# MGagen's 3D TOS-E



## MGagen (Dec 18, 2001)

After over twelve years of diddling, I’ve finally finished my digital Enterprise. This could have been completed years ago if I wasn’t so hung up on getting it _just right_ and I had no Real Life™. As my old friend JV likes to say, in his best McCoy voice: “It’s like an obsession...”

This started with an effort to draw up accurate plans. After years of photogrammetry, augmented by bit and pieces of the original construction plans; the work of Gary Kerr via his small Polar Lights model; personal pointers and inspiration from Kerr, JHeilman, Phil Broad and many others; and two different 3D modelling programs later; here she is.

The final version was built completely in Strata Design 3D on a Macintosh. The planet is based on a retouched surface map of Io, with Photoshopped swirly clouds similar to the second pilot orbit shots.

Thanks to 3D technology, these shots all have something the original studio footage could not manage: Both the model and the planet are let by the same distant “sun.”

In this first render I have included a blue backfill, similar to the lighting used in one of the early Second Pilot orbit shots:









http://img.photobucket.com/albums/1003/ProfessorQuatermass/3D_TOS-E/StandardOrbit.jpg

Captains Log...









http://img.photobucket.com/albums/1003/ProfessorQuatermass/3D_TOS-E/Orbit1.jpg

Deflector closeup









http://img.photobucket.com/albums/1003/ProfessorQuatermass/3D_TOS-E/DeflectorCloseup.jpg

Mission accomplished









http://img.photobucket.com/albums/1003/ProfessorQuatermass/3D_TOS-E/LeavingOrbita.jpg

There are a few more tweaks to do, but she is largely complete. 

I’m also finishing a Greg Jein style DSS K-7 to go with her, so stay tuned for more renders.

M.


----------



## Shaw (Jan 9, 2005)

Wow! She is gorgeous!




MGagen said:


> The final version was built completely in Strata Design 3D on a Macintosh.


That must be helpful... I've done most my 3D stuff in Strata Studio Pro from the mid 1990s. I've tried Blender, but I've decided to wait for the funds to get one of Strata's 21st century products.


----------



## Lou Dalmaso (Jul 13, 2004)

Just Beautiful! 

I was looking for a new Desktop image..thanks!


----------



## MGagen (Dec 18, 2001)

Thanks, Shaw.

Strata Design 3D v.7 is a much more mature program these days. I actually started this model way back when in Strata, then moved to Amapi 3D because Strata's modeling tools were not up to the challenge. Later, as Strata improved, (and Amapi bit the dust) I began redoing it all in Strata.

M.


----------



## Maritain (Jan 16, 2008)

Awesome job, very sharp looking!


----------



## jheilman (Aug 30, 2001)

Wow, it's done! Looks awesome.

If I recall correctly, we first met over a discussion of a 3D Enterprise those same 12 years ago. Mine was complete and you were beginning. I've thought many times about making a new model with modern software, but I remember how long the first attempt took and I really don't want to go through it all again.


----------



## woof359 (Apr 27, 2003)

*Enterprise*

great job, love how big they are for the detail, and IMHO:thumbsup: Im glad you left out the forward saucer light.


----------



## TIEbomber1967 (May 21, 2012)

That really is a wonderful job you've done with the old girl. Thanks for sharing this with us.
I do a bit of Star Trek 3D modeling myself in Lightwave, but since I'm not shooting for anything that could be mistaken for perfection, my schedules for completion are not so lengthy.
So now that you have all the basic components are you going to make the Franz J. ships? Did you make the registry markings part of the mesh, or are they texture images that could easily be swapped out with another ship's name & number? I've seen it done both ways, and I opted for textures for the ease of just dropping in a new texture and having a whole new ship (sort of, heh).
I hope you don't mind if I put up a few of my own. I claim no ship designs as my own, if I see a design I like, I try to build it.
I look forward to seeing more of your work, and I wouldn't mind if other people posted some of their 3D work too.


----------



## Captain April (May 1, 2004)

Well, I am suitably impressed. Very nice work.


----------



## MGagen (Dec 18, 2001)

Thanks, guys.

Yes, JHeilman; it was your beautiful Enterprise render with the Firehouse email address in it that let me know you were here in town. We have Matt Jefferies to thank for a great friendship...



woof359 said:


> Im glad you left out the forward saucer light.


If you look closely, you'll see a circular hatch in that place.

