• 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!

ST XI Enterprise conjecture

Psion said:
Judexavier, it's a shame to see you moving on. I'd love to see you continue to refine this fantastic image ... although I haven't a clue how you could improve it more. Although I'd be reluctant to accept it instead of the original design.

Like Cary, I'm a huge fan of the original. For several years, I preferred The Motion Picture's refit, but as time went by, I found myself drifting back to the classic version. I'm still hoping to see that ship on screen next May ... a ship that could easily pass for the original on a 1968 color TV, but in the movie theater becomes much more detailed and interesting close up. Not aztecing, per se, at least not all over the hull. But more details that suggest how the ship might be put together in other ways. Frames around the windows. Imperfections in the hull finish. Details hidden under grating. A ship that stirs every classic fan's heart as soon as we see it, but gets more and more real as it gets closer to the screen.

As far as the ship looking out-dated ... hmmm. That's a tough call. I don't see the ship as being out-dated at all; it's a classic. Like a '57 Chevy or a '69 Mustang. Like the Mach 5. But I'm willing to concede that that is an entirely subjective viewpoint. So all I ask is for people who see it as out-dated to explain why it's out-dated. Is the whole design flawed by time, or just parts of it? If the latter, which parts?

I bet even Cary would change his mind in the face of a well-reasoned argument. He strikes me as that kind of a fellow ... adamant in his beliefs, but open to reason.
Click to expand...

Psion, yes I'm still finding things I didn't notice, like the lower edge of the sauer seems to be *very* rounded, and the row of windows on the lower front saucer I hadn't noticed until it was brought up how naked my sketch was...so I'm doodling in fixes and soforth.

I agree with you, in that I am also a big fan of the original...to be honest, I'm not *quite* old enough to have seen it on the network in the 60's, but in 70/71, watched it religiously, syndicated every day at 4:00 . My mother still has countless drawings in K-1st I made with crayons on crappy rag manilla paper they'd give us. Man I loved that thing. The wonderful mysterious "spinning things"...I could go on and on.:)
Yeah, I'm hoping they really make it "real". Not the aztec stuff, (I loved it in '79 but...) but just....real, and subtle things that, like you said, you only notice when it gets close in view (if only for an instant).

Personally I can't wait, but thats MHO.

On a side note, I've always loved guessing/conjecture stuff, so this thread was really about that, my "guess" at what the new project is doing, and I hope I've offered something that has some substance, that others are invited to refine and critique and change.

Let's have fun:)
 
judexavier said:
PixelMagic, can't wait for this! I have no 3D skill to speak of, so I really looking forward to seeing some of the lens effects and view angles, to try to figure out what they are actually doing (especially with those engine rib/nodule things).
Click to expand...
You have the ability to see things three-dimensionally (as demonstrated by your ability to translate the short clips of the trailer into a pretty damned accurate-seeming set of orthographic views). And you have impressive texturing skills already.

All you need to do to get the 3D rendering part down is to pick a package and start using it.

For the level of work you're doing here, I recommend Lightwave (which happens to be what most of the aired Trek has used for the past few years). I suspect it would fit nicely with your already-existing strengths.

I use Maya (an older version, I don't care for some of the "improvements" the last version "added"). I do that mainly because of the "everything is a node and can be linked to everything else" functionality... you can drive any aspect of any element (color, shape, animation, anything) by any other element. But it's a bit less straightforward, and for straight ship design, Lightwave is probably still a better choice. It's also a lot less expensive!
 
Last edited:
Meanwhile, back to the top-- nice extrapolation. Actually, looks like THEY ripped off Gabes' design!
 
ST-One said:
Starship Polaris said:
DeMille's 1923 Egypt didn't look all that much like his 1956 Egypt, either. One, after all, was in black-and-white. ;)
Click to expand...

Funny. I just finished watching the 1956 version on DVD a few moments ago :)
Click to expand...
This is a great example of what I keep talking about re: Star Trek's design, actually...

