• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Favourite Enterprise...

Which version is your favourite...

  • Cage era (1st pilot) version

    Votes: 1 1.0%
  • WNMHGB era (2nd pilot) version

    Votes: 3 2.9%
  • Kirk era (series) version

    Votes: 40 38.8%
  • TMP refit (TMP, TWoK & TSFS) version

    Votes: 42 40.8%
  • 1701A (TVH, TFF & TUC) version

    Votes: 5 4.9%
  • ST09 (Abrams) version

    Votes: 12 11.7%

  • Total voters
    103
Yeah, again, I'm completely in the minority and I understand it. But, for example, I really like the lighting that they used on TNG and could never stand the revised, darker lighting scheme of Generations. Or even Voyager for that matter. I know people generally think the TNG lighting was way too bright, and deride it's production design as well ("hotel lobby," anyone?) but I still like it.

That's actually why I like the TFF bridge. To me, it combines the functionality and efficiency of the TOS and TMP bridges with the elegance and warmth of the TNG bridge.

Now, if only TFF hadn't re-used so many TNG sets...

I like the TNG production design just fine. In fact, I liked the way the alternate Ent-D bridge was lit in Yesterday's Enterprise. Nice and dark! :lol: I hated the lighting in Generations overall. Very muddy, dark, and washed out looking -- similar to the lighting in Nemesis...ugh. I didn't mind the dark bridge though. I dunno...I kinda think a starship bridge should be kinda like a submarine bridge as far as lighting goes...but that's just me.
 
I think Generations is an odd case too. I know they had a very well-respected cinematographer on that film, and I know that he was trying to go for a much more dramatic lighting scheme than was possible on a TV series where lighting setups can't be changed for each and every shot. But to me it just came off looking extremely unnatural.

It looks so dark that you have a hard time believing the crew could even be seeing what they are doing. There's tons of very noticable shadows being cast everywhere, which just looks odd. Even times when unusual lighting was deliberate -- such as in Ten Forward when there's supposed to be intense lighting from a nearby star -- look "off" somehow.

About the only lighting I liked in that film was the Enterprise-B bridge, during which they obviously tried to mimic the lighting of the TOS movies, and the exterior scenes.
 
Also, if memory serves, all the Enterprise footage was shot by Trumbull and the Klingon ships and V'Ger were all shot by Apogee/Dykstra...
I believe that's correct. However, I believe the actual V'Ger cloud was done by Trumbull, while the V'Ger model itself was shot by Dykstra.

As for the choice of blue screen vs. black background, I don't know why ILM would have chosen one over the other. But, regardless, I still think it is a shame that they had to ruin the beautiful paint job to accommodate their chosen method of filming.

Trumbull's TMP spaceship shots are accomplished via the techniques developed for Close Encounters and later improved upon for Blade Runner. The models are photographed against black velvet because then you can light the model any way you want as opposed to lighting to prevent blue-screen spill and other issues. But since the models can have black in them, then you have the problem that you can't pull a luminance matte off the photography because anything black on the model will be see-through. So, what you do is replace the black velvet with a backlit white screen and repeat the camera pass to shoot a high-contrast black and white image, where the ship is a dark silhouette against white. Push the contrast in post and you get a pretty solid matte element (albeit reflections are sometimes still a problem, so you might have to have artists hand animate fixes). This is known as Hi-Con matting. In some productions, they wrapped the models in white (maybe gauze) and shot a second pass against black to pull a matte that would have no reflections.

The problem is that ILM didn't do hi-con mattes. Their system at the time leaned heavily on the photochemical blue-screen process, where you shoot different passes of the model against a solid blue background. In the lab you do some tricks and the blue doesn't print and ends up as clear, so that's how you get the mattes. Now, the Trek features after TMP were lowish budget, so for ILM to do the shots economically they probably had to do what they could to shoot and process the shots with a miminum of fuss. A pearlescent model is doomed to a lot of blue-screen spill, so their apparent solution was to dull down the paintjob. I'm not certain precisely when this happened, as some of the Enterprise shots (notably the initial approach to the Reliant) still appear to have some of that pearlescence, but it's possible that as the production progressed that dulled the model more to make it easier for them to photograph.

Hope that makes sense.
 
They dulled it enough to prevent a lot of bluescreen spill, but not enough to obscure it completely. Besides, they also reused a lot of TMP footage, so they couldn't go too far or it'd really stick out which shot came from where.
 
Wow. No love for the Pike era Enterprise? I quite like it after the series production version.
 
Also, if memory serves, all the Enterprise footage was shot by Trumbull and the Klingon ships and V'Ger were all shot by Apogee/Dykstra...
I believe that's correct. However, I believe the actual V'Ger cloud was done by Trumbull, while the V'Ger model itself was shot by Dykstra.

As for the choice of blue screen vs. black background, I don't know why ILM would have chosen one over the other. But, regardless, I still think it is a shame that they had to ruin the beautiful paint job to accommodate their chosen method of filming.

Trumbull's TMP spaceship shots are accomplished via the techniques developed for Close Encounters and later improved upon for Blade Runner. The models are photographed against black velvet because then you can light the model any way you want as opposed to lighting to prevent blue-screen spill and other issues. But since the models can have black in them, then you have the problem that you can't pull a luminance matte off the photography because anything black on the model will be see-through. So, what you do is replace the black velvet with a backlit white screen and repeat the camera pass to shoot a high-contrast black and white image, where the ship is a dark silhouette against white. Push the contrast in post and you get a pretty solid matte element (albeit reflections are sometimes still a problem, so you might have to have artists hand animate fixes). This is known as Hi-Con matting. In some productions, they wrapped the models in white (maybe gauze) and shot a second pass against black to pull a matte that would have no reflections.

The problem is that ILM didn't do hi-con mattes. Their system at the time leaned heavily on the photochemical blue-screen process, where you shoot different passes of the model against a solid blue background. In the lab you do some tricks and the blue doesn't print and ends up as clear, so that's how you get the mattes. Now, the Trek features after TMP were lowish budget, so for ILM to do the shots economically they probably had to do what they could to shoot and process the shots with a miminum of fuss. A pearlescent model is doomed to a lot of blue-screen spill, so their apparent solution was to dull down the paintjob. I'm not certain precisely when this happened, as some of the Enterprise shots (notably the initial approach to the Reliant) still appear to have some of that pearlescence, but it's possible that as the production progressed that dulled the model more to make it easier for them to photograph.

Hope that makes sense.

Yes, it does. Thanks for re-explaining all that. It's something I knew at one time, but forgot in the fog of time...:lol:
 
They dulled it enough to prevent a lot of bluescreen spill, but not enough to obscure it completely. Besides, they also reused a lot of TMP footage, so they couldn't go too far or it'd really stick out which shot came from where.


There's certain shots in Khan where it's pretty obvious the paint has been modified. To me, the shot where the Enterprise pulls up alongside Regula One...it looks almost completely gray in that. Ugh.
 
Wow. No love for the Pike era Enterprise? I quite like it after the series production version.


I love it. It's hard to pick a favorite. I just like all the detail of the TMP ship...but, I love the Pike era Ent through TMP.
 
I don't hate the new ship--I've warmed up to her and look forward to seeing her again. But both she and the TMP design suffer from being too pretty. The original design strikes a balance between (illusory, I know) utilitarianism and gee-whiz pulp grace. And I love the copper "radar" dish.
 
Last edited:
I used to like the refit best, but over time I've realized that I just really don't love the nacelles. The original ship just evokes the feeling of a naval cruiser, and it edges out the refit on those basis.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top