# Round 2 ENTERPRISE REFIT- WOW!



## spindrift (Apr 16, 2005)

Notice the May release of the 1/350 Refit will include COMPLETE AZTEC decals!? Also- a DECENT metal rod in base display stand that replaces that horrible original stand? Fantastic! The aztec decals alone make the kit a must! Round 2 didn't have to make these great additions but they definately are paying attenton to us and what would make the kit better! I will be getting several of these...very excited! Gary:hat:


----------



## Atemylunch (Jan 16, 2006)

Let's hope they make those available separately, for those of us that have a few of them. Well ok, more than 6, and less than 8. I think my wife will give me that look, if I get a few more.


----------



## jbond (Aug 29, 2002)

They'd be crazy to make any of that available separately when they can sell them for the entire cost of a kit...a lot of people never built their refits due to the daunting problems of the paint job and stand and between that and the kitbash possibilities I'll be they'll do all right on these...


----------



## spindrift (Apr 16, 2005)

Exactly! Think about it- that entire whopping kit- four sheets of aztec decals and a nice new stand for around $60, that IS a bargain....beyond reasonable. They are going to sell a TON of these- wise wise move correcting the two biggest problems with the first release IMO, now I can build mine properly!
Gary


----------



## AJ-1701 (May 10, 2008)

spindrift said:


> Exactly! Think about it- that entire whopping kit- four sheets of aztec decals and a nice new stand for around $60, that IS a bargain....beyond reasonable.Gary


Your dead right there... !! As much as I am, on the most part, enjoying doing the whole aztecing thing on my refit. The decals and stand are a real bonus for those less skilled, confidant or time friendly. 

Cheers,

Alec. :wave:


----------



## klgonsneedbotox (Jun 8, 2005)

AJ-1701 said:


> Your dead right there... !! As much as I am, on the most part, enjoying doing the whole aztecing thing on my refit. The decals and stand are a real bonus for those less skilled, confidant or time friendly.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Alec. :wave:



I was thinking of buying the Acreation decals for $50...but that doesn't make sense if I can get decals and another kit for $10 more!

I wonder if anybody has any details as to who made the Round 2 aztec decals and how accurate they are? It would be nice to see some pics. I saw some pics of a finished model on the round 2 site - box art? - and that looked good - assuming that kit actually had the decals on it.


----------



## Gunstar1 (Mar 1, 2007)

Here's the site. Looks like the photos are of an authentic build of the "new" (ha!) kit.

http://www.round2models.com/models/polar-lights/starship-enterprise/pol808-04

These aztec decals are not any more accurate than anyone putting random patterns on - they are certainly not similar to the TMP era refit as far as colors and how the smaller shapes break up. On this round they appear to be monotone, and look like a further breakdown of other inaccurate aztec masks people can get online.

So far, no one has ever based their small-pattern-panel paint scheme (on top of basic aztec) on the many images that are available of the TMP refit, B&W and color.

Maybe there are 2 decal sets with the kit (doubt it) - also disappointing is that apart from extra decals and metal tube stand, there is no difference to the original PL release.

Even if you don't care about the decal accuracy (let alone pearl flip flopping!), you would still be forced to paint the ship a specific way to match the new aztec decal set.

No thanks.


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

Well, I have 8 of the damn things, so I'm not gonna buy another. So i hope the decals ARE made available separately.


----------



## Raist3001 (Oct 23, 2003)

Gunstar1 said:


> So far, no one has ever based their small-pattern-panel paint scheme (on top of basic aztec) on the many images that are available of the TMP refit, B&W and color


Many builders have broken down the secondary pattern to match what we can see via Cloudster and the Christies auction pics. Myself included. My patterns were based on these pictures, and although not entirely accurate, they are broken down and placed with much study. 

No one will ever be able to produce an exact duplicate of the refit aztec paint job. All one can hope for is a nice representation.


----------



## klgonsneedbotox (Jun 8, 2005)

John P said:


> Well, I have 8 of the damn things, so I'm not gonna buy another. So i hope the decals ARE made available separately.