There is a REAL ancient egypt. Both versions (plus many other films) have been intended to APPROXIMATE the feel of the real ancient egypt. But neither WAS the real ancient egypt.

The TOS version of Trek as we've seen it isn't real... but the way I look at it is that this show was the best possible approximation of some mythical "real Star Trek universe" which was possible with the budgetary and technological limitations of the production.

Any new Star Trek presentation which is intended to be set in that same timeframe needs to seem to be approximating that same "real Star Trek universe." In other words, changes can be made, but they need to look like the original, but "more like the real one" as well.

Neither of DeMille's films was the real Egypt. Neither of these Trek shows is the "real 23rd century" but they really, REALLY need to look like they're both trying to present the same thing, but are limited by the technological and financial limitations of each production.

Any change which is purely STYLISTIC... changing the colors of the bridge, for example... is similar to doing another DeMille film, but deciding that the buildings of ancient Egypt were built out of polished aluminum.
 
Quasi-Odo said:
Meanwhile, back to the top-- nice extrapolation. Actually, looks like THEY ripped off Gabes' design!
Click to expand...
Well, they OWN his design, so technically they can use it. But it's really bad form to use it in another forum without compensating the artist. There's no question but that they borrowed certain elements from him. If he's not getting compensated for it, and if this is really one of the ship designs seen in the film, he might not have the certainty of a legal claim, but it's doubtful that any jury would rule against him. (on the other hand, if he DID sue, he'd never work in the industry again!)
 
judexavier said:
How about one last time, with a few changes. The inter-fin-coolers are tilted back and resized. I think I fixed that random hull countour on the bottom. Finally, exposed turbines as in the trailer, and prototype markings...
The unseen beginnings of the Constitution perhaps?

(At least it's not the Enterprise anymore) :)

http://i248.photobucket.com/albums/gg178/judexavier/STXINCC-1701Side-Front03FLAT.jpg

Oh, and my little cobbled-together take on the shuttle; as goofy as this looks, I was suprised when the spy pics came out with top-mounted engines too.

Anyway, time to start working on something completely different.
Click to expand...

Really looks great! I'm a little late on the reply, I haven't looked here in a while because I felt too many people were getting off topic.
Love the NX-1700 tag! (since it ties into my fanfic) In my version of trek the Constitution and Ent were built and launched side by side under the NX tag to shake the bugs out of all the new tech.
My only crit is the fin on the nacelle, I'd like it more if it were reversed and a little smaller.
You're Photoshop skills are fantastic! I'll keep looking for more!
 
Thanks Baxart. I'v been working up a newer nacelle that looks more conventional/traditional. Also did a quick overlay of this and the TOS ship at the same scale, and it's really scary HOW BIG THE NACELLES ARE. The front elevation is almost cartoonish.:) Anyway, yeah I'm kind of liking the NX-1700 guise, since it's not the "E", and I suppose a prototype could look like anything. (I wonder how the "NX" prefix relates to our current "XF" and YF" designations?) Makes me wonder about "enterprise", i.e. putting an experimental ship on full duty...?
One brief thought I had about the fins and bulges on the conjecture ship: perhaps they are aerodynamic fairings that are ejected once the ship is in proper space (perhaps intercoolers and bussard collectors are somehow fragile in our atmosphere...eh, probably not.)
OH, one neat development of this, a guy on one of my wife's boards took the side view, and made an incredible Miranda class out of it. I'll ask him if I can post it here (heck he may Be here).

Here's a new little WIP, a "fighter craft" of sorts. Something I've messed around with for years. It's just lines and ideas right now (no shading or anything). I fear that it's a little too greebled up, "star-wars-ey", and the shape itself may be ludicrous! (Trying to capture a "federation" look with a saucer and two nacelles) Maybe it's due to the mysteries of warp field dynamics LOL.

