Question about Star Trek Maps

[bfollowell]

I've picked up some of the older Bantam/Ballentine Trek items over the years, including original editions of Franz Joseph's Technical Manual and Enterprise Blueprints. I've seen several of you refer to Star Trek Maps fondly even though I'd somehow never heard of this item.

I picked up a decent looking copy off of ebay last night for $13.16 + $3 s/h. It sounds like a steal. From the looks of it, it appears to be in really good condition. I won't be able to tell for sure until it's delivered and I check it out though. If one of you was the bidder I out-bit, I'm sorry it didn't work out for you.

My question is this; what all was included with this item? From the description and the photos, it looks like it includes four maps (two wall sized poster maps front and back) as well as a 32 page manual and the paper slip cover packaging. To any of you that own this set, does that sound about like it's a complete set?

Thanks guys.

- Byron

 

[Christopher]

^Yep, that's about it. Two double-sided foldout poster maps (one of the whole UFP, the other of the octant patrolled by the Enterprise) and the Introduction to Navigation booklet, inside a cardboard pouch.

 

[bfollowell]

Thanks for the info Christopher. I'm anxious to receive it now. If it's in anywhere near as good a shape as it looks to be in the photographs, I'll definitely consider it an awesome deal. The next best price I've seen on these things through Amazon, ebay and Alibris usually runs around $50-$60 and I see a lot of them going for closer to $100.

Now I'll have to see if I can find a decent price on it's later Pocket Books cousin, Star Trek Star Charts.

- Byron

 

[Christopher]

^Well, it's probably in better shape than my copy, whose folds are barely holding together anymore.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Random trivia: In the Nero comic, the star charts made by Rura Penthe inmate (and former Starfleet cartographer) Clavell are from the old Star Trek Maps. The heart of the UFP and a map of Klingon space are clearly identifiable on page 36 of the TPB.

 

[Therin of Andor]

The heartbreaker: due to the end of Bantam's license, "Star Trek Maps" essentially went straight to the remainder bins. I bought my copy (and one for a raffle prize) and a few for friends for $AUD 4.00 each in 1981. The shrinkwrap was quite brittle, so most had some splits in that. A few years later, you'd see the odd copy for around $20-$40 on dealers' tables, then the price tended to skyrocket, sometimes into the hundreds! A few years ago, I found a second hand set (the packet covered in clear Contact adhesive) in a book store, back to the $20 price and pounced on the chance to have a less-than-mint copy to preserve my original.

 

[Steve Roby]

I never saw a copy when it was released. I think I paid about $50 or $75 for a copy 20 years or so ago. Most expensive copy I saw was one at a con around the same time -- the dealer wanted $150 US or $200 Canadian. Didn't sell it, not at that con, anyway.

 

[Mysterion]

I've still got the original copy I bought back in 1980. Like, Christopher describes with his set, mine are coming apart at the folds. I think this is symptom of the very sharp creasing of the map sheets. Was fortunate to find a second copy a couple years back at a reasonable price, and in better condition than my original.

I much prefer this depiction of the Trek universe to that shown in the Star Charts book, all due respect to Geoff Mandel and later incarnations of Star Trek.

 

[TheAlmanac]

I much prefer this depiction of the Trek universe to that shown in the Star Charts book, all due respect to Geoff Mandel and later incarnations of Star Trek.

What is it that appeals to you more about the old-school approach...?

 

[Pauln6]

You can get star maps for projectors these days, I wonder why nobody has produced a projectable Trek universe map.

 

[Mysterion]

I much prefer this depiction of the Trek universe to that shown in the Star Charts book, all due respect to Geoff Mandel and later incarnations of Star Trek.

What is it that appeals to you more about the old-school approach...?

Well, this is in no way objective, but - the Star Trek Maps is the ST of my youth with wide open spaces and plenty of room for new stories and places we hadn't seen in TOS or TAS. The Star Trek Star Charts is the later ST crowded and smooshed down into a smaller area, crowded with continuity (sometime contradictory), and only in two dimensions. It just seems too cluttered to me, for lack of a better word.

 

[James Swallow]

I much prefer this depiction of the Trek universe to that shown in the Star Charts book, all due respect to Geoff Mandel and later incarnations of Star Trek.

Actually, Geoff was heavily involved with the original Star Trek Maps as well, back before he got involved working on the franchise as a graphic designer.

 

[Christopher]

Well, this is in no way objective, but - the Star Trek Maps is the ST of my youth with wide open spaces and plenty of room for new stories and places we hadn't seen in TOS or TAS. The Star Trek Star Charts is the later ST crowded and smooshed down into a smaller area, crowded with continuity (sometime contradictory), and only in two dimensions. It just seems too cluttered to me, for lack of a better word.

I'm okay with the later version, because it reinforces the fact that even a few light-years is really an unimaginably huge distance. TOS had ships traveling a thousand light-years in 12 hours or getting to the edge of the galaxy on an annual basis, and that's just not respecting the sheer immensity of space. The modern shows and Star Charts have a better appreciation of just how inconceivably huge the galaxy is.

I mean, just within 100 light years of Earth, there should be something like 15,000 star systems. Even if only, say, 10 percent of them have habitable planets, that's still a huge amount of territory.

 

[Mysterion]

I much prefer this depiction of the Trek universe to that shown in the Star Charts book, all due respect to Geoff Mandel and later incarnations of Star Trek.

Actually, Geoff was heavily involved with the original Star Trek Maps as well, back before he got involved working on the franchise as a graphic designer.

Understood. I'm just saying, in my opinion, that I think he did better work the first time around.

 

[Captain Robert April]

I've still got my set, but since I've now got in in .pdf, I don't need to drag it out so much.

 

[Starlock]

Geoff got busy on another Star Trek Map

Beautiful work - but rather expensive.

 

[Mysterion]

Geoff got busy on another Star Trek Map

Beautiful work - but rather expensive.

Expensive and the same artwork from the fold-out pages in the back of Star Charts.

 

[F. King Daniel]

We can update our copies by using a black marker over Romulus!

 

[NSTrekfan]

I prefer the maps to Star Charts because the maps take the third dimention into account. Star Charts is a pretty book but pretty much useless for determining how far things are supposed to be from each other. Next time I'll take more substance over more style.

 

[Christopher]

I prefer the maps to Star Charts because the maps take the third dimention into account. Star Charts is a pretty book but pretty much useless for determining how far things are supposed to be from each other.

Well, a lot of its star systems are real, so there are places you can get their coordinates in order to calculate their distances, or programs you can use to calculate them for you.

Still, yeah, the lack of a third dimension can be misleading, so it's important to take it with a grain of salt when two systems appear to be close together.