New Enterprise Premieres In ‘Trouble With Tribbles’ Remastered…See Promo & Sneak Peek |
jump to navigation

New Enterprise Premieres In ‘Trouble With Tribbles’ Remastered…See Promo & Sneak Peek November 1, 2006

by Anthony Pascale , Filed under: TOS Remastered,TOS-R Preview,Uncategorized , trackback

Two weeks ago revealed that the CBS Trek Remastered team were working on a new model for the Starship Enterprise..and it arrives this weekend. CBS Digital was kind enough to let visit their offices and we can say that the new model is a big improvement, here is a little peek.

(click for a closer look) 

CBS are going all out for this episode, creating a series of new shots to replace the repeated establishing shots. So make sure you do not miss Trouble With Tribbles Remastered. 

Here is the promo (but just a glimpse of the new ship) 


On FridayThis weekend will have a full article on our behind the scenes tour of CBS Digital 


1. Skippy 2k - November 2, 2006

From what I can see in that picture it looks very nice! Really looking forward to seeing this episode, even more now. Awesome job, and work on getting the shot of it!

2. dmack - November 2, 2006


3. dmack - November 2, 2006

MUCH better. It may still not be perfect, but it’s still a massive improvement over the current CGI model.

4. Smitty - November 2, 2006

I for hope they closely studied the model shots they did for DS9’s Trials and Tribble-ations. Which can be seen as a practice run for what the CBS Digital team are doing now.


5. Dip Thong - November 2, 2006

Is that a Klingon cruiser in the upper right of the frame? The E looks nice, but I didn’t have a problem with the last version.

6. Jim J - November 2, 2006

I like it!!!

7. bobby n - November 2, 2006

it looks good. just like the enterprise in DS9’s trials and tribble-ations. k7 looks a lot bigger. hope they show the klingon battle cruiser.

8. Greg Stamper - November 2, 2006

Anthony Pascale —
Great Work, Thank You Very Much!! Looking forward to the episode and Friday’s article.

9. KW - November 2, 2006

That is absolutely a Klingon cruiser in the shot. Kudos to the CBS team for including it! In keeping with their subtle improvements, there is no need for them to show it in all it’s glory – yet. Just a nice distance shot to let us know its there, and to add tension to the drama inside the station.

10. Rob Walley, Bay Saint Louis, MS - November 2, 2006

The fact that this is Trouble with Tribbles is suspect. With so many new shots done for Trials and Tribblations it would be easy just to reuse that footage. But closer study shows that it is not. Over the past few weeks the nacelle caps have gotten better. Now that the ship has gotten a load of new detail, the caps look wrong again. I like the newly detailed ship as it was what I was hoping for all along, but I hope they go back and put the new CGI model into the episodes already done. I’m looking forward to hear what Dochterman has to say about this new model.

11. trekmaster - November 2, 2006

Hm, let’s search for Sisko and Dax aboard the Enterprise! :-)

12. Jeff thorn - November 2, 2006

happy days I think it looks good and there is the klingon battlcruiser in the lower right hand corner!

13. Lee - November 2, 2006

There’s a still shot of K-7 and the Enterprise in background over at

It’s a photo that says “Station K-7 (remastered)”.

14. Scott Gammans - November 2, 2006

Blech. The nacelle caps still look like painted orange domes. Let’s hope that it’s just that one shot, or the fact that this is a *picture* of a monitor and not an actual screenshot, but it still screams FAAAAAAKE to my eyes.

15. DB - November 2, 2006

The nacelle caps in that still look very much like these:

Although the CG ones are a little less subtle particularly with regard to the blades. We’ll see what it looks like animated.

16. Ron Jon - November 2, 2006

Looks awesome! I can’t wait.

17. Not In Cardiff » The newly-remastered NCC-1701 - November 2, 2006

[…] […]

18. Toonloon - November 2, 2006

There was nothing wrong with the original MODEL. It was the lighting and texturing that made it look naff.

CBS digital have acutally stated that this is a FAR LESS detailed model so that they can speed up their render times.

