black interior than a gray color is you. Although I may not go with a plain white color but maybe with a lighter shade of gray but I do plan on having it on display in a well lit area.


----------



## kdaracal (Jan 24, 2009)

Don't mean to bash the well intentioned cgi work, but I'm tired of it. And the Enterprise, although the shot angles are much better, just looks too cartoonish for my taste. 

Yea. Enhance the original film stock, but don't eliminate the old bird altogether!


----------



## CLBrown (Sep 8, 2010)

kdaracal said:


> Don't mean to bash the well intentioned cgi work, but I'm tired of it. And the Enterprise, although the shot angles are much better, just looks too cartoonish for my taste.
> 
> Yea. Enhance the original film stock, but don't eliminate the old bird altogether!


The model wasn't bad, really. It wasn't "perfect" but the model itself isn't the problem with the new shots.

The trick is, the animation used in the new shots was too smooth, and the camera moves didn't behave as though inertia was present. That's what you're really seeing when you observe that the ship seems to be "massless." And this is something that's difficult NOT to get when using a real, physical camera.

I've played around with this a bit myself, and have never been satisfied with any of my own camera-moves, when working in Maya. I think I know what needs to happen, but the trick is, a realistic motion path for a camera, or for a model, or for both, needs to reflect real camera behavior.

nuBSG tried to accomplish this, but they overdid it so tremendously that the shots actually LOST fidelity to me... shaky-cam, whip-pans, etc... carried to extremes. Had they done these things a bit more sparingly, more subtly, I think it could have been a lot more convincing. For nuBSG, they turned it into a blatant "trick" and when you NOTICE it, it loses its effectiveness.

But for Trek... a few little "camera jiggles," and a realistic motion path (including inertia, something no CGI rendering program does "by default," and thus which requires an ARTIST to create!), using the same model, would have been a lot more convincing.

Abrams did the same thing in his movie... camera "tricks" designed to make the audience feel like it's "real" but which were carried to such ludicrous extremes that we all realize it's just another blatant "trick." A few lens flares... sure. Some handheld camera work... sure, as long as it's reasonably stable (no "running shaky-cam" work, thank you!).

For TOS-R, the model itself was fine... not perfect, but fine. It was the "scene composition" (including all the motion data) which was lacking.

Subtle, near-imperceptible flaws... that's what the CGI shots need, and what they lack. That, and motion paths which reflect physical motion rather than mathematically-defined bezier splines.


----------



## RSN (Jul 29, 2008)

CLBrown said:


> The model wasn't bad, really. It wasn't "perfect" but the model itself isn't the problem with the new shots.
> 
> The trick is, the animation used in the new shots was too smooth, and the camera moves didn't behave as though inertia was present. That's what you're really seeing when you observe that the ship seems to be "massless." And this is something that's difficult NOT to get when using a real, physical camera.
> 
> ...


Very true. To me the best example of mass being shown with the Enterprise is when she is trying to back away from the Reliant in TWOK. The ship looks and acts like it is 1,000 feet long and not 8 feet long. Even the newer model shots in Next Gen did not show this in a ship that was supposed to be twice as big and the CG work failed even more to my eye.


----------



## kdaracal (Jan 24, 2009)

> _To me the best example of mass being shown with the Enterprise is when she is trying to back away from the Reliant in TWOK._


Yea. I remember sitting in the theater thinking: "Move, dang it! Come on and move!"


----------



## swhite228 (Dec 31, 2003)

While it's free is anybody picking up a quart of Shady Cove at ACE today?


----------



## Fozzie (May 25, 2009)

swhite228 said:


> While it's free is anybody picking up a quart of Shady Cove at ACE today?


He's referring to this. Does anyone know if Shady Cove is a Clark+Kensington color?


----------



## swhite228 (Dec 31, 2003)

yes it is.


----------



## GSaum (May 26, 2005)

RSN said:


> Very true. To me the best example of mass being shown with the Enterprise is when she is trying to back away from the Reliant in TWOK. The ship looks and acts like it is 1,000 feet long and not 8 feet long. Even the newer model shots in Next Gen did not show this in a ship that was supposed to be twice as big and the CG work failed even more to my eye.


This is all so, so true. During that entire Mutuara Nebula sequence in TWOK, both ships move along like battleships in space. They are filmed in such a way that you don't think of them as models, but rather as the real McCoy. It has always bothered me that the effects people involved with the later Trek incarnations simply don't get it. The Enterprise SHOULD move and maneuver slowly, like a battleship, not like an X-Wing fighter.


----------



## swhite228 (Dec 31, 2003)

Trekkriffic said:


> "Shady Cove" is an oil based enamel and only comes in a can ($9.99 per quart at my local ACE hardware). It's pretty thick so you have to mix it with thinner to airbrush it.
> It's recommended for use as a paint for outdoor farm equipment like tractors and such so it's tough stuff.
> 
> Here's the can I bought:
> ...


As Shady Cove is a color mixed paint that is done in store it is available as a C&K paint.

I took the photo above with me and after about 7 minutes walked out with a quart. The paint manager said that as long as the color mix was in the computer they could match it. I choices for the base were flat, gloss or simi gloss.

I found out that at 8:15 they had already made 8 cans of Shady Cove and answered a bunch of questions about how the paint did on plastic surfaces.


----------