TIEbomber1967: Great work on your original designs. I have no plans to do any FJ kit bashes. But I do have a couple of other small models planned. Regarding the hull markings: they are texture maps. I have layered Photoshop versions of all of the maps and all the hard markings are vector layers. This will allow me to sample up to higher resolution maps for any extreme closeups without starting from scratch. It also lets me adjust the weathering on a selective basis. The current ship is exactly studio scale with 96 dpi textures with the Strata file weighing in at over 400 Mb.

M.


----------



## TIEbomber1967 (May 21, 2012)

MGagen said:


> TIEbomber1967: Great work on your original designs. I have no plans to do any FJ kit bashes. But I do have a couple of other small models planned. Regarding the hull markings: they are texture maps. I have layered Photoshop versions of all of the maps and all the hard markings are vector layers. This will allow me to sample up to higher resolution maps for any extreme closeups without starting from scratch. It also lets me adjust the weathering on a selective basis. The current ship is exactly studio scale with 96 dpi textures with the Strata file weighing in at over 400 Mb.
> 
> M.


Thanks for the kind words, but I do need to point out that these are NOT my original designs. 99% of the ships I've done are other people's designs, I just build them because I like the look of them. I can't take credit for other's creativity.


----------



## Griffworks (Jun 24, 2002)

Excellent work, Mark! Hope you don't mind if I steal 'em to use as future desktops, do ya?


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

'Tis a thing of beauty indeed!!


----------



## Bernard Guignar (Sep 9, 2006)

Great work there by all showing the pictures. :thumbsup:


----------



## Chuck_P.R. (Jun 8, 2003)

Gorgeous! 

Any links to interiors or other work you've done on her?

She's so puuuuurty she makes me want to see what she has under the hood!


----------



## uss_columbia (Jul 15, 2003)

Looks great!


----------



## MGagen (Dec 18, 2001)

Thanks again, everyone. Feel free to decorate your desktops with the images.

Here are a couple of new closeups. 

A closeup of the Bridge:









http://img.photobucket.com/albums/1003/ProfessorQuatermass/3D_TOS-E/.highres/BridgeCloseup.jpg

A closeup of the Hangar:









http://img.photobucket.com/albums/1003/ProfessorQuatermass/3D_TOS-E/.highres/HangarCloseup2.jpg

No plans at this time to do an interior, other than eventually building a hangar deck. That will be a while...

I'm also toying with the idea of building a virtual cradle and depicting the studio scale model sitting in my driveway à la the famous curbside rollout photo.

M.


----------



## Trek Ace (Jul 8, 2001)

Very nice work, Mr. Gagen!

That is one of the finest recreations of the ship that I have seen.
I particularly like the frame titled "Standard Orbit".

I would like to do some "processing" to that image and then post the results back to this thread for your use. There is a certain "look" that I will aim for. I would do so only with your permission.


----------



## StarshipClass (Aug 13, 2003)

Great work! Looks fantastic!


----------



## MGagen (Dec 18, 2001)

Trek Ace said:


> Very nice work, Mr. Gagen!
> 
> That is one of the finest recreations of the ship that I have seen.


Thank you, sir. Coming from you, that is especially gratifying!



> I particularly like the frame titled "Standard Orbit".
> 
> I would like to do some "processing" to that image and then post the results back to this thread for your use. There is a certain "look" that I will aim for. I would do so only with your permission.


I would be honored.

M.


----------



## Trek Ace (Jul 8, 2001)

Here is the result of my experiment:










I was intrigued with your rendering of the ship and also the planet. My goal was to approach what a modern composite of the original film elements (either negatives or IPs) might have looked like in a remastered edition. I used tools that simulated the grain structure of the film stocks of the time, and also added the effect of internal incandescent lighting of the studio model, and how it registered on film.

I relocated your copyright notice to the opposite corner so that the HobbyTalk stamp would not interfere with it's legibility.

Thank you for your kind permission and indulging me. Please keep up the great work!


----------



## Captain April (May 1, 2004)

And NOW it's perfect!


----------



## MGagen (Dec 18, 2001)

Trek ACE:

Ah, what might have been! How great if they had reconstructed the original effects sequences by re-compositing the original elements. I am flattered that you feel my model looks enough like the original to serve as its double. 

I tried to give the windows a bit of a yellow cast, but I don't think it looks quite incandescent enough in my renders. I was trying to avoid the blue-white that looks so out of place on the MR Enterprise. Your retouching gets it much closer to the look of the show. Thanks!

