I really miss the original 6 foot Enterprise-D

[SCE2Aux]

I'm currently on a run-through of all Star Trek episodes going in timeline order (Star Trek: Enterprise first, then The Cage>DSC> TOS>TAS>TOS-Movies... by the time I get to the TNG era, I'll alternate TNG, DS9, VOY and TNG-Movies as their eras overlap, and Kelvin/Picard to wrap up) Anyway, right now I'm in early season 4 TNG and having an absolute blast watching episodes I haven't seen in 20 years.

Seeing it all in glorious HD has only heightened my appreciation for the show, except for one thing: The switch to the 4 foot model is really jarring, especially now that I can see so much more detail. The six footer is elegant, its curves are noticeably sharper, and it effectively conveys the massive size of the Enterprise D. I think it's even lit better. The four footer looks ok sometimes, especially from above, but mostly it looks very clunky and toy-like, as if they filmed an Eaglemoss model. I think maybe the four footer is responsible for a portion of the online criticism of thte Galaxy Class design.

I know the reasons for switching over to the newer model; that it was tough to use the cumbersome old six footer on a weekly tv schedule, but I wish they found some way to keep using it, as the later episodes suffered greatly in the visuals department. HD TNG only exacerbates the inadequacy of the model.

Of course, all this doesn't detract from the quality of the episodes in the later seasons, but I will be very much looking forward to seeing the 'proper' Enterprise NCC 1701-D again in Generations, if only for a short time! The CGI model used in DS9 and Voyager ain't too shabby either, so it isn't all bad.

 

[Kor]

We must come up with an in-universe explanation for why the ship's appearance changed!

Kor

 

[Arpy]

The six footer was gorgeous! It’s really great being able to see it in HD now.

I think the four footer looked okay way back when in SD. I agree it’s problematic in HD. The six was really wonderfully otherworldly in SD. It’s beautiful now HD, but I feel like they could do an even sharper and more graceful “nine footer” to get across how otherworldly the six looked to me at the time.

Also, that’s an amazing viewing queue you got there. What’s it been like watching it in that order?

 

[SCE2Aux]

We must come up with an in-universe explanation for why the ship's appearance changed!

Kor

Hmmm. How about this: The ship was damaged after the Borg attack in BOBW , but since half the fleet had just been blown up, the only engineers that were available were... Pakleds.

 

[SCE2Aux]

The six footer was gorgeous! It’s really great being able to see it in HD now.

I think the four footer looked okay way back when in SD. I agree it’s problematic in HD. The six was really wonderfully otherworldly in SD. It’s beautiful now HD, but I feel like they could do an even sharper and more graceful “nine footer” to get across how otherworldly the six looked to me at the time.

Also, that’s an amazing viewing queue you got there. What’s it been like watching it in that order?

A nine foot Enterprise D model would really be something to behold!

Viewing the Star Trek body of work in timeline order has been amazing so far (apart from TOS season 3, which I hadn't seen much of beforehand - it really is as bad as everyone says, with a couple of exceptions). I expect it'll take until late 2020 to finish at my current pace. Each series has its own take, its own strengths and weaknesses, but for a fifty year franchise it's amazing how vibrant and inventive it has been, and how well it hangs together. The biggest surprise so far has been how much I enjoyed certain episides of The Animated Series

TNG is still my favourite though, and watching TNG has been like coming home. The Enterprise D will always be 'my' Enterprise.

 

[Qonundrum]

6' > 4' > 2', in my book. The raised relief surfaces on the 4' do add in a fuzzy lower resolution/SD, but in HD it looks something like either an 16-bit computer 3D render (e.g. Commodore Amiga, Atari ST) or a Lego kit that a crack addict cobbled together.

Ironically, in SD the 6' model looks like globs of clay blopped together by said crack addict's BFF the guy with constant munchies. In HD, it is sublime in detail and nuance, with proper depth accorded the escape pods, hull paneling that has a more realistic depth and not jutting out all over... and no annoying rainbow moire around window cabin lighting that's a dead giveaway for any videotape source with high contrasting patterns/edges that post-processing cleanup algorithms can improve up to a point but not completely... still, in 1987 everyone was floored at the overall picture regardless of hiccups.

Wasn't a 12' model made for "Generations", at least of the saucer for that crash scene? Really gorgeous, detailed model.