8! 

I have just one...let me know if they are taking up too much space on your shelves! 

I agree with Raist...a nice representation is what I am going for.

I would love to paint everything, but my "almost completed" (how many of us have one of these!!!) refit has been sitting in storage for a couple of years now and I need to get it done. It's been there mostly because I got to the point of final assembly and painting and could not decide on my approach...and I did not want to ruin the kit.

I personally think that the kit on the Round2 site looks very nice. It's essentially what I am aiming for. I have lights installed and now I need the flashers/nav lights (will probably buy a kit since my approach didn't quite achieve the look I wanted) and a less time consuming way to do the aztec patterns...enter the option of decals.

My concern about the decals is twofold (aside from them being a good representation)...

1) I think (as with paint) that to get the proper look, the aztec pattern and strongback/engineering decals have to be subtle. Since I am going for the on screen look, colors need to be lighter/less saturated than the kit would appear in a fully lit situation.

2) yellowing of the decals over time...I guess if properly sealed, this should not occur or at least be minimized to great extent...

Any thoughts on the yellowing factor?


----------



## Gunstar1 (Mar 1, 2007)

Raist3001 said:


> Many builders have broken down the secondary pattern to match what we can see via Cloudster and the Christies auction pics. Myself included. My patterns were based on these pictures, and although not entirely accurate, they are broken down and placed with much study.
> 
> No one will ever be able to produce an exact duplicate of the refit aztec paint job. All one can hope for is a nice representation.


Here we go again 
I would argue that one CAN get darn close, at least as how the pattern BEHAVES.

I did say TMP refit. You are building the -A. The subpatterns on the saucer are easy to see and have never really changed apart from being muted. The panel subpatterns on the secondary hull greatly differ between each version, and are more 'logically' or 'orderly' laid out on the TMP refit - because of the shoddy repaint jobs it received, the secondary/engineering hull by STIV is an unorganized mish mash of un-orderly overlapping panels. Even so, Aztec Dummy templates (what you are using) may be alright for most of the ship, but they are, in comparison, poorly designed for the engineering hull, and don't even resemble what's going on in the post-STIII era of the model.


----------



## Maritain (Jan 16, 2008)

I'd like to see a decent pic of the metal support stand.


----------



## Gunstar1 (Mar 1, 2007)

Maritain said:


> I'd like to see a decent pic of the metal support stand.


http://www.round2models.com/models/polar-lights/starship-enterprise/pol808-04

there's a pic with stand - see the product release pic, bottom right


----------



## SteveR (Aug 7, 2005)

The decals, though not perfect, complete the kit in my mind ... as a box stock build, that is. 

If the original AMT refit had them, I would've been a happy camper back in '79.


----------



## Model Man (Oct 1, 2007)

I'm trying to figure how aztec decals could come close to simulating pearl, regardless of 'accuracy issues'? If it's just alternating grayscale, then that sucks. I guess you could scan and tweak them into 2 bit image masks and print them on vinyl though. You could also correct the pattern for any given era needed somewhat easily. Hmmm. 

I'm going TMP, so the decals are useless for me otherwise. I'm having a devil of a time getting paint reference, apart from the films and the random gem stumbled across in the wild, there's not much it seems. I still gotta thoroughly research the painting threads here though.


----------



## Flux Chiller (May 2, 2005)

Gunstar1 said:


> On this round they appear to be monotone, and look like a further breakdown of other inaccurate aztec masks people can get online.


I am with you, these decals are a waste of time for the saucer aztec. At least the kit is back in production for a while


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

Gunstar1 said:


> http://www.round2models.com/models/polar-lights/starship-enterprise/pol808-04
> 
> there's a pic with stand - see the product release pic, bottom right



Hm. Exactly how I did mine. It's a very logical place for a rod-stand, right near the balance point, and right where the mount for the TOS filming model was.


