Size Of The New Enterprise (large images)

[SonicRanger]

In 40 years of trek, what we call the “official” dimensions of a starship has always been established by the artist that imagined, planned and designed her. Jefferies, Probert, Sternbach, Eaves and Drexler, their words have always been final.
The final word regarding this new Enterprise should be given by Ryan Church and only him. Not to the cgi modelmakers that can shrink or expand a model just to fit to the scene. (In his previous trek movie Jeager dwarfed the Defiant in relation to the E-E).

Amen, I'm in total agreement

Yes, but ILM did a lot of work on the design after Church gave them a very rough draft. Just compare the Enterprise painting on his website to the final design. It is more of a concept than a final design.

Jefferies, Probert, Sternbach, Eaves, and Drexler all did much more detailed final design work, and some of them worked on the final blueprints for the models, either physical or CGI.

There have been quotes from ILM artists about all the design work they put into it too.

EDIT: Here's the article about ILM: http://scifiwire.com/2009/04/how-ilm-came-up-with-the.php

 

[LisbonPlayer]

But you’re assuming that painting is the final version. Considering the highly detailed images from the bridge and the jellyfish, I actually believe that it’s just a first color draft and that he produced many more refined images of the ship. And frankly I’m not seeing a designer handing over his work to the modelers without final specifications, or in this case a set of orthographical views.

But it’s just speculation.

For the look of this thread we’ll still be debating this in 30 years. Just like the epic debate about the position of the bridge regarding the turbolift alcove on the original E

 

[SonicRanger]

^^^

From ILM model maker John Goodson:

It was really interesting working with J.J. for this ship. They gave us a lot of latitude to kind of play with it. They had some specific ideas of what they wanted. He wanted a hot-rod type of vehicle, but they also wanted to preserve the Enterprise kind of look. They gave ILM a tremendous amount of leeway in terms of the design. ... It's got this sweeping line that's kind of giving it this real hot-rod kind of car feel. It's ILM's job to sort of take this and start to flesh this thing out and make it more real and convey the scale and all those things that you need, so it's just a leaping-off point for us.

 

[LisbonPlayer]

It's ILM's job to sort of take this and start to flesh this thing out and make it more real and convey the scale and all those things that you need, so it's just a leaping-off point for us.

If they actually made it “more real and conveyed the scale” we wouldn’t have this 1464 post thread.

 

[SonicRanger]

^^^

Even if Spock mentioned the precise length in the film, there would've been people here bitching about it and saying "Spock misspoke" or something.

 

[JuanBolio]

I'm still scratching my head as to how they thought scaling it up to 2000+ feet allowed them to render more detail.

 

[SonicRanger]

I'm still scratching my head as to how they thought scaling it up to 2000+ feet allowed them to render more detail.

That's why they work at ILM and you don't

 

[JuanBolio]

I believe I'm correct in thinking you can put just as much detail into one starship model as the next, regardless of overall scale. After all, the ship didn't seem any more detailed than the refit ship, and we didn't even get many slow, close-up shots.

 

[Mangledduk]

^^^

From ILM model maker John Goodson:

It was really interesting working with J.J. for this ship. They gave us a lot of latitude to kind of play with it. They had some specific ideas of what they wanted. He wanted a hot-rod type of vehicle, but they also wanted to preserve the Enterprise kind of look. They gave ILM a tremendous amount of leeway in terms of the design. ... It's got this sweeping line that's kind of giving it this real hot-rod kind of car feel. It's ILM's job to sort of take this and start to flesh this thing out and make it more real and convey the scale and all those things that you need, so it's just a leaping-off point for us.