The blue pic on the side is the old bryce derived birth of it, and the little guy for scale is a graphic of my son.

http://i248.photobucket.com/albums/gg178/judexavier/NEWtrekfightertopFlatFlat03.jpg

*What is your fanfic? Anything on the boards?
 
judexavier said:
Here's a new little WIP, a "fighter craft" of sorts. Something I've messed around with for years. It's just lines and ideas right now (no shading or anything). I fear that it's a little too greebled up, "star-wars-ey", and the shape itself may be ludicrous! (Trying to capture a "federation" look with a saucer and two nacelles) Maybe it's due to the mysteries of warp field dynamics LOL.

The blue pic on the side is the old bryce derived birth of it, and the little guy for scale is a graphic of my son.

http://i248.photobucket.com/albums/gg178/judexavier/NEWtrekfightertopFlatFlat03.jpg

*What is your fanfic? Anything on the boards?
Click to expand...

Usually when people mention fighters in conjunction with ST I want to smack them senseless, but this is without a doubt the coolest ST fighter concept I have ever seen.

RAMA
 
Love the fighter!

In my version (see my Captain's Log thread) The Connie class was launched at the tail end of the five year war. Basically the Feds had fought the Klingons to a standstill and pushed out the Connies to overpower the aging D7s. (Think Regan out spending the Russians.) They kept the NX designation at launch to show the Empire that these were just the tip of the Connie iceburg.

I don't disagree with RAMA that space fighters (while cool) are kinda dumb. But I do approve whole heartedly with the BSG raptors and I can see how those could be used effectively by a starship like Enterprise.
 
The fighter has a distinctly B5-ish feel to is. I take it that the various fins and so forth are there for aerodynamic (atmospheric, obviously) purposes?

Also... your son needs a haircut! ;)
 
I've never understood the hatred for fighters in some Trek fans...they are a valid and valuable tactical/strategic option in any number of circumstances.

Oh, and I LOVE this design...more views please!!! :)
 
Cool fighter. Looks like the front saucer ejects. In fact, it looks a lot more like a Federation craft than other ships. It looks like a stingray with two-tails to me. :-)
 
ST-One, thanks, and yeah most of the stuff I do seems to be different...guess I need to up my meds. :)
RAMA,... "I want to smack them senseless"....LOL I think I know where your coming from! I was hesitant to post this, but at the last minute figured it might open up some opinions on the "scale of Starlfeet" and the multitude of designs it has in service...and if nothing else, an "art/critique" dialog....and thanks for the compliment!
Thanks, Bernard Guignard.
Thanks Baxart, I'll check out the thread. And, yeah, I can see how "hero x-wing" fighters could be a dumb plot device if written stupidly....but something like BSG raptors on the other hand...hmmm. I'll have to play with that.
Cary L. Brown, thanks, yeah, the fins and overall shape were meant to evoke something that was remotely viable in an atmosphere without magic and forcefields...although I am ofcourse no Kelly Johnson!:) Seriously, at the time I thought it looked "neat"...
My son was going through a Dimebag Darrell stage at that time.....(that's a whole other thread-worth there)...or not:)
he is qute the guitar player, though.:)
Darkwing duck1, thanks! I'm attempting to move to 3D, so hopefully this and other projects will soon be fleshed out in more than lines and guesses!

Jimmy_C, thanks, and, what is a stingray? Any links or images?
 
Last edited:
It is hard to be creative in such a saturated universe, but that fighter design manages to be both creative and clearly a part of the Trek mythos. It seems like such a simple idea -- shrink the "saucer as escape module" idea down from full-sized ships down to fighter craft. And yet no one else has done it -- at least as far as I know. This is my new favorite Trek fighter.

Great work.
 
Just took a look at your fighter design, influences or not that is just a beautiful look for a spacecraft in anyone's 'verse.
 
judexavier said:
OH, one neat development of this, a guy on one of my wife's boards took the side view, and made an incredible Miranda class out of it. I'll ask him if I can post it here (heck he may Be here).
Click to expand...
Deffinatly ask him that (or alternativly post a link to the original post...unless these boards are part of a closed group) would love to see that material
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top