----------



## klgonsneedbotox (Jun 8, 2005)

Model Man said:


> I'm trying to figure how aztec decals could come close to simulating pearl, regardless of 'accuracy issues'? If it's just alternating grayscale, then that sucks. I guess you could scan and tweak them into 2 bit image masks and print them on vinyl though. You could also correct the pattern for any given era needed somewhat easily. Hmmm.
> 
> I'm going TMP, so the decals are useless for me otherwise. I'm having a devil of a time getting paint reference, apart from the films and the random gem stumbled across in the wild, there's not much it seems. I still gotta thoroughly research the painting threads here though.


Well, if the decals are done on clear paper (one would assume) and there are areas of the aztec that are left clear, then an underlying coat of a pearl white should show through nicely. That's how it appeared that the kit in the pictures was done (again, assuming the decals were used).


----------



## Gunstar1 (Mar 1, 2007)

Well, theoretically you could do a variation of pearl effect with printed decals - you can print metallics, and you can have different coatings applied, but even though I have experience in the print industry, I have no idea how they would fare as water-slide decals - even if they did work, the cost would not be worth the risk. If you really want to make it look anything like the film or raw model, painting would be the simplest (though more time-consuming) and surest option


----------



## Lou Dalmaso (Jul 13, 2004)

well I have my own obvious reasons why I think paint is better than decals but the main one comes down to freedom of color choices.

to be honest I hadn't thought about possible yellowing over time. I hope the instructions cover how to seal decals in Future.

I can see a benefit for the deflector area, tho.


----------



## Raist3001 (Oct 23, 2003)

Gunstar1 said:


> Here we go again


Again? I do not remember discussing aztec techniques before?



> I would argue that one CAN get darn close, at least as how the pattern BEHAVES.


I believe that is what I said...a nice representation 
Knowing the pattern behavior helps greatly in creating a nice pattern. 



> The panel subpatterns on the secondary hull greatly differ between each version, and are more 'logically' or 'orderly' laid out on the TMP refit - because of the shoddy repaint jobs it received, the secondary/engineering hull by STIV is an unorganized mish mash of un-orderly overlapping panels.


Even with what is available I would argue that a 100 percent accurate secondary aztec is impossible. Even nailing down the pattern behavior on the secondary hull is quite difficult.



> Even so, Aztec Dummy templates (what you are using) may be alright for most of the ship, but they are, in comparison, poorly designed for the engineering hull, and don't even resemble what's going on in the post-STIII era of the model.


Poorly designed? I think not. They were never meant to give a 100 percent accurate secondary hull pattern. However, they can be used to create a nice representation. In the end, it is the quality of the paint job IMHO that matters.


----------



## Lou Dalmaso (Jul 13, 2004)

well, I got to say that I don't care to try to be accurate to any thing post STIII. 

Since the "A" wasn't the same ship as the original refit there is no explanation for how it differs from the refit that isn't anything more than a simple rationalization.

I realize that it might have been the same filming model, but other than that there is no connection


----------



## Gunstar1 (Mar 1, 2007)

Oh, we have, Raist. But I believe that whole thread ended up getting deleted - I had started the sticky thread on painting the refit, and then you eventually started one on painting the -A.

Doing the engineering hull semi-accurately is not too difficult - my beef with all the available templates out there is that they can get areas like the saucer, warp engines and dorsal all pretty close, but then throw out the book with the engineering section. There are plenty of clear black & white shots, some color publicity shots, and some good screencap references to what is going on with the engineering hull - but hey, that's the refit - like i said before, the -A engineering hull, as can be seen on color cloudster and christie's pics, is a big mess because of crummy overlapping paint jobs.


----------



## Gunstar1 (Mar 1, 2007)

Lou Dalmaso said:


> well, I got to say that I don't care to try to be accurate to any thing post STIII.
> 
> Since the "A" wasn't the same ship as the original refit there is no explanation for how it differs from the refit that isn't anything more than a simple rationalization.
> 
> I realize that it might have been the same filming model, but other than that there is no connection


? might have been the same ? no connection ?
This forum is full of threads that detail the history of the one and only primary filming model. It's a history because of all the sad, silly and stupid things that happened to the paint job since ST:TMP was completed. check the Painting the Refit sticky thread for info and links.