Wasn't the 2' model an Ertl kit painted with a reflective material on some windows to make it look illuminated since there wasn't enough room for proper lighting inside?

And as much as I adored the ATG version with three nacelles, isn't placing two torpedo launchers just behind the bridge/deck 2 just a tiny bit disconcerting and not because it's in an incompatible shade of orange? (It's far worse that so little of the new weaponry added was used... )

 

[Qonundrum]

We must come up with an in-universe explanation for why the ship's appearance changed!

Kor

http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/articles/galaxy.htm



(Which discusses the 2' edition too )

 

[SCE2Aux]

Wasn't a 12' model made for "Generations", at least of the saucer for that crash scene? Really gorgeous, detailed model.

You are correct - They made an extra large saucer for the crash. For all other shots, they used the original six footer, albeit a bit spruced up compared to its tv appearances.

 

[Boris Skrbic]

In-universe we have to consider that

a) existing graphics continue to depict the six-footer, especially the large MSD cross-section;

b) the six-footer “magically” surfaces whenever the rare saucer separation is needed;

c) a compromise between the two “magically” appears in the framing story of the ENT finale;

d) the six-footer is entirely back for “Generations”;

e) TNG never stops interspersing stock footage of the six-footer with new shots.

As a result, whatever the reason for the four-footer shape, it has to be something semi-permanent but hardly irreversible at a moment’s notice: structural integrity field upgrades that distort the shape for the “camera”, either in part or in full, the default shape being that of the six-footer?

 

[Finn]

^How are these "in-universe"??

 

[David cgc]

^How are these "in-universe"??

As in, those are the stipulations to consider before finding an in-universe rationale. You can't just say that the ship was rebuilt off-screen in season 3 with a new deflector, thick armor-plating, and the saucer was sliced like a bagel and made taller, you have to figure out a reason where the ship can morph back and forth, in the space of an instant at some times, and why the six-foot design seems to have primacy.

 

[plynch]

Ok, as a TNG lite-weight . . . what are the differences? Can someone post some pics/links?

 

[Qonundrum]

Ok, as a TNG lite-weight . . . what are the differences? Can someone post some pics/links?

Check out Memory Alpha:

The 6' master model was used for main shots, but a 2' model was constructed for more custom and distant shots
https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Galaxy_class_model#Six-foot_model
https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Galaxy_class_model#Two-foot_model


Season 3 saw a need for a new, smaller model to make filming easier:
https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Galaxy_class_model#Four-foot_model


Scroll to the top of the page to see a photo of all three 1701-D models side-by-side on the top-right:
https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Galaxy_class_model

 

[plynch]

I guess I meant are there onscreen examples of each so I could compare how they look in the show? Not really seeing that in the long article.

 

[clevercat]

This is completely crazy so I will start by saying I love TOS and watch it on Netflix. I only joined this thread to respond to a thread from 09 about a flat blue dog you had a a child - I had/have it! Your request turned up in a google search about the dog just now. Here is the pic you requested at that time https://www.pinterest.ca/pin/466333736415913722/

 

[plynch]

That's insane! Please head to the TOS forum and threads and poke around and see if any interest you. So glad to have you aboard. Thanks for the link. What a weird toy!

 

[tomswift2002]

I guess I meant are there onscreen examples of each so I could compare how they look in the show? Not really seeing that in the long article.

The 4-footer is really easy to spot on screen, especially when you see the underside, as all the pods on the outer saucer rim stick out even further than on the six foot model. The rim on the six foot has the pods but the are closer to the saucer so it gives a smoother look, rather than the “teeth” look that the 4 footer has.

Also, for me, I find the saucer on the 6 footer is more oval in shape whereas the 4 footer is oval but squished in at the Sides.

The 2 foot model, especially in the original SD, you can tell by looking at the bottom of the engineering hull, as the detail disappears on the ship when the 2footer goes to warp (think Voyager opening), but the Remaster fixed this.

 

[PT109]

The 4-footer is really easy to spot on screen, especially when you see the underside

Yep, this ^

I guess I meant are there onscreen examples of each so I could compare how they look in the show? Not really seeing that in the long article.

@plynch, this article has side-by-side screenshots near the top http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/articles/galaxy.htm

 

[plynch]

Thanks.

 

[Salinga]

The funny thing is, that all these models you can buy of the 1701-D seem to always be a mix of the 4- and the 6-footer: The nacelles section is the 4-footer and the saucer from the 6-footer.