John Eaves working on STXI

[Enterpriserules]

CaptainDonovin said:
Well I for one love the E-E and thought Eaves other works were pretty cool so I'm glad he's involved. As for Ryan Church I think this movie is going to look great.Just hope the script is as good as they say it is.

I totally agree. I thought that the E-E really captured the heart of the original and the movie E more than the D ever did. I also really liked Ryan Church's work on Episode III was brilliant. The star destroyers and the early ties looked fantastic. I that the look of the new Trek could be great. I too just hope the story and the new actors are good.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

I think the E-E is an awful design - there's not a thing I like about it, other than perhaps a little of the detailing.

I like Ryan Church's work quite a bit. I imagine he'll have more to do with the look of the Enterprise than Eaves will, and I certainly hope so.

 

[HarryM]

The worst part of the E-E is the gothic black hull plating and sneaker nacelles. The overall shape is not bad but nothing very original. Take the basic shape and make it look faster by squishing and lengthening it. At least someone wisely steered him clear of the "thanksgiving turkey" version.

 

[ancient]

The E-E is too squatty, which makes it look small & lop-sided from most angles. The TMP-E looked bigger, and better.

As for this other guy, I hope he does a good job. I'll tell you what I think of his Trek stuff when I see it.

 

[arch101]

Regarding John Eaves i am quite satisfied having him in XI. I big admirer of his Enterprise E design. Actually i fell his Enterprise design as true successor to Matt Jeffries TOS Enterprise and Andrew Probert Enterprise Refit.

[/QUOTE]

Except that the E was SUPPOSED to be a successor to the D, not to ships of (chronlogiclly) a century earlier. Eaves (and whomever gave him permission to do what he did) blew 8 years of TNG design precedent out of the water. A design precedent backed up by numerous Galaxy class, Nebula class ,Runabouts, Shuttles, starbases and even the Intrepid class-all of which carry a similar design vocabulary. Eaves just "went his own way" because he felt like it. Even funnier, Probert's newest "Trek" stuff takes Eaves'design precidents into consideration. A true designer at work, I suppose.

 

[Saul]

Tyson said:

"As far as the NX-01 goes, his early concepts of those were wonderful as well. They looked like earlier versions of the NCC-1701."

One, one of his concepts looked like the NCC-1701 with panel lines all over it. The rest looked like knives or 24th century speedboats.

Eaves is into the "kewl" design aesthetic. That works fine for things like Star Wars and Transformers, but Star Trek's style has (until fairly recently) always been more refined and sleeker than that. His previous major Trek work, with the possible miraculous exception of the Akira, is tiresome, repetitive and visually too bloody busy. For the 24th century this was tolerable, but after seeing his work on ENT, he Eaves seems like a one trick pony to me, and I don't want to see him try and tackle anything close to TOS.

Except that he didn't design the NX Enterprise. That was Doug Drexler. So...

Also Church seems to be working on the Design of the Enterprise for the movie.

 

[skylark]

Also, remember that Eaves is now working for a different set of producers. That could make a huge difference in what he's allowed to do.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Or *encouraged* to do.

 

[Arpy]

My $0.02: they're drunk.

Why hire the guys around at Trek's end and not at those at its peak?

I'm afraid this is going to turn out a glossy husk nostalgia-fest. ...Trek's no longer the future - it's kitsch.

Okay, so bah humbug from me.

EDIT: grammar

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Arpy said:
Why hire the guys around at Trek's end and not at those at it's peak?

Where's the plural, there? Who've they hired besides Eaves?

 

[theARE]

The detailing may have been a problem with the E-E, but I don't think there is anything wrong with the basic shape of it.

I'd actually like to see a TOS styled Sovereign, I think it would fit in quite well with the original Enterprise.

Some of you may be right that Eaves has a tendency to go a bit mad with detailing, but J.J and Co obviously have a clear vision of what they want their Star Trek to be, so I'm sure they'll reign him in if he goes to far.

 

[starburst]

Anyone ever read the Art of Star Trek book?

Says in there Eaves first Trek movie was Generations, he was asked to come up with a new communicator for the movie and the first thing he drew up was a TOS communicator...was told to go watch some of the 'newer' stuff, so hes not really stuck in TNG ect he was told to go there and developed it.

I like the E-E, I dont mind the NX-01, its the schimitar I didnt like

 

[Stardate]

Vejur said:

Regarding John Eaves i am quite satisfied having him in XI. I big admirer of his Enterprise E design. Actually i fell his Enterprise design as true successor to Matt Jeffries TOS Enterprise and Andrew Probert Enterprise Refit.

arch said
Except that the E was SUPPOSED to be a successor to the D, not to ships of (chronlogiclly) a century earlier. Eaves (and whomever gave him permission to do what he did) blew 8 years of TNG design precedent out of the water. A design precedent backed up by numerous Galaxy class, Nebula class ,Runabouts, Shuttles, starbases and even the Intrepid class-all of which carry a similar design vocabulary. Eaves just "went his own way" because he felt like it. Even funnier, Probert's newest "Trek" stuff takes Eaves'design precidents into consideration. A true designer at work, I suppose.