M.


----------



## Nova Mike (Apr 26, 2009)

Stunning work, thanks for sharing your talents:thumbsup:


----------



## MGagen (Dec 18, 2001)

Here are a few more new renders.

Leaving Orbit 2:


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/1003/ProfessorQuatermass/3D_TOS-E/LeavingOrbit2.jpg

Impulse Drive Closeup:


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/1003/ProfessorQuatermass/3D_TOS-E/ImpulseCloseup.jpg

Bridge Dome Closeup:


img.photobucket.com/albums/1003/ProfessorQuatermass/3D_TOS-E/BridgeCloseup.jpg?t=1351574944

Hangar Closeup:


img.photobucket.com/albums/1003/ProfessorQuatermass/3D_TOS-E/HangarCloseup2.jpg?t=1351574951

Enjoy!

M.


----------



## Fozzie (May 25, 2009)

LOVE the first one ("Leaving Orbit 2")...! My new wallpaper.


----------



## jheilman (Aug 30, 2001)

Beautiful. I couldn't resist a comparison as the angles are very similar. On mine I did tweak color, grain and add in the "Lights of Zetar." But, pretty close. I have some windows in the wrong locations. I noted you didn't add the mysterious amber and green windows. Did the MR replica have them or not?


----------



## trekman (Apr 2, 2007)

Awesome! Tos trek rules!


----------



## MGagen (Dec 18, 2001)

jheilman said:


> Beautiful. I couldn't resist a comparison as the angles are very similar. On mine I did tweak color, grain and add in the "Lights of Zetar." But, pretty close. I have some windows in the wrong locations.


Thanks! 

As for window locations, there are a heck of a lot more references available now than when you finished yours. She's still a thing of beauty.



> I noted you didn't add the mysterious amber and green windows. Did the MR replica have them or not?


I know for certain that the amber one on the dorsal pylon is there, but I don't recall if the ones near the hangar are colored.

M.


----------



## jheilman (Aug 30, 2001)

I think that tidbit came from Petri, but don't know if it's accurate compared to current info.


----------



## jheilman (Aug 30, 2001)

MGagen said:


> As for window locations, there are a heck of a lot more references available now than when you finished yours. She's still a thing of beauty.


For sure. I know most of the inaccuracies by heart, but will have to leave it as is. The software is long gone, so it would mean starting over. Not happening.


----------



## MGagen (Dec 18, 2001)

As promised, I've been working on a DSS K7 to go along with my Enterprise. Here's a little work-in-progress teaser:


Click image to enlarge.

I had some time ago completed modeling a Greg Jein DS9, but it seemed a pity to pair an accurate TOS Enterprise with a later version of the station. So this is a brand new model based on images of the original model. GJ's version is beautiful, but the original is different in several respects. Two notable differences: The DS9 station has rounded "cones" where the original ones were quite straight sided; also, the DS9 "saucers" are sharper and more pointy in profile, while the original saucers were more rounded.

I have not yet modeled the large "pod" that hangs off the primary habitat. None of the images of the original model show this side, so it will have to be guess work. I may resort to following GJ's model on this point, although I am also entertaining the idea of incorporating the box-like structure that was present on the original NASA source model, as it seems unlikely that Datin would have gone to the trouble of removing it and rebuilding that area from scratch. 

You will also note that I am also depicting three hangar doors on the lower pod. This is suggested by the large number "1" seen in one photo, and what appears to be a "3" beside the door on the side seen in the episodes. I am guessing that door 3 was modeled open (and dark) and doors 1 & 2 were closed and hull-colored on the original model.

M.


----------



## Captain April (May 1, 2004)

Fascinating...


----------



## TIEbomber1967 (May 21, 2012)

MGagen said:


> As promised, I've been working on a DSS K7 to go along with my Enterprise. Here's a little work-in-progress teaser:
> M.


That looks great. I appreciate you taking the time to show us the things you've been doing and sharing your thoughts about what goes into making them.
I also made a K-7, but mine is based off the design shown on the ex-astris-scientia website. To add extra visual "excitement" I built the K-7 as it's being assembled. I think that the station isn't as visually interesting as the starships, so I dressed it up with scaffolding, lights and textures. I also threw in a Franz J. tug as a bit of fun.
It's still not done (no windows, no registry name & number) but I'm slowly plugging away at it.
I hope to see more of your station soon.