I think it’s unfair to blame the original 3D mesh when there was nothing wrong with it, other than it was TOO detailed to make too many renders to test lighting, texturing, etc… before they had to add the clip to the episode.

19. Norbert Steinert - November 2, 2006

I hope they put at least one member of the DS9 crew somewhere in the background.

20. Horn - November 2, 2006

What is the big deal with these these new Nacelle caps!?? They look great!! Further, the Enterprise looks a BILLION times better than it did in the 60’s! Why would you want them to look like they did with the old model? You could hardly see them anyway!! They were blurry, dull and poorly lit in the old show. I just don’t understand what the big deal is and why people keep complaining about it.

The only shot that wasn’t any good IMO, was the left turn shot in I Mudd. Other than that the CBS folks have done a good job and this new model looks even better. Great to see the Klingon Battlecruiser put in there!!

21. bdrcarter - November 2, 2006

I’m usually a “share no expense” kind of guy. But in the interest of stretching the budget (so episodes like The Doomsday Machine and The Ultimate Computer give us all fan-gasms), why don’t they use some of the stock footage of the great opticals from Trials and Tribblations?

22. Anonymous - November 2, 2006

“What is the big deal with these these new Nacelle caps!?? They look great!! Further, the Enterprise looks a BILLION times better than it did in the 60’s! Why would you want them to look like they did with the old model? You could hardly see them anyway!! They were blurry, dull and poorly lit in the old show. I just don’t understand what the big deal is and why people keep complaining about it.”

Because the Nacelle caps on the model were accurate, mechanical devices. The Nacelle caps on the digital Enterprise up until now, have not even been close approximations. They jump off the screen, looking totally washed out, rushed and fake. If the Enterprise were given the attention to detail it deserves, there would not be the same level of dissatisfaction. Some would still nitpick, but not on the same level we have seen. Just because ‘you’ can’t see what’s wrong with it, doesn’t mean more discerning eyes can’t. We’re not all born with the ability to spot artistic flaws.

23. Daniel Shock - November 2, 2006

they CAN’T reuse footage from Trials and Tribbulations BECAUSE those shots were not produced in High Def. The point of this is to create a high def version of TOS.

24. Adam Cohen - November 2, 2006

“THERE SHE IS! There she is!”

Now that is the Enterprise, people. It took 40 years, but we’re on the verge of finally seeing the original in all her glory. I’m friggin’ stoked.

25. Daniel Shock - November 2, 2006

sorry – obviously – I meant “Trials and Tribble-ations”

26. raff - November 2, 2006

That’s the Enterprise i’d hoped to see from the beginning of this remastered TOS.

27. Jeff - November 2, 2006

Hmm, is all I can say, and I’m a huge fan of this remastering process. they’ve done some outstanding work. But seriously even this new version of the old girl looks off.

I have seen far superior nacelle caps on at least three different fan renderings floating around on the internet. One guy who reviews here, and one guy who is re-doing the doomsday machine.

What’s the big deal, just call these fans up and ask them how they did it. Or hire one of them. Sheesh, it’s not like they don’t know what they’re doin.

28. Ron Jon - November 2, 2006

One thing with the nacelle caps is that they had many different “looks” in TOS. The density of the lighting and color changed, and the amount of white sheen on the caps varied widely. Sometimes they really *did* look totally “washed out.” I’m pretty sure the speed of rotation and the pattern of the blinking lights changed, too. Even the sharpness of the fan blades varied.

I like the nacelle caps in the new digital Enterprise, probably because it looks like the episodes that I remember from the Old Days. It’s obvious to me that some of the so-called “purists” are remembering the look of the ship in other episodes. But they’re all “canonical.”

For myself, I can’t wait to see the “new” Enterprise this weekend!