----------



## Raist3001 (Oct 23, 2003)

Gunstar1 said:


> Oh, we have, Raist. But I believe that whole thread ended up getting deleted - I had started the sticky thread on painting the refit, and then you eventually started one on painting the -A.


Ahhh....I remember now. 

The Refit paint scheme is not my favorite to say the least. I much prefer the 1701-A's color scheme. 

I'll have to go back over the B/W shots at Cloudster to review. Haven't looked at them in awhile.


----------



## Lou Dalmaso (Jul 13, 2004)

Let me try to back up and say something different here.

What I meant to say is that I feel the "original" paintjob is the one I feel the best trying to emulate because it was the consistant work of one man or team of men.

What I am not interested in doing is trying to emulate all of the varied additions, modifications and pattern changes that came after the "battle damage" that happened to the model in TWOK.

As you pointed out, the secondary hull is much more a product of artistic license than the saucer. OK, I'll cop to that.


----------



## Roguepink (Sep 18, 2003)

The closest I got to a pearlescent quality with decals involved printing them in a 15% screen of silver ink using an ALPS printer. That never got past experimental. I could easily add in other screens of color to approximate the range of colors on the painted studio model. However, as good as my tests were, they could not compare to masking and painting.

I also worry about durability. Decals don't play well with masking tape and I would tend to paint the panel colors FIRST, then add detail color.

I like the mods to the stand. Nicely done.

Polar Lights is not likely to retool any other parts of the model for reasons I have explained elsewhere, but they come down to reasonable cost. In short, a new steel tool costs THOUSANDS of dollars. Its not going to happen.


----------



## CaliOkie (Dec 31, 2007)

To decal or not decal? That is the question. That we are even talking about having that option is an indication that Round 2 is making an effort. The stand is a great improvement! Yes, it's too bad they couldn't make some of the other improvements we've all talked about. They could improve it right out of our price range and then go out of business -- but they won't.

In this economy, I am just glad that they are taking a risk and putting these kits back out there. I'm looking forward to getting a 1701 and a C-57-D.

As for the decals, I'm tempted to use them as a paint guide that will make the process much faster. You know, put the decals down, cut out an index card mask to match the pattern and paint over it. If you are afraid masking tape will take up the decal, use sticky post-it notes laid around the area to paint. Spray a light coat, pull it up, move on to another area. (Of course, you have to seal the decal with clear coat first.) 

As for the refit paint job in ST-TMP, it was not strictly an Aztec pattern. There were lots of little squares and rectangles added over the basic pattern in a fairly random way. Variations in color made up those patterns as did variations in refractive index -- although there was no flat coat used, spray patterns in metallic paint (or pearl coats) cause the paint to reflect in different directions. This is something many a silver Lexus owner finds out when they take their car in to get the fender fixed . . . you can't match that paint. Even drying time impacts reflective quality.

I found my best results were with gloss white with a little chrome silver mixed in and then three or four coats of very, very thin silver, gold, metallic blue, and purple for the panel variations. Subtle is the key. In direct light, the finish should look mostly an even white and then break up as the lighting gets more indirect.

There is no doubt in my mind that the Refit is the most complex paint job to appear on a science fiction model of any kind in any movie.


----------



## bigjimslade (Oct 9, 2005)

I want to know if they did something about the ridiculous 8 segments on the side of the saucer that don't fit right.


----------



## bigjimslade (Oct 9, 2005)

I want to know if they did something about the ridiculous 8 segments on the side of the saucer that don't fit right.


----------



## Raist3001 (Oct 23, 2003)

CaliOkie said:


> Subtle is the key. In direct light, the finish should look mostly an even white and then break up as the lighting gets more indirect.