----------



## MGagen (Dec 18, 2001)

TIEbomber1967 said:


> That looks great. I appreciate you taking the time to show us the things you've been doing and sharing your thoughts about what goes into making them.
> I also made a K-7, but mine is based off the design shown on the ex-astris-scientia website. To add extra visual "excitement" I built the K-7 as it's being assembled. I think that the station isn't as visually interesting as the starships, so I dressed it up with scaffolding, lights and textures. I also threw in a Franz J. tug as a bit of fun.


Do share! I'd love to see it.

M.


----------



## TIEbomber1967 (May 21, 2012)

MGagen said:


> Do share! I'd love to see it.
> 
> M.


Okay.
Looking over it again, there are several things that need more work. I'll get to it all someday.


----------



## MGagen (Dec 18, 2001)

Very nice. Love the construction details.

Thanks,
M.


----------



## Gregatron (Mar 29, 2008)

Hey, y'all wouldn't happen to know the name of the correct font for the "Tail Pipe Socket Adjustment Access" labels, would ya? I'm looking to do some custom markings for a scratchbuild.


----------



## Shaw (Jan 9, 2005)

Gosh...*MGagen*, that is some incredible model building!

I know I only spent about four months trying out the 3D modeling stuff back in 2007 (with painfully amateurish results), but the one thing that pushed me away from it and back to physical models was... well, I like to play with my models. :tongue:

But I'm not sure that even if I had given the medium more time (and more modern software) that I could have produced anything as nice as what you and *jheilman* created. Both models are quite stunning.


----------



## jheilman (Aug 30, 2001)

Thanks. Mine's a dinosaur compared to this one.

Gregatron - as to the font used, I pm'ed you what little info I had. Maybe Gary could chime in on that one? All I know is it looks to be a sans serif, bold, condensed font. I don't recall their origin. Whether a model kit or dry transfer sheets?


----------



## MGagen (Dec 18, 2001)

Here is an updated image of my K7. I have done a little more work to the overall shape and added the "pod" and its antenna. This part is more guesswork than anything else, as I've never seen a photo of the model from this side. I decided to preserve the box-like structure on the original NASA source model as the attachment point, but the shape of the pod itself is based on Greg Jein's work. 

I'm guessing the "UHF antenna" is mounted on the pod, but it might have come from the top of the box structure. Does anyone have any documentation of this feature? I recall Richard Datin mentioned that he could have provided Jein with better references, but he wasn't asked. This is no doubt due to the incredibly short timeframe Jein had to get the models done for _Trials and Tribble-ations_. What he managed in that time is nothing short of a miracle. Alas, it is too late to ask Mr. Datin now...

Next up: texturing and lighting.

M.


----------



## jheilman (Aug 30, 2001)

Very nice.


----------



## jheilman (Aug 30, 2001)

Have you thought about creating animations with the big E? Really want to see the nacelle domes in motion. That was a challenge I don't think I ever got quite right.


----------



## MGagen (Dec 18, 2001)

The engine domes of my E, as built, could easily be animated; but I've never spent much time on learning that part of Strata. As you know, my day job deals mostly with static images. But it is tempting, once K7 is completed, to move on to that. 

One thing I'd really like to demonstrate is the fallacy of the whole "orbiting the station" nonsense that the remastered series got wrong. I've always contended, given the static Enterprise and star field seen in Lurry's window (and the basic laws of physics, to boot) that what the original effects crew was trying to depict was a static ship next to a non-rotating station, with both viewed from a moving camera. All they missed in pulling this off was a little drift in the background stars.

At least that arrangement makes more sense than either the idea of the station having a massive gravitational field so as to be orbit-able; or the helmsman of the Enterprise taking the risk, and expending a lot of effort and energy to sling a multi-thousand ton-starship closely around an inhabited space station in a perpetual powered swoop. Such a thing is surely not desirable, and may even be practically impossible. 

The sensible solution would look just as visually interesting as what we got, and indeed not all that much different. I think a little demonstration animation might drive this point home...

M.


----------



## Chuck_P.R. (Jun 8, 2003)

MGagen said:


> As promised, I've been working on a DSS K7 to go along with my Enterprise. Here's a little work-in-progress teaser:
> 
> 
> Click image to enlarge.
> ...


I thought I might have something to help you, so I looked through some very old emails of mine and found a couple of pictures of the Douglas Aircraft model that was sent to me by Richard Datin before he turned it into the K-7. No pod present though there is a box-like structure. 