[/QUOTE] I want to point out there is defiantly some similarities between Voyager and Enterprise E design. The guy that gave Eaves permission was Berman i think. They wanted more aggressive design and Eaves delivered great ship. It didn't hurt that he sought his inspiration to Enterprise Refit(my favorite design) instead of using unbalance Ent-D designs.
In retrospect i find Galaxy and Nebula design a bad design(sorry Probert). Didn't Jefferies made remarks, that they had turned his Navy-esque bridge into "the lobby of the Hilton,,, I am guessing but he must be refereeing to Ent-D brigde.

 

[starburst]

Voyager in my opinion took the 'look' of the E-D and made it perfect (didnt like the bridge though), I like the D but I prefer the TOS, Refit & E designs, the silouette says Enterprise to me more, although the D is a better ship than the B or C (coming from someone who loves the Excelsior its odd)

There is things I would change on the TOS ship, I dont know how to describe it but it would be elements from the refit...but not (thickening up sections which in my opinion looked weak-the neck and nacelle pylons)

 

[Stardate]

I dont know how to describe it but it would be elements from the refit...but not (thickening up sections which in my opinion looked weak-the neck and nacelle pylons)

I totally agree with you on the neck and nacelle pylons being to weak in Enterprise TOS and Refit..
This was the main reason why Eaves eliminated the neck in his Enterprise-E. He quoted that in TWOK that if Reliant had aimed little higher they could have splited the Enterprise in 2 parts..
I would like to see combination of these 3 designs. Enterprise Refit, Voyager and Enterprise-E are inspiration for the New Enterprise. I also really like this Nightshade design by Koerner in my signature.

 

[Cary L. Brown]

theARE said:
The detailing may have been a problem with the E-E, but I don't think there is anything wrong with the basic shape of it.

I'd actually like to see a TOS styled Sovereign, I think it would fit in quite well with the original Enterprise.

Some of you may be right that Eaves has a tendency to go a bit mad with detailing, but J.J and Co obviously have a clear vision of what they want their Star Trek to be, so I'm sure they'll reign him in if he goes to far.

Actually, I think that the E-E looks pretty good. I have three major issues with it.

1) The impulse engines... which are just unspeakably poorly design, IMHO. They may "look cool" but from a technical standpoint (assuming that they're not some new form of "impulse" totally unrelated to all prior forms seen that has nothing to do with the technical term "impulse" whatsoever)

2) The silly, senseless "stair-stepping" all over the underside of the primary hull, which serves absolutely NO apparent purpose and makes for large internal volumes which are out of alignment with any possible decklines)

3) The bizarre paint job, with large areas painted in different colors for no apparent reason other than "to make it look kewl."

If the E-E design were reworked to remove the stairstepping, to make the impulse design more logical, to have a FRONT-FACING deflector, and to have more logical coloration... it would be a GREAT design.

As of now, it's really a starship design done as graphic-arts rather than as engineering.

 

[theARE]

I agree. The basic shapes and lines of the E-E are great. Like I said earlier in the thread, it's probably the best later design Trek ship, as it has a lot of the grace and beauty of the original.

 

[HarryM]

Exactly. That strange stuff going (beams and stair-stepped levels) on on the bottom of the p-hull is not good.

To me all this strange geometric dark patterning and gothic flying buttress detail is reminiscent of the Borg. Strange design choice as ordinarily you want to distinguish the hero ship from the main opponent, and they veered towards it. If there was some subtle statement they were trying to make it was lost on me.

Cary L. Brown said:

theARE said:
The detailing may have been a problem with the E-E, but I don't think there is anything wrong with the basic shape of it.

I'd actually like to see a TOS styled Sovereign, I think it would fit in quite well with the original Enterprise.

Some of you may be right that Eaves has a tendency to go a bit mad with detailing, but J.J and Co obviously have a clear vision of what they want their Star Trek to be, so I'm sure they'll reign him in if he goes to far.

Actually, I think that the E-E looks pretty good. I have two major issues with it.

1) The impulse engines... which are just unspeakably poorly design, IMHO. They may "look cool" but from a technical standpoint (assuming that they're not some new form of "impulse" totally unrelated to all prior forms seen that has nothing to do with the technical term "impulse" whatsoever)

2) The silly, senseless "stair-stepping" all over the underside of the primary hull, which serves absolutely NO apparent purpose and makes for large internal volumes which are out of alignment with any possible decklines)

3) The bizarre paint job, with large areas painted in different colors for no apparent reason other than "to make it look kewl."

If the E-E design were reworked to remove the stairstepping, to make the impulse design more logical, to have a FRONT-FACING deflector, and to have more logical coloration... it would be a GREAT design.

As of now, it's really a starship design done as graphic-arts rather than as engineering.

 

[Kegek]

Eaves is okay. Good, not great. He's not Andrew Probert, who IMHO delivered the best two Star Trek designs - the Constitution Refit and the Galaxy class - both good buildings-on of Matt Jeffries' classic shape.

Eaves' Enterprise-E was alright, if not up to that calibre. If he gives us a design of that quality, I'll be satisfied.

 

[starburst]

Vejur said:
...in TWOK that if Reliant had aimed little higher they could have splited the Enterprise in 2 parts..

Ive always thought that and the pylons to be the weakest part of the original/refit design and the only real fault to jefferies. Same goes for the Klingon Battlecruiser (and the Bird of Prey after), it would seem to tempting a target to try and sever the neck area and figurativly decapitate it.