29. Spockariffic - November 2, 2006

I’m with you Horn! I can’t believe some of the comments in here lol. People complain and complain about how they don’t like the ship an dthen when they announce a new one no one is happy LOL!! It’s a still photo taken with a digital camera off some guy’s computer screen and already the bashing begins! Some people just WANT to hate these guys! “The nacelle caps” and “what will Dochterman think?” and “It may not still be perfect” – Not perfect? Have you guys actually SEEN the effects from the 60’s LOL?! This is like a badillion times better. COME ON!

I can see all that detail on the engineering section and the color looks wicked cool!! I want to hear what the folks at CBS-D have to say. Thanks Anthony for getting the interview!

REALLY looking forward to seeing Trouble with Tribbles!

30. Dr. Image - November 2, 2006

I’m cautiously optimistic… at best.
On THIS particular project- because of it’s status and history- They really need an FX supervisor that is a true nitpicker to do justice to the E.
When supposed in-depth viewing and replication of details of the original model (now I’m speaking of the proper size of the domes on the rear of the nacelles, for example) totally eludes these guys, it’s time for drastic action- like firing someone. When LOTS of $$ rides on a project, that can at times be the best option.
Who knows, perhaps they have!
Let’s just hope they replaced them with the right (Daren?) person.

31. Lao3D - November 2, 2006

Ditto what Ron Jon and Spockariffic just said. There wasn’t a single standard look for the caps, and if you look at screen caps from something like “The Tholian Web” (try, which features some of the best ship work in the series, you’ll see a variety of looks there too. For my money, the caps as seen here look pretty darn good. If the motion works as well, I think they’ve gotten very very close to a great look.

32. Josh - November 2, 2006

It just goes to go show you what I have been illustrating all along, you CAN’T please fanboys, and shouldn’t even try. It’s pointless, and a wasted, useless gesture because with some people unless they did it personally, they won’t be satisfied, with others, unless it meets with their pre-concieved imaginative notions they won’t be satisfied., and still with another group if it doesn’t look like the craptacular DS9,Voyager, or Enterprise CGI effects it won’t please them so, why even bother.

Okuda, there wasn’t a damn thing wrong with the CGI Enterprise you have been using, it was accurate to the 11 foot studio model in dimensions, it was mean, clean, and pristine, and it was camouflage/concrete grey, the true color of the Enterprise.
Why you had to listen and take petty, dimestore criticism to heart is beyond me. There wasn’t a letter writing campaign criticizing the model, only 7 or 8 people on this website.
Now that you have catered to fanboy sensibilities, you can expect even MORE division and displeased fans.
Some want the ship grey, some blue, some white, some clean, some dirty, some want dull nacelle caps, some want bright and cheery, some want the phasers redone, some want barrel rolls, some want strick adherence to the original effects. Some want fleet shots, some even want DS9 crewmembers inserted into the original.

Dont even acknowledge it Okuda, do what YOU want to do and **** all these opinions because that’s all they are- armchair, couch potato opinions. You have been given creative control over this project and have done a masterful job despite what these naysayers cry about.

Don’t please anyone but your own artistic sensibilities Okuda.

33. Dom - November 2, 2006

By all accounts, there were problems with the original CGI model and, I suspect, these were obvious to the team behind the remastered series. While it’s possible they were aware of the views on this site and others, they were bound to have noticed these problems themselves!

34. Josh - November 2, 2006

By “all accounts?”

That’s my point, “problems” according to WHOM?

Does anyone honestly think with the tight schedule they are doing these shows they would have gone back and redone the ship if Okuda hadn’t probably visited this website and read some of the “opinions?”

No what it is, is the very vocal MINORITY screamed loud enough to be heard, and those satisfied weren’t loud enough, otherwise we wouldn’t be having this discussion.

35. Anthony Pascale - November 2, 2006

I can assure you all that changes made at CBS were done because that is what they wanted to do. Although I do know they read this site and others, they are fully capable of forming opinions on their own. The work on the new model began even before the first episode aired. They made it simply because the one they started with was always going to be a stopgap measure due to the time constraints on the project.

36. Lao3D - November 2, 2006

There’s no way any for-profit corporate entity is ever going to spend more time and money on effects because of “7 or 8″ disgruntled “fanboys.” No way in heaven or heck. They saw where improvements could be made and to their credit, they’re making them.