I'd post it here but I'm close to my posting limit. Email me and I'll send it along.

In the same email he happened to mention while he never had time to take any pictures of the K-7 or the 11-footer, he had taken some pictures of the 3 footer and the TOS shuttlecraft miniature.

I didn't even pick up on that comment at the time, and now realize I might have been able to ask about and maybe see those!

Darn! Darn! Darn! Darn! Darn! Darn! Darn! Darn! Darn! Darn! Darn! Darn! Darn! Darn! Darn! Darn! Darn! Darn! Darn! Darn! Darn! Darn! Darn! Darn! Darn! Darn! Darn! Darn! Darn! Darn! Darn! Darn! Darn! Darn! Darn! Darn! Darn! Darn! Darn! Darn! Darn! Darn! Darn! Darn! Darn! Darn! Darn! Darn! . . .


----------



## Shaw (Jan 9, 2005)

I haven't seen the remastered episode, but the original episode had the Enterprise orbiting.

Why anyone would think it would need gravity to circle the station is beyond me... a mooring tractor beam (designed to keep visiting starships at constant parking distances from the station) seemed like a good idea to me. In the episode the Enterprise was parked close to the station, so we saw it and the station together (and the Enterprise could be seen from the station). The Klingons were most likely parked well outside visual range (but easily within transporter range) to avoid any hostilities between the ships close to the station.

The nice thing about the idea of the station being at the center of the Enterprise's parking orbit is that it lets us gauge the approximate size of the station (relative to the Enterprise)...








Again, I have no idea how the remastered episode approached any of this, I'm strictly working from TOS.


----------



## Chuck_P.R. (Jun 8, 2003)

I've just gone through some of the other Datin emails on the K-7.

He doesn't appear to remember adding the canister to the outward protruding block, and asked if I was confusing his model with the Greg Jein model.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Sorry if I was unclear. I meant the embedded canister on the main module right below the center cone. I'm attaching two files that should clear up what I meant by canister and rib or seam.

_Datin: Upon viewing what you describe as the 'half-block,' it's news to me. I don't ever recall seeing that, nor adding it to the upper platform. Was this taken from Jein's K-7?_

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>


The above exchange led me to believe that perhaps the canister attached to the original square protrusion already on the main module might have been wholely added by Greg Jein.

Not in the sense of contours and general accuracy, but in this one limited sense the original AMT K-7's main module protrusion may have been not that far off. 

From what I can tell it seems that if Datin did anything with that protrusion, he didn't remember it. It is entirely possible the man simply didn't remember.
But it seems that it's also possible that if he did anything it was just to cover up the spot where there was once a dish antenna.


----------



## Chuck_P.R. (Jun 8, 2003)

Okay, I'm going to try and squeeze this file in and see if it uploads.


This photo was actually sent to Mr. Datin by Phil Broad. So credit for it goes to him.

If you look at it and the photo Shaw posted above,

and consider how rounded the corners of the rectangular protrusion are,

it seems possible to me that the lighting from above in the shot posted by Shaw(the only semi-clear shot of the as-built version that shows the main module protrusion) is what makes the protrusion look rounder then it really is.

From Shaw's screenshot I don't see an indication that it goes down as far as I've seen it depicted elsewhere.


All this wouldn't have been a problem if there were clear pictures taken of the finished model.

But that ship has sailed.


N.B. MGagen. I tried emailing you a moment ago but no longer have a working one for you.


----------



## MGagen (Dec 18, 2001)

Shaw said:


> Why anyone would think it would need gravity to circle the station is beyond me...


Shaw,

Why? Simple High School physics. I believe I explained it pretty well. 

Of course, in the Trek universe they have Tractor Beams; but why would they go to the trouble? Things in deep space pretty much stay where you put them. A ship coming to a relative stop a given distance from the station would pretty much stay there. And why spin the station at all? It would needlessly complicate entering and leaving the docking pod, which would need to be able to counter-spin each time a ship was launched or received. The station doesn't need to spin to generate gravity, and it isn't oriented properly to do so anyway. And think of the issues involved, tractor beams or no: Every ship exerting a unique radial pull in its own direction like a bucket of water being spun on a rope. Loads needing to be rebalanced each time a starship arrived or departed. Oscillating forces acting on the station structure, and on each captive starship, which would need to be counteracted. New ships having to spiral in from miles away, trying not to collide with any of the cloud of swirling vessels before they can be snagged by the tractor beam. Talk about a balancing act. I'm not sure it could even be done from a practical standpoint. At any rate the entire main habitat cone would likely need to be devoted entirely to air traffic controllers. :freak:

I'm offering a more logical explanation for what we see in the original episode. The station _appears_ to be turning, and the Enterprise _appears_ to be going around it at pretty much the same rate. Yet the view inside the station manager's office shows both a static ship and static stars. Something doesn't add up. If the station is turning, the stars would be drifting by the window in Lurry's office, even _if_ the ship is in a perfect "geosynchronous" orbit. Conversly, in the exterior shot, if my interpretation is correct, the stars should be drifting slowly in the background. It is one or the other. Either way, the static stars are a production limitation. I choose the interpretation that offers the simplest explanation, and as an added bonus, doesn't pile on layer after layer of physical improbabilities. 

At any rate, if I get around to animating the scene the way I envision it, everyone can judge for themselves.


Chuck,

Thanks for the photo, but I already have the pix of the original NASA elements. 

It is interesting that Datin didn't know what you were talking about. Here is a capture from Tribbles where I have lightened the image so things are more easily seen. Both the block and the canister are present. Also, there is a light visible on the bottom of the canister, showing that Jein was pretty close with his version, even if he may have attached it differently.

M.


----------



## Chuck_P.R. (Jun 8, 2003)

MGagen said:


> Chuck,
> 
> Thanks for the photo, but I already have the pix of the original NASA elements.
> 
> ...


That's a fantastic photo. 

Yep, he definitely added something there, even if he didn't remember it.

I didn't followup on the question of the canister again because he seemed to be a bit touchy on the subject of whether I was interested in his versus Greg Jein's version.

And I didn't want the man to feel in any way slighted.

He did such a tremendous volume of work, most of it on a very tight schedule, from everything from Trek to the miniatures seen used for the opening of PettyCoat Junction.

Add to that the fact that I was asking him about work he had done about forty years ago, and I can understand his not remembering. 

Plus he had not taken any pictures of the finished model. But worse of all, I'll be kicking myself for a long time for not asking him about his pictures of the TOS Shuttlecraft hanger and the three foot TOS E!!!!!!


----------



## Trekkriffic (Mar 20, 2007)

Regarding the light on the bottom of the canister, is it possible that's just a star? It looks to be the same size as the other stars in the image.


----------



## MGagen (Dec 18, 2001)

Trekkriffic said:


> Regarding the light on the bottom of the canister, is it possible that's just a star? It looks to be the same size as the other stars in the image.


It is definitely a light. It tracks perfectly with the station as it "rotates" in the frame. The stars stay static.

M.


----------



## Nova Designs (Oct 10, 2000)

jheilman said:


> Have you thought about creating animations with the big E? Really want to see the nacelle domes in motion. That was a challenge I don't think I ever got quite right.


I did this waaaaay back in 2002... the lights are all done with animated texture maps and the fan blades are rotating geometry. 


http://nova-designs.com/2d_3d/movies/trek/1701_from_nose.avi


----------



## Trekkriffic (Mar 20, 2007)

Wow! Love that animation! :thumbsup:


----------



## Nova Designs (Oct 10, 2000)

Thanks I had actually picked "Tribbles" as a testbed to redo all of the FX shots, (since everyone else was playing with Doomsday Machine) but I never got around to doing more than a couple of shots.

After CBS came out with their's I figured there wasn't a point any more.


----------



## jheilman (Aug 30, 2001)

Nice animation. I'd dig one of my oldies up, but don't want to detract from MGagen's creations here.


----------



## Nova Designs (Oct 10, 2000)

I understand, I just posted it because you asked... and it has the K-7 in it. We return you to your regularly scheduled program...


----------



## jheilman (Aug 30, 2001)

Absolutely. No problem. :thumbsup:


----------



## TIEbomber1967 (May 21, 2012)

jheilman said:


> Nice animation. I'd dig one of my oldies up, but don't want to detract from MGagen's creations here.


Perhaps we can start a dedicated thread for posting 3D models & animations?


----------



## MGagen (Dec 18, 2001)

Nova Designs,

Very nice! I love the cinematic quality of the clip, and the faint suggestion of interiors in the windows. Well done.

M.


----------



## Nova Designs (Oct 10, 2000)

Thanks! I think your ship looks great too!


----------



## MGagen (Dec 18, 2001)

Here is a minor update to K7: I have added lights and windows.

