Thanks! On my model I used a plastic pen to start with, cut it to match the upper curves, and then shaped it so it flattened out towards the back. I didn't take any images of that part while working on this model, but I used the same technique on the previous model. Here are some comparisons when I attached that piece. And yeah, there is supposed to be a straight raised piece over the top for the series version of the model... I just wasn't happy with how my attempts at making it looked, so I left it off. As for what it is... I'm not sure on the smaller model. In the later images it has a hole drilled through it, so I think it was used for hanging the model. Given that, I don't think it is just a cover (like on the 11 foot model). It might be part of the dorsal... but I'm not sure. I'm hoping that when faced with building this in the same materials as the original, the reasons for why things were made certain ways will become clearer. I'm already trying to think through how I might do things and then looking at the images of the original to see if they did things in a similar way. Plus I was going to put together a series of questions for Datin... basically to see how much of the building of that model he recalls from back in 1964 so I can match it as closely as possible.
I've been playing around some more with my camera and made some attempts to re-create shots of the original model that I really liked. Two series of shots of the original that I was especially fond of from my childhood were the shots of the model in Requiem for Methuselah and from the ViewMaster set. As a kid I really wanted the model seen in both (not knowing that they were the same model back then). Here is my attempt at the ViewMaster shots... And a quick comparison with the original shots... I'll most likely try again to get the lighting better. And here is a quick version of the table shot from Requiem for Methuselah and the Enterprise streaking towards Andromeda from By Any Other Name.
Thanks guys! So I've been considering entering my model at a local model contest, but I'm not really sure this model is up to the quality needed for being judged (though I've gotten great feedback on the idea over at HobbyTalk). That, plus how do you explain that it isn't supposed to look like the Enterprise most people are expecting to see? With that in mind, I took a number of images of the model in a setting that seemed like it might be similar to what it would face if I entered it. Of course this may have nothing to do with the model itself... I might not be ready to have my work judged at this point (I've never had anything I've made judged before). And I know there are a lot of things I could do better with more experience. I've got about a week to decide one way or the other.
I think you should go for it. Take the risk and you'll have a better chance of reaping appreciation than if you let the model collect dust. Maybe there will be much better talent up against you, but I really have my doubts. One recommendation. If the rules permit it, be sure to bring along reference materials. Drawings, photos, maybe even film loops so people can see what you're going for here. By the way, I really want to see Zach Quinto (preferably as Spock) holding this model. I think you know the photo I'm talking about.
Go for it... this model is among the truly best ones I've seen... I'd vote for it. BTW... what color did you use for the "red" nacelle caps?
That is a great idea! I'd love that... but not with this model. Two-third scale makes for a surprisingly smaller model (specially when someone is it the shot with it). Well, I wasn't going for red (or reddish)... Ideally I would have liked something like the inside of a pair in color/look. These images are what I was using as a reference... The domes are painted transparent orange on the inside and pearlescent on the outside, with cotton balls inside the domes. The domes aren't glued on, and I have a second set of domes where the orange isn't as deep that I can use (that are currently on my first attempt). I also have a stuffing material (like the cotton) that isn't as white. In person, it actually feels pretty close to the reference images (the pearlescent really does help).
For any model display, it might help to have poster art of the three-footer to explain to the judges just what you are doing. My guess is that a lot of folks only believe that one model was used, or that two models actually looked like one another.
[chuckles delightedly as his trap springs] Excellent point! So when does work on the 1:1 version begin?
Get over yourself already and enter this puppy! The only one who could possibly find fault with that model is some rabid Star Trek hater, and they're pretty rare.
Well, the original plan was to finish with the updates/changes to the 33 inch plans before starting... and in the mean time find someone who could do the turning of the major pieces. The thing is, I actually may do another interim step. I'm considering doing a one-to-one version of one of the nacelles (not in wood), but making molds of the detail pieces from that for the final model. One of my clients is a framing and art restoration business, and they use a lot of techniques that I could apply to making multiple copies of parts. In a couple cases it would be nice to make only one part and be able to pull six identical parts from a mold of that original. Plus, by finishing up the nacelle as a whole, that will give me another opportunity to try out paint colors and decaling techniques. Slightly off topic... I was already considering doing something similar to help me with my plans of the 11 foot model. I wanted to build a half-scale model of the port nacelle to work out the details of how the nacelles were built. I could then translate what I found down by another half-scale to my quarter-scale plans. I had done a quick-in-dirty half-scale representation of a section of the port nacelle to study the ramp at the end of the inboard channel last year. I found it quite helpful, so that was why I had intended to try doing the full nacelle (but with far more care in the construction).
I'm getting tired of contributing nothing but encouragement to your thread, but I love your studied, meticulous approach. You're like the Gregor Mendel or Marie Curie of artists -- carefully working your way through difficulties using readily-available materials and re-purposed tools. If I were doing this, I'd spend tens of thousands of dollars on vacu-form devices, rapid-prototypers, laser levelers -- and I suspect my first few efforts would still only look good when seen through the bottom of a freshly-drained glass of strong beer. There are several artists around here I watch eagerly, but you're the only one whose description of your work puts me on the edge of my seat. Which is rather dangerous because I'm currently using an exercise ball as a chair.
Thanks guys! Well, I wouldn't classify it as that. The thing is, in a lot of cases I don't have fully formed ideas on how to progress until I talk it through with someone. For example, I had considered doing the non-wood nacelles... but I hadn't fully thought through what it would involve or what the benefits would be until I posted in response to your question. While writing that I started to notice the number of detail pieces that are needed for the nacelles (and how many are repeated). So what had started out as a vague consideration became my primary path forward because you asked a question. That doesn't seem like nothing to me.