Try it, you might like it even better than before!

37. Josh - November 2, 2006

Is that spin coming from them Anthony?

You have to admit if they used this website as a gauge they weren’t feeling much “love” emanating from the forums. Far from it actually.

If they were in R and D and this was legitimately planned for, that’s another matter entirely.

What I have issue with is the notion of creativity by commitee and “fan” influence in creative decision making processes.

38. Ralph F - November 2, 2006

Again, I ask: before the remastered series goes to DVD, are they going to re-do the re-done eps with the newly remastered 1701?

And will THE CAGE (the original pilot) get the treatment as well?

39. JON - November 2, 2006

You guys are really obsessed with nacelle caps.Keep it clean OK.Nacelle Nichols might get offended.

40. Josh - November 2, 2006

I hope they color them Indigo and perriwinkle.

41. Josh - November 2, 2006

What was Daren’s contribution to this?

Texturing? Shading? Lighting?

Somewhere I read daren had a discussion with Okuda, but nothing further was elaborated on?

42. Kevin - November 2, 2006

Why did the model have to be replaced in the first place? The replacement seems problematical,and before anyone jumps on this, there are many who prefer the model, and who have a right to that position, just as the CGI proponents have their right to respectfully disagree. Is there a technical reason. Also, I hope Abrams commissions a model for the movie, there are times when 3d is better. I was surprised–after reading Star Wars 365 days– at the vast amount of model work in the prequels. My dream scenario would be to see them pull the model from the NASM, redo it, then shoot all the shots on a stage; the only way to match the style of TOS but absolutely prohibitive in time and cost. They’ll never do it, but that would have gotten so much publicity it would have paid for itself. Maybe all that CGI on TV has jaded me somewhat.

43. John N - November 2, 2006

#32 – Josh – While it may better suit your argument that ungrateful fans are to blame for the replacement model, surely youmust by now concede that is not the case. Anthony visited the studio and spoke directly to the poeple involved, which is much greater access than most others here can claim to have.

Even if you LOVED the original model in all her glory, that would never compensate for the fact that it was a render-intensive resource hog that would always prove to be a bottleneck. THAT is why they replaced it… because if they didn’t, that bottleneck would eat up all of their production time, and prevent them from achieving the level of quality that they, as artists, were striving for.

I don’t think it can be stated any simpler than that, and I don’t think that you can argue the validity of the source, since it has now been reported twice, once through the original article two weeks ago, and now again through Anthony’s in-studio visit.

44. Dr. Image - November 2, 2006

Uh-oh …this is going to get interesting…

45. Seangh - November 2, 2006

Is that Michael Dorn doing the commercial VO? I know he has done voice work on the video games in years past.

46. John N - November 2, 2006

#44 – Dr. Image – I’m not trying to be controversial… and I did try to be polite… :)

Listen, I will grant that some people on here are WAY to hard on the work being done. But I don’t honestly for a second believe that they are attacking the artists directly, or out of spite. And I think that some VERY good and artistic ideas come out of this group.

I just wish that we as a group could take a more moderate approach to one another. If someone has a valid point, let them have it. If you disagree, then let’s be rational about the reasons why. If you’re proven wrong, then there is no shame in admitting it.

47. John N - November 2, 2006

#42 – Kevin – see my earlier post (#43). In there I’m summarizing an article that appeared on this site a few weeks ago.

The bottom line is that the original model was perfectly fine when considered SOLELY AS A MODEL. However, it was so detailed that rendering it (i.e. creating each frame to piece together into a moving image) took so long that they didn’t have time to refine their work before having to deliver the shots.

I’ll try an admittedly crude analogy for those not familar with CGI work…
Imagin you had a week to prepare a banquet, and your main course was this amazing stew, but the recipe called for 5 days of simmering to prepare. What would you do if you realized at the end of 5 days that you had missed a key ingredient? Your banquet is in two days, and your recipe takes 5 days, so starting over is out of the question. You basically have to go with the stew as is, even though you know it’s not your best work.