Agreed. Subtle is the key. When I created my paint job, I was not interested in 100 percent accuracy since I believe that is impossible. I wanted to create something subtle and something that would look mostly white, then suddenly pop with a flip flop sheen as the light struck the surface.

These are a few older pictures as the paint buildup has been removed. However, what I wanted to show was how subtle the pearl effect is and how the primary hull looks mostly white. What you can not see is how the sheen flip flops with color.





























This paint job was created with Acrylics. My next job will find me using a lacquer based white paint. Then to create the pearl Aztecs, I will use a powder pearl added to a clear Lacquer. From what I have gathered, lacquer holds the pearl pigment much better. And the Refit was painted in Lacquer.


----------



## SteveR (Aug 7, 2005)

Some day, I'd like to see that in person!


----------



## klgonsneedbotox (Jun 8, 2005)

Raist...your Atec patterns are always top notch...:thumbsup:

And, as you stated earlier, it would be next to impossible (without the original color photos - I think) to recreate the TMP aztec. 

I prefer to liken it to a photo mosaic. There may be different ways to create the overall image, but it's the overall image that I am striving for.

I found some larger pics of the TMP refit here:
http://misenbootlegauchateau.blogspot.com/

They start about 1/3 aways down the page...you'll see TMP pics...click on the images to see them separately and then again to magnify...these are some of the largest scans I have seen on the net.


----------



## spindrift (Apr 16, 2005)

No one can be happy! Suppose the Refit came out with NO new stand or aztec decals- alot of you would complain about that.
We are LUCKY Round 2 is putting it out again and EXTREMELY LUCKY (IMO) that they are giving us these two HUGE additions to an already great kit. I was floored by how nice the reissue of the 18 inch Amt kit was with the great box and big decal sheet- more than I expected- indication they are listening to us and attempting to do something extra! I think we are going to be pleased beyond words at the Refit release.
James Small did the aztec design for the decals in case it wasn't mentioned. 
I AM concerned the listing for the reissue C-57D does NOT mention crew figures/ID monster...hmmmm...
Gary:wave:


----------



## klgonsneedbotox (Jun 8, 2005)

spindrift said:


> James Small did the aztec design for the decals in case it wasn't mentioned.


Cool...then it's probably safe to assume that display refit had kit decals or the prototype for them.

I would like to see some closer images of that finished kit to see how the aztec pattern looks.


----------



## Nova Designs (Oct 10, 2000)

Well, since I only have one of these kits (I never did get my promised free one from Thomas ) I will buy a couple. I think the additions are nice ones.


----------



## CaliOkie (Dec 31, 2007)

Raist3001 said:


> Agreed. Subtle is the key. When I created my paint job, I was not interested in 100 percent accuracy since I believe that is impossible. I wanted to create something subtle and something that would look mostly white, then suddenly pop with a flip flop sheen as the light struck the surface.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, and the subtle paint job is notoriously hard to photograph in any way that makes it look the way it does in real life. The pearlescent quality of the finish is almost impossible to render in photos. It actually looks like you captured it fairly well.


----------



## klgonsneedbotox (Jun 8, 2005)

Nova Designs said:


> Well, since I only have one of these kits (I never did get my promised free one from Thomas ) I will buy a couple. I think the additions are nice ones.


Speaking of Thomas...and the refit...

Didn't he at one time say he had color pictures of the TMP version that were similar to the black and white ones on the cloudster site?


----------



## Nova Designs (Oct 10, 2000)

Yes, he did mention that... I only ever saw one and it was only a closeup of one section. not much more to go on that we already had.


----------



## bigjimslade (Oct 9, 2005)

Raist3001 said:


> Agreed. Subtle is the key. These are a few older pictures as the paint buildup has been removed. However, what I wanted to show was how subtle the pearl effect is and how the primary hull looks mostly white. What you can not see is how the sheen flip flops with color.


That's the best I've seen. I think the decal idea is silly...especially if the fundamental problems in the kit are not fixed.