This comment can also support the quote from Alex Jaeger saying they scaled the ship based on whatever shot they needed... I know you and other members of this board want to just nail down a specific number and I'm with you on that, the only problem is, we've been given so many different numbers and we have many of the designers of the model saying that they changed the scale several times that it is impossible to say for sure what it really is. The 366 meter crowd has the fact that they said they designed the ship originally in that scale and scaled it up. This argument is valid in that the ship to most people looks just like the original ship in scale and you don't have to explain away the appearance of a much larger ship that looks the same size as the original. The problem with this argument is the fact that they said they scaled the ship up, and the shuttle bay scene. The 700 meter crowd has numerous quotes saying the ship is over 700 meters and they have the shuttle scene. The problems their argument has, is all their quoted sizes are contradictory, and analysis of the construction scene clearly show a much smaller ship than we see in the shuttle scene. Basically what I'm saying and have been saying is that both arguments have their merits, but both have their faults. I wish it was clear, but its not

 

[SonicRanger]

This comment can also support the quote from Alex Jaeger saying they scaled the ship based on whatever shot they needed... I know you and other members of this board want to just nail down a specific number and I'm with you on that, the only problem is, we've been given so many different numbers and we have many of the designers of the model saying that they changed the scale several times that it is impossible to say for sure what it really is...

It "really" isn't any size. The ship we saw sits on a computer hard disk. We can only then establish about what size it is meant to be in-universe. That number is about 740 ± 25 meters according to the legitimate sources.

I have no problem with the ship being rescaled to look its best in different shots. As I've pointed out above, that sort of rescaling has happened throughout Trek, starting with WNMHGB, sometimes deliberate, sometimes not.

The ship looked great in the film, better than it does in any still photo, and a lot of that goes to the talent of the artists who worked on the film.

MJ's design for the TOS Enterprise was reportedly upscaled early on, as evidenced by the shrinking bridge dome and increase in crew size. But none of us insist that the TOS Enterprise was that initial smaller size because GR and company decided to upscale it. We take it for what it was eventually decided to be.

 

[darkwing_duck1]

This comment can also support the quote from Alex Jaeger saying they scaled the ship based on whatever shot they needed... I know you and other members of this board want to just nail down a specific number and I'm with you on that, the only problem is, we've been given so many different numbers and we have many of the designers of the model saying that they changed the scale several times that it is impossible to say for sure what it really is...

It "really" isn't any size. The ship we saw sits on a computer hard disk. We can only then establish about what size it is meant to be in-universe. That number is about 740 ± 25 meters according to the legitimate sources.

I have no problem with the ship being rescaled to look its best in different shots. As I've pointed out above, that sort of rescaling has happened throughout Trek, starting with WNMHGB, sometimes deliberate, sometimes not.

The ship looked great in the film, better than it does in any still photo, and a lot of that goes to the talent of the artists who worked on the film.

MJ's design for the TOS Enterprise was reportedly upscaled early on, as evidenced by the shrinking bridge dome and increase in crew size. But none of us insist that the TOS Enterprise was that initial smaller size because GR and company decided to upscale it. We take it for what it was eventually decided to be.

The model represents a physical object of fixed size.

 

[SonicRanger]

This comment can also support the quote from Alex Jaeger saying they scaled the ship based on whatever shot they needed... I know you and other members of this board want to just nail down a specific number and I'm with you on that, the only problem is, we've been given so many different numbers and we have many of the designers of the model saying that they changed the scale several times that it is impossible to say for sure what it really is...

It "really" isn't any size. The ship we saw sits on a computer hard disk. We can only then establish about what size it is meant to be in-universe. That number is about 740 ± 25 meters according to the legitimate sources.

I have no problem with the ship being rescaled to look its best in different shots. As I've pointed out above, that sort of rescaling has happened throughout Trek, starting with WNMHGB, sometimes deliberate, sometimes not.

The ship looked great in the film, better than it does in any still photo, and a lot of that goes to the talent of the artists who worked on the film.

MJ's design for the TOS Enterprise was reportedly upscaled early on, as evidenced by the shrinking bridge dome and increase in crew size. But none of us insist that the TOS Enterprise was that initial smaller size because GR and company decided to upscale it. We take it for what it was eventually decided to be.