Now imagine after a few banquets, you start thinking to yourself… what if I could find a similar recipe that only takes 1 day of simmering to prepare? And what if the taste change was so subtle that the guests would never know the difference? That way, if you screwed up the recipe, you still have 6 days to try again… heck you could try the recipe out 4 or 5 times that week to get it just right. Would that free you up as a chef to REALLY give your best work?

Well, if you can make the leap, that’s what they’ve done here. They’ve replaced an excellent model (recipe) that just took up too much of their time to give them the flexibility to be great artists (chefs).

Alternative analogies are invited… :)

48. jcvmf214 - November 2, 2006

The nacells and shading still looks like shit. can’t they get it right

49. Daniel Shock - November 2, 2006

well – I think the pic above shows a great deal of improvement and if that’s what it looks from now on – I’m very happy.

50. Josh - November 2, 2006

So now we are to believe they launched this particular endeavor with a CGI Enterprise that was intended to be replaced all along, knowing full well it wasn’t their “best effort”, and perhaps hoping no one would notice?
But now we get a “less” detailed model, that just happens according to some, to fit more accurately with their preconcieved envisioning of how the ship should have looked all along?

COME ON! I’ve heard of spin before but that is ludicrous.

But then again, this IS the season for spin is it not?

51. Josh - November 2, 2006

The bottom line is,

If Okuda and the producers IRRESPECTIVE and regardless of fan consensus, are pleased with their work, that’s ultimately all that matters.

I was fine with the CGI Enterprise they were using, I slept good at night.
Evidently initially they were fine with it too.
If the new model silences some of the tripe criticisms more power to them. Maybe they will be able to get some work done in PEACE now without people looking over their shoulder.

52. Norm - November 2, 2006

Sometimes the Enterprise looks white & sometimes it looks gray. I wish they would keep it white.

53. Josh - November 2, 2006

Or, maybe not.

54. John N - November 2, 2006

#50 – Josh – If we can step away for a moment from the theory that ungrateful fans have cause this project team to lower their standards, I don’t think it’s hard to imagine a situation where they:

1) ordered a model from a sub-contractor
2) received the model, tested it and realized that at that point that it was too render intensive to use practically.

3) At that point they would have ordered a second, more render friendly model, which to anyone who understands CGI does not necessarily equal a lower-quality model

4) While they are awaiting delivery of the new model, they would be forced to use the first model, since pushing the delivery date of the first episodes is not an option.

I work in project management, and this is an entirely realistic possibility. We have had vendors try to pawn off sub-standard deliverables that we have had to work around until the problem could be rectified.

Perhaps Anthony can confirm or deny this based on his personal discussion with the Remastered team.

55. Jeff - November 2, 2006

Josh, I’m sure I speak for a few people. You’re an ass. Quit whining and making yourself look like a fool. I’ve been nothing but positive about this remastered endeavor and this is the first time I’ve said anything remotely negative. The plain fact is the caps did look off or so many people wouldn’t have commented and it wouldn’t have been changed. The poster way above was right to correct me that the cpas looked different from episode to episode. The problem is I’m basing my opinion not just on the show but the fact that I’ve seen that actual model in real life. The new picture above is far better than before, but just from that picture it still looks a little off. I’ll wait and see what the episode turns out like. But frankly Okuda’s opinion is NOT all that matters. A lot of money rests on what’s done. if you make a show that only depends on one guy’s opinion you end up with the first three seasons of Enterprise. Yet when people are listened to, you get season 4. I rest my case. Now, my apologies to everyone for going off like this but sometimes cricism is required no matter how painful it might be. Remember it’s because the show is loved by so many, not because it is hated.