Next comes the texturing.

M.


----------



## MGagen (Dec 18, 2001)

Progress report:

Texturing is well underway. The saucers and habitat cones are textured. The balance of the station has a temporary texture.

I've also attached an image from Tribbles from the same vantage point for comparison. Other than the fact that I have chosen to regularize the alignment of some of the elements, it is a fair match.



















The station now has Version 3 of the canister pod. I think I'll stick with this one. It retains the Jein pod shape and the NASA extension box, but lowers the canister more to the level that we see in TOS. 










The base color of the hull is the same as Gary Kerr's Enterprise Hull paint. I'm guessing they would have used the same paint for the station.

By the way, has anyone else noticed that they switched the film color layers around when compositing various station segments? I had a bit of a time with the color scheme until I caught on to this. I began to think the main pod had a three different colors on the top and looked different depending on the angle. The true color seems to be red for the foreground pod, and blue for the main pod; but at least one of the segments shows a green foreground pod with a reddish main pod. The hull, being basically gray, it doesn't show much of a color shift, but the red light also shifts to green. The station is obviously in the same orientation. Unless they re-painted and re-wired the lights during filming, this is only explanation that makes sense.

Perhaps Trek ACE could speak to this...

M.


----------



## Petri Blomqvist (Dec 19, 2001)

Mark! Wow! That's excellent work, both on the Enterprise and the K7! I once built a K7 too, but yours looks way better.


----------



## MGagen (Dec 18, 2001)

Thanks, Petri!

And to echo JHeilman in another thread: Thanks for the inspiration of your original 3D Enterprise. You really were _the_ pioneer in this area, all those years ago. I still remember the charge I got out of seeing your renders on the old IDIC page.

M.


----------



## MGagen (Dec 18, 2001)

Another update. Progress is slow, but still going on...

Detailing the Docking Pod:










There appears to be a number of random windows in two decks between the docking bays. As far as I can tell, they were not lit on the studio model. The pattern is my best guess.

I have also taken the liberty of adding approach lights like the ones below the Enterprise hangar deck. Two sets per bay, in precisely the same configuration and size as the ones on the Enterprise.










Next the hangar interiors. 

M.


----------



## RossW (Jan 12, 2000)

Is that the landing lights pattern on the TOS E? I thought some of those were black? See post #9 at http://www.hobbytalk.com/bbs1/showthread.php?t=380407


----------



## jheilman (Aug 30, 2001)

While it does appear that there are some black windows in that shot, I don't think it's what was really on the model. Maybe a bulb burned out or something was altered inside? It's been generally accepted that the lights are a landing assist. Green means you're on the correct path. Amber is a warning you are drifting out of the path and red means bad things are about to happen. Here's the 1/350 build from Wonderfest this year.










Some of our Navy guys here may speak about the lighting systems to aid in landing on aircraft carriers?


----------



## TIEbomber1967 (May 21, 2012)

MGagen said:


> Another update. Progress is slow, but still going on...
> 
> M.


It's looking real good. I like that you've gone with more than one landing bay, it makes it seem like it was built to handle a lot more "traffic". Looking forward to seeing more.


----------



## MGagen (Dec 18, 2001)

Thanks, TIEbomber.

Here's a preliminary render of the docking bay interior I'm working on. It is inspired by the Jein model, but I've respected the scale of the original a little more closely (based on the habitat window spacing).










There's a little more detailing to do, but not much, as I don't expect to feature it in closeups.

M.


----------



## RossW (Jan 12, 2000)

I'd agree with your explanation, jheilman. The black always bothered me since it didn't make sense, and my goal is to build the model as the fictional starship Enterprise so I'll go with the red/amber/green.


----------



## MGagen (Dec 18, 2001)

OK, here we go.

Here's the station with the docking bay installed:










And a couple of closeups:



















Next up: Some renders of my Enterprise and K-7 together. That should be good for a couple of desktops...

M.


----------



## jheilman (Aug 30, 2001)

Beautiful.


----------



## Fozzie (May 25, 2009)

Very nice indeed!


----------



## aridas sofia (Feb 3, 2004)

I am sorry that I'm so late in commenting on the remarkable fidelity of your models. I recall way back when you were just gathering steam on the E build. I never knew you'd finished. Knowing as you do that you were one of my sources of information when I created my Jefferies cross section, you can imagine how good it is to see the ship complete. It doesn't disappoint. ?