----------



## Gunstar1 (Mar 1, 2007)

The best I've ever seen was done by user TrekFX.

He posted a video of his refit paint test (from 1992 actually) a year ago on this forum but whatever site was hosting the video is permanently down - if you recall, he had one video set to Star Trek theme music, and another to Alan Parson's Mammagamma - along with his Paramount "Parakeet" spoof.

His layering methods and pearl color use was dead on.

Where are you, TrekFX?!


----------



## Raist3001 (Oct 23, 2003)

Gunstar1 said:


> The best I've ever seen was done by user TrekFX


Yes, he did a fantastic paint job on the ERTL kit. 



> His layering methods and pearl color use was dead on.


Although fantastic, I myself do not think they were dead on. For me, they were not subtle enough. To busy for me.


----------



## Gunstar1 (Mar 1, 2007)

Is the original studio model too busy for you?


----------



## Raist3001 (Oct 23, 2003)

Gunstar1 said:


> Is the original studio model too busy for you?


IMHO....not dead on  

The pearl subtlety in the pic you posted of the Refit is quite evident. In the VID you refer to, the pearl pattern jumps out at you and IMHO is too busy. 

By the way, is the RIM of the primary hull appear to be pearl? It's darker than the rest of the hull.


----------



## Gunstar1 (Mar 1, 2007)

Paul Olsen said that every bit of white surface area was covered in layers of pearls (that excludes the green engineering areas, blue molded parts, and vent/grille areas).

The pearls do cover the edges of the saucer and side walls of the saucer - though I have never seen any apparent pattern shifts on the side deflector grid grooves, I would bet there is at least an initial light uniform pearl coat on it


----------



## klgonsneedbotox (Jun 8, 2005)

Gunstar1 -

A few years back I asked Thomas about the primary hull TMP main aztec pattern and the "sub patterns"...

I told him it APPEARED that the sub pattern was actually just a further breakdown of the main pattern...meaning that Paul Olsen appeared to have stayed "within the lines" when applying the other layers.

Thomas indicated that he thought that was the case.

This could be an optical illusion...because of layering...but I was curious if Paul Olsen was ever asked that question.


----------



## Gunstar1 (Mar 1, 2007)

Paul said that he did break down the main pattern by using smaller panel friskets that FIT IN the main pattern. He also said that he did many many many layers - sometimes mixing several of the colors (mixing meaning that, for example, a red panel layer went on top of a blue that was on top of a gold etc etc) and varying intensities - so one blue panel may be more blue than another blue panel, and you get colors that are not just simply red or blue or gold or green - you get the whole spectrum with the numerous combinations/permutations -not just of color, but of shapes. He also told me the order of most-to-least prevalent was blue, green, gold, red. But that is not simply that there are more blue panels than gold panels, it is a smoother transitioning spectrum.


----------



## klgonsneedbotox (Jun 8, 2005)

Gunstar1 said:


> Paul said that he did break down the main pattern by using smaller panel friskets that FIT IN the main pattern. He also said that he did many many many layers - sometimes mixing several of the colors (mixing meaning that, for example, a red panel layer went on top of a blue that was on top of a gold etc etc) and varying intensities - so one blue panel may be more blue than another blue panel, and you get colors that are not just simply red or blue or gold or green - you get the whole spectrum with the numerous combinations/permutations -not just of color, but of shapes. He also told me the order of most-to-least prevalent was blue, green, gold, red. But that is not simply that there are more blue panels than gold panels, it is a smoother transitioning spectrum.


Very interesting...thanks for the info!


----------



## Gunstar1 (Mar 1, 2007)

Start at the beginning of the Painting the Enterprise Refit ST:TMP sticky thread.
There's more details there from my conversations with Paul Olsen.