56. Scott Gammans - November 2, 2006

Wow, this thread got nasty in a hurry! :(

Believe me, I *want* this project to be as good as it can be. I fell in love with the starship Enterprise when I was a little boy and it’s been a 35-year love affair ever since. Sometimes it’s hard to be objective about the object of one’s affection, and I’ll admit that some of my criticism of the model CBS Digital has been using has been harsh… but please understand–that criticism is borne out of a desire to see the Gray Lady treated with the care and respect she deserves, and NOT to merely bash some CGI artists whom I don’t even know.

I really hope that the new Enterprise looks great in motion when we see her this weekend, I really do. The lighting on the model looks tons better in that brief glimpse we saw in the preview trailer, so I’m cautiously optimistic. But if, after we see the new model in action, there are still problems with it, I would hope that *constructive* criticism of those problems will not be heckled out of the room without a fair hearing. We all love “Star Trek” (why else would we be in here?)… is it so wrong to want the “remastered” Trek to be its very best?

57. Dom - November 2, 2006

The lack of perspective of some ‘fans’ and critics here astonishes me!

As someone who has worked in print, television and new media for over fifteen years, I know that fan opinion only carries a very minor weight, no matter how nice the people in charge try to be in the press about their fans/critics!

End of the day, these people are working their butts off to get the new FX done in time on an extremely limited schedule. This will mean late nights, missed meals and more than a few nervous stomachs!

Does anyone **really** think these people have time to comb through every vitriolic or complimentary remark about TOS: Remastered, separating them out from the JJ Abrams love/hate posts?

The team knew their CGI model wasn’t working out right. This means they have probably worked themselves into the ground sorting out the new model on top of their other duties **and** have had to get ready to back to the earlier episodes and drop in replacement inserts.

People have often complimented the non-ship FX in TOS:R. That’s because they’re mostly getting them done the way they want them to be. They must have been dreading launching the new versions with the ship not looking right, knowing it couldn’t be sorted out in time!

The FX team are dedicated professionals, not imbeciles, crooks or vandals. While not everything they do will ever meet everyone’s ideal of a perfect Star Trek, they deserve our respect and our support!

58. Anthony Pascale - November 2, 2006

I dont like to have to do this but this thread (like others before it) is become more about a single poster and his diversions. So let me say once and for all..Josh is wrong…completely and 100% wrong. His old theory is wrong, his new theory is wrong. to coin a phrase \’you are entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts\’

Everyone at CBS Para is consistent in saying that they knew they had to change the model, but they had to use the one they started with because of time constrainnts. it was impractical and unweildy but it was all they could do to get those first episodes out in time. And that is that

Even still, this is no reason for namecalling…so no more of that please.

59. Lao3D - November 2, 2006

The best part about this whole thing is that after 40 years they have given us new footage to pore over, love, hate, form heartfelt opinions on. Let’s agree to respect each other and keep the name calling to a minimum.

Scotty said it best: Everybody’s entitled to their opinion… but nobody better call the new Enterprise a garbage scow or there’ll be hell to pay!!!

60. John N - November 2, 2006

#58 – Anthony –

‘you are entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts’

That is a BRILLIANT phrase! I’ve never heard that one before… thanks for sharing!

And also, thanks for stepping in. You shouldn’t have to moderate… it’s sad payback for the hard work that you put into the site.

61. An olde timey fan - November 2, 2006

Way to go John N, Dom, Jeff …

This is business. Star Trek = profit potential. The guys at the studio are paid a salary, or hourly, or whatever according to a budget.

Whatever decision CBS makes is based on a budget based on profit projections based on viewership based on demographics based on liklihood of spending money with the sponsors.


The only voice that ultimately counts is the voice of the customer who speaks with his wallet. Paramount/CBS is unbelievably fortunate to have a customer base that TELLS them what they like and don’t like. (I’ve done CFO-level financial management projects for fifteen or twenty Fortune 500 clients. Trust me — they would KILL to have this kind of feedback for their marketing and finance staffers.)

Even so, whatever decision they make will be based on its contribution margin. And that means ideosyncratic opinion is irrelevant. Good data is invaluable. This site is a treasure trove.

Josh, our excitable friend, you need to learn these lessons soon, or you are in for some big surprises in your life.