----------



## MGagen (Dec 18, 2001)

Thanks, Aridas! That means a lot coming from you.

I'll have more to post, shortly. Some compositions matching the footage from Tribbles with the station and the Enterprise together.

M.


----------



## woof359 (Apr 27, 2003)

*windows*

this is great work, maybe a person looking out a window in the future ? can't wait for the 1701 and D7


----------



## MGagen (Dec 18, 2001)

At present I have no plans to model a D7.

Here is an update:

Two views of the station with the Enterprise. (Click to enlarge.)





I began by arranging the models so they matched the two "orbit" shots from Tribbles. I was able to match them pretty closely. The I chose more dramatic camera angles for these renders.

If you want to know how far off the Station the Enterprise was parked, I can give you a reasonable answer. The ship appears to be about 2.75 Km from the station measuring center to center. That means roughly 3000 yards or 9000 feet. If you want to know what that means visually, here's an "overhead" view:










I may be able to get a similar match to the Tribbles shots with the ship even closer to the station, so don't take the above as gospel. I'll likely try that next.

Enjoy,

M.


----------



## MGagen (Dec 18, 2001)

Here's a further update.

After working a little more with the relative positions of the station and the Enterprise, I have settled on 2 Kilometers 
as the distance between the two, as measured _between the nearest edges_. Here's how it looks in a top view:










And here's how the renders stack up against screen caps from _Tribbles_:





































If there is any question as to why the Klingon ship was not visible in the original episode, we are given the answer in dialog: 

KIRK: What is the position of the Klingon ship? 
CHEKOV: A hundred kilometres off K7. It's just sitting there. 

To the naked eye, it would appear a mere speck, being fifty times further away from K7 than the Enterprise was. A long way, yes; but still easily within transporter range.

M.


----------



## Captain April (May 1, 2004)

The real reason being that the model wasn't ready yet.


----------



## TIEbomber1967 (May 21, 2012)

What a difference that straight nacelles make! One of the beauties of 3D, nothing sags.
I like it.


----------



## MGagen (Dec 18, 2001)

A sneak peak of the next project:





Another companion for my Enterprise.

M.


----------



## jheilman (Aug 30, 2001)

Appears to be a sleeper ship of some sort. Possibly DY-500 class. No, wait, much older. DY-100 class to be exact. 

Looking good.


----------



## MGagen (Dec 18, 2001)

Thanks!

Here's how the texture mapping is shaping up.

M.


----------



## MGagen (Dec 18, 2001)

Space Seed.


----------



## MGagen (Dec 18, 2001)

A little something to show I've not been idle.










Yes, it is possible to shoehorn something resembling the TOS Hangar Deck into a 947' Enterprise; but things are a bit tighter 
than they appear in the spacious miniature set used on the series. Still, it is workable...

M.


----------



## Warped9 (Sep 12, 2003)

^^ _Ooooo!_ Nice! :thumbsup:

I'm liking your model of the _E_ much better than the TOS-R version.


----------



## TrekFX (Apr 15, 2004)

And if, when you're done, you can create some flat projections that can be formed into a paper model, folks building the 1/350 kit would be pleased.

(Me!)

Very cool!


----------



## MGagen (Dec 18, 2001)

The 1:350 kit already has a decent hangar deck, given the limitation of styrene thickness and the need to support the nacelles. I expect that a card version of what I've come up with wouldn't fit it properly.

M.


----------



## jheilman (Aug 30, 2001)

Interested in seeing your interpretation of the other end of the shuttle bay.


----------



## MGagen (Dec 18, 2001)

I'm leaning towards a forward gallery like MJ's cross section. The two biggest limitations of the whole hangar are the smallness of the aft opening, and the structural requirements of the engine pylons at the forward end. I've ended my hangar about where the pylons become flat. In short, I'm cheating it just a _little bit _under the aft edges of the pylons. I refuse to go the Franz Joseph route and have the hangar extend further forward as if the engines just velcro onto the exterior skin of the hull.

Do I recall correctly that you worked out a version that had visible structural members laid into the forward bulkhead? That seems like an elegant compromise. I can picture the interior of the galley with a "walkthrough" cut into the supports...

M.


----------



## jheilman (Aug 30, 2001)

I never finished mine, but here's where I left off in 2000.


----------



## MGagen (Dec 18, 2001)

Very nice! That's what I remembered.

What scale were working to? It looks quite spacious.

I may have to borrow a page from your book before I'm through...

Mark


----------