----------



## John Duncan (Jan 27, 2001)

I've got too many of these already but might get one more! :thumbsup:


----------



## 1701ALover (Apr 29, 2004)

Here's my question regarding the aztec decals: It says that it will include decals to make either the refit or the -A. Does that mean it will include a set of green strongback decals for the refit and blue ones for the -A? *Ducks shoes and other objects*


----------



## ClubTepes (Jul 31, 2002)

Gunstar1 said:


> Here's the site. Looks like the photos are of an authentic build of the "new" (ha!) kit.
> 
> http://www.round2models.com/models/polar-lights/starship-enterprise/pol808-04
> 
> ...


Hey, if you can paint the darn'd thing better than the offered decals, have at it. Then an old kit is for you.
For only ten dollars more than a seperate decal sheet set, you can have a whole kit.
Sell your old kit on ebay and for even $40.00 and then purchase a new kit wth decals for $60.00 and you have the equilivant of a decal set for $20.00.
Seems like a no brainer to me.

A really good modeler might utilize a combination of personal painting AND the decals. 

Having seen this kit first hand, I can tell you that the decals look better in person than the photos suggest.

Personally, I have not seen ANY build-up look better than what these decals offer.
Are they perfect? No.
But I would say they're 90-95% there.

I've picked up a TOS and a 'E' rerelease and they've improved each kit in some way.
New decals, metal post, whatever
As Dave Metzner said, he knows the guys working on this stuff and says "its in good hands" and I believe him.
The fact that a decal set this comprehensive is included in such a large kit is amazing.

I'm amazed that they tooled a part to serve as a stand for the hangar bay.
My only wish is that they would have corrected the hangar instead.


----------



## Gunstar1 (Mar 1, 2007)

One of the points in this thread was that a decal cannot replicate metallic pearl flip flopping - so that's a 'no brainer' for anyone wanting their model to resemble the studio model no matter what version. 

You said you saw the decals first hand. do they even attempt to make the small panels different intensities of blue, green, red, and gold? Or are they just shades of gray?


----------



## sbaxter (Jan 8, 2002)

Gunstar1 said:


> One of the points in this thread was that a decal cannot replicate metallic pearl flip flopping


Actually, it probably _could_ -- but it sounds like an expensive printing job. At least, I imagine the pearl quality could be done with a decal, but I don't know if "interference" ("flip-flop") inks exist that could be used with decal paper.

Qazpla'

SSB


----------



## klgonsneedbotox (Jun 8, 2005)

I am also someone that believes that a good set of decals combined with some strategic painting, could offer a fairly nice representation.

Check out the Round 2 site: 
http://www.round2models.com/models/polar-lights/starship-enterprise/pol808-08

It looks like more pics are available and SOME are larger (newer ones?).

I like how this kit looks...nice job...

One small critique...I believe the "blues" are too saturated (maybe it's the photos?).

I am big on "scale effect"...and in general, I think most of the non white markings need to be a little lighter.


----------



## ClubTepes (Jul 31, 2002)

klgonsneedbotox said:


> I am also someone that believes that a good set of decals combined with some strategic painting, could offer a fairly nice representation.
> 
> Check out the Round 2 site:
> http://www.round2models.com/models/polar-lights/starship-enterprise/pol808-08
> ...


"Scale effect" on color is due to atmosphere.

Theres no atmosphere is space.

The decals are shades of grey.
But the first sentence of my post stands.
If you can paint better than these decals, then this kit may not be for you.
However, there is a lot of detail in these things.


----------



## lizzybus (Jun 18, 2005)

klgonsneedbotox said:


> I am also someone that believes that a good set of decals combined with some strategic painting, could offer a fairly nice representation.
> 
> Check out the Round 2 site:
> http://www.round2models.com/models/polar-lights/starship-enterprise/pol808-08
> ...


I'd just mist the high contrast blue deals sections with pearl white to calm them down a bit. This would give them a grey/blue appearance. Also if you cut out some masks you could vary the intensity of the mist to give a different shine effect. I think misting with solid color sprays would be too harsh.

Rich


----------



## robcowley (May 29, 2005)

*decals*

what will be the best way to seal the decal sheets onto the kit to prevent future yellowing and them breaking down over time?


----------