The model represents a physical object of fixed size.

That's my point -- the "real" model represents an imaginary physical object of fixed size. But consider how even a real, physical starship model like the six-foot Ent-D can be made to look different sizes due to how the effects footage made. A CGI model, which can presumably be digitally shrunk or expanded for the needs or aesthetics of a particular shot, is just as susceptible to being made to appear different sizes.

We're not trying to decide how big the model is. We're trying to decide how big the imaginary starship is.

 

[Mangledduk]

It "really" isn't any size. The ship we saw sits on a computer hard disk. We can only then establish about what size it is meant to be in-universe. That number is about 740 ± 25 meters according to the legitimate sources.

I have no problem with the ship being rescaled to look its best in different shots. As I've pointed out above, that sort of rescaling has happened throughout Trek, starting with WNMHGB, sometimes deliberate, sometimes not.

The ship looked great in the film, better than it does in any still photo, and a lot of that goes to the talent of the artists who worked on the film.

MJ's design for the TOS Enterprise was reportedly upscaled early on, as evidenced by the shrinking bridge dome and increase in crew size. But none of us insist that the TOS Enterprise was that initial smaller size because GR and company decided to upscale it. We take it for what it was eventually decided to be.

The model represents a physical object of fixed size.

That's my point -- the "real" model represents an imaginary physical object of fixed size. But consider how even a real, physical starship model like the six-foot Ent-D can be made to look different sizes due to how the effects footage made. A CGI model, which can presumably be digitally shrunk or expanded for the needs or aesthetics of a particular shot, is just as susceptible to being made to appear different sizes.

We're not trying to decide how big the model is. We're trying to decide how big the imaginary starship is.

Hey man, I don't disagree with you. All I'm saying is we are trying to call one number a sure thing when we have about 8 different numbers or more.

" That number is about 740 ± 25 meters according to the legitimate sources."

Yes this is true for some legitimate sources. There are other equally legitimate sources that say the ship is 366 meters along with screen evidence.

 

[Lt. Trull]

well... we'll all have to wait till the hayes manual won't we....

 

[Mangledduk]

well... we'll all have to wait till the hayes manual won't we....

haha, yes sir I figure we can keep this thread going for another year

 

[Lt. Trull]

I love my hayes manual for my 1968 galaxie 500... I'm geeked to see how to fix the engines on this neew enterprise besides that... all the dissembly and reassembly instructions... you betcha... gotta love it... all the little parts...

 

[SonicRanger]

That number is about 740 ± 25 meters according to the legitimate sources."

Yes this is true for some legitimate sources. There are other equally legitimate sources that say the ship is 366 meters along with screen evidence.

Wrong. The only "366 meters" source is Jeager saying the ship started out around 1200 (obviously rounded), but then the ILM crew and/or JJ decided to make it larger. That doesn't make 366 meters a valid length for the final design. It was just a starting value during the design process.

That's like saying the TOS Enterprise isn't 289 meters because MJ initially designed it as 165 meters in 1964 and, therefore, it must still be that smaller size despite all later intentions.

 

[miraclefan]

well... we'll all have to wait till the hayes manual won't we....

Unless the size is said or seen on screen the book is worthless!

 

[Lt. Trull]

well... we'll all have to wait till the hayes manual won't we....

Unless the size is said or seen on screen the book is worthless!

never worthless... It's gonna be correct in one of the trek multiverses....
Ya gotta have faith

 

[Crazy Eddie]

I'm still scratching my head as to how they thought scaling it up to 2000+ feet allowed them to render more detail.

It had nothing to do with the detail. What they wanted was to generate a sufficient amount of hugeness in specific elements--the secondary hull mainly, and the shuttlebay in particular--and they couldn't do that without upscaling the ship. Plus, I got the distinct impression they wanted the bridge to have a WINDOW for a viewscreen and they didn't want to add a big dumb feature on the front of the dome that would make the Enterprise look like a B-52.