My homebrew kitbashes

[Kaiser]

I for one consider myself very lucky indeed to have access to such excellent "parts boxes", seeing as how I do not have the time or talent to "draw" my own from scratch.

Starfleet vessels tend to have characteristics in common much of the time (saucer, nacelles, 2ndary hulls, etc), which is a plus. I think I've managed to put together some unique configurations here with several of my efforts, and at least tried to put my own "spin" on the ones that are "variations on a theme" (Connie refits, etc).

If you disagree, that's your own opinion, and you're entitled to it. There are plenty of other threads for you. All I ask is that you leave mine to my work and those who DO enjoy it.

On to tonight's entries:

2250s refit Durance class frigate

and the SS St Christopher (ex USS Erikson), a demilitarized Vespucci class scout

Nice ones

 

[Kaiser]

You said what has been on my mind for some time, but never said because I didn't want to unintentionally offend.

I would like to see some designs that are either brand new, or use newly designed parts, such as using/heavily modifying an Excelsior saucer to make a supplement/replacement for the Larson and Loknar class, for example.

I think Capt. Shade on Dev art made those with his own style of ship parts which at Kavinveldars dev art page.

 

[Kaiser]

Also my 2 cents on this.

Im also grateful for these parts as it gave me chance to do what i used to as a kid when i had a fresh piece of notebook paper and a nice #2 Pencil

Might as well get used to the fact people will prolly use these parts and other for a long time and if you dont like it blame Neal Davidson aka Vance for it and / or Every Star Trek Ship designer starting from Matt Jefferies to the lil kid who saw Star Trek 2009 or Prime Trek and is doodling her or his own lil ships on Paper in school or when there home building them from model kits or Lego's and who might grow up and design canon Trek ships in the 2030's.

Live long and Prosper Star Trek and anything attached or based on it

 

[Ian Keldon]

Went back and "finished" the Durance refit...I must've been zonked when I posted that WIP with several parts missing.

 

[Kaiser]

Went back and "finished" the Durance refit...I must've been zonked when I posted that WIP with several parts missing.

Looks good

 

[nightwind1]

^And yet, here you are. As long as you just rearrange parts you'll never come up with anything new. Might as well save yourself the time and just browse the Starship Schematics Database.

So you come in here to crap all over someone else's fun? Y'know, if you don't like it, no one says you have to come here to this thread and look at it.

 

[sojourner]

^Sorry, the minute it was posted here it was open to criticism. Good or bad.

Ultimately all I am saying is that Ian could take some time and actually come up with something new and unique.

 

[Ian Keldon]

^Sorry, the minute it was posted here it was open to criticism. Good or bad.

Ultimately all I am saying is that Ian could take some time and actually come up with something new and unique.

The components may be standardized, but I don't as a rule "redo" other people's work. My designs are my own. I just have help executing the drawings.

How would my work be any more "artistic" if I drew my own components from scratch? They'd look just like the one's I'm using now, assuming I was able to do them right.

 

[sojourner]

The assumption would be that you would create something new and NOT redraw existing components.

 

[Ian Keldon]

Whatever, sojourner.

If you have a legitimate complaint or suggestion about any of my designs, feel free to post it.

If you just want to bash me for working within the existing design paradigms in regards to components, then feel free to find another thread to frequent.

 

[sojourner]

Just keep pushing what you can do. Don't limit yourself to the components.

 

[largo]

yeah, we want to see some ORIGINAL frisbees with sticks and nacelles.

 

[arthur2sheds]

The Navy does not scale down a carrier hull to make a PT boat.

Most of the designs (or very similar) up thread have been around the internet a thousand times. They take little time or work and it shows.

That is most unfair. Even the simplest 'kitbashes' take a fair bit of time and a certain skill level.
Everyone who takes the time and patience to come up with these designs has my appreciation. The Franz Joseph destroyer/scout/dreadnought and TWOK Reliant are just basic 'kitbashes' on the Enterprise but we still love them.
I've really enjoyed this thread, please keep posting. As soon as my post count is high enough i will be posting my own designs. I also make no excuses for using Vances and Captain Shades parts sheets and i look forward to peoples comments good and bad!

 

[The Axeman]

The Franz Joseph stuff is indeed kitbash writ large, and they look it. I am no fan of his work in that respect. The Reliant is also a bit more than a kitbash, as shuffling components around wont make that whole rear section or the roll bar. Genuine 'kitbash' plastic models like Forbin makes are a whole other world away from the cut & paste artwork that litters the internet. They take all sorts of parts and disguise or modify them to make genuinely new models.

I am with Sojourner on this, you should push to improve and make your own designs with your own stamp on them. Kitbashes tend to be the first rung on the ladder of design and creativity, and it should only be considered a stepping stone to other things. I'd much rather see an amateur attempt at a model or drawing than the best cut & paste work.

 

[Draculasaurus]

Having no desire to debate the relative merit of kitbashes, I'll simply say; I like Ian's designs, and find many of them to be very creative.
-especially the chunky cargo ones!
keep up the good work.

 

[Ian Keldon]

Thanks for all the support guys!

Today's contestants:

USS George Washington,systems testbed for the Constitution class

And lastly, the USS Valhalla

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Again, in the Lafeyette, you are doing something that I called attention to upthread, though less so: you are obscuring part of the main deflector when viewed from the front. I don't know how everyone else feels about this, but I think it's a no-no. I believe that the main deflector should not be obscured at all when viewed from the front.

 

[Kaiser]

Have to agree with CorporalCaptain on that.

but very cool designs there

 

[Ian Keldon]

Does this meet with more approval?

USS Lafeyette

I had to go back and add credits in any event

 

[sojourner]

You have an extra deflector in the front view.