62. Daren Doc - November 2, 2006

In answer to some questions…

I had nothing to do with the new CG ship looking better. I haven’t talked to Mike Okuda since the project started. I did speak briefly to the VFX Supervisor, but not specifically about “how” to do stuff… I believe that the fx team have been wanting to update the enterprise model from the start… but didn’t have the opportunity to at the onset. I’d like to think that comments by myself and others about the Remastered TOS have encouraged them to “upgrade”… but I don’t think that it had much effect… The Supervisor told me that at least he had not looked at message boards or blog sites, for fear of being totally bummed out with his work. That’s a stance that I quite agree with, since I did the same thing when working on the ST:TMP:DE project.
I like what I see so far in the stills from Trouble With Tribbles, but I’m reserving final comment til I see the episode.

63. Scott of the Morgites - November 2, 2006

Josh… I’ve read repeatedly your accusations, admonitions and consternations through a variety of reviews and articles on this site of anybody who doesn’t subscribe to your viewpoint of the Remastered Star Trek Project, Argumentum ad nauseam.

This is a great site when folks state their opinions (whether I agree with them or not) or ask questions or connect with each other about a remarkable television program that deserves… no, demands recognition and congratualtions in all it’s incarnations (arguably, some more than others.) But when someone constantly resorts to ad hominem attacks… well, it’s tiring and sad for everybody.

for chrissakes, josh… give the strident tones, general histrionics and self-appointed arbiter of all things Star Trek role, a rest… or to be more direct, and to use your own expletive deletive from #32, shut the **** up!

Hey everybody… if you ignore him, I’m sure he’ll go away… eventually. Maybe if he get’s off this site it’ll give him time to solve the problems in the Mid-East… since obviously he knows everything about everything.

64. Cameron Boehme - November 2, 2006

This is Anthony’s site, and Anthony’s blood, sweat and tears. If you don’t respect him or his thoughts then I suggest you create your own website and spread your negativity there. You wouldn’t even *have* this forum to bitch in if it weren’t for Anthony… Respect his wishes, and his website.

Let those of us here have the intellectual conversation and even disagreements on an educated and civilized manor. Don’t continue to try to bring this brilliant website down to that level, please.

Anthony, I’ll email you privately about the rest I have to say; and from the depths of my Star Trek riddled heart, thank you for all that you do, and for this forum in which to gather and discuss our passion.

Always the best,


65. John N - November 2, 2006

I have a question for Daren… granted that you don’t have access to their model(s), can you think of a technical explanation from a mesh point of view for the difference between the nacelle caps we’ve seen so far, and the ones that you have designed?

Or even if it’s not so simple, would you mind educating a guy who is just starting to play around with this CGI stuff?

66. Dip Thong - November 2, 2006

I think Josh has a point. Not necessarily about whether or not fan input played a role in getting the E model changed (no one has first hand knowledge to know the truth from spin), but rather in the broader notion that fans deserve to have a say at all.

There is a huge difference between fans exchanging opinions and fans complaining in hope of influencing the powers that be to do things their way.

Let me frame this in terms of the nacelle “debate”: the color of the nacelles is not the issue. There is no “right” way they should look. The nacelles look different in the original footage from shot to shot, season to season, model update to model update. You could paint the nacelles brick red and claim they are “right” because on one version of the model they were! The same is true of the “look” of the Enterprise herself. Comments about it looking “off” are ridiculous because the original never looked the same from episode to episode. The original was a hodge-podge of snippets of footage with different deflector dishes, paint jobs and modifications. Even the model in the Smithsonian wouldn’t look “right” if they slapped it on a model stand and shot it today. So if there is no “right”, then it’s up to the artist to do their job and interpret it as best they can. Of course they won’t match the original footage 100% because there are too many variations in the original footage. You end up with an interpretation that is no more or less “right” than anything that has come before. Yet fans still make comments about the “lame” work of the artists and make unfounded assumptions about “rush jobs” or “sloppiness”, etc. That’s how these things always start and eventually people are talking about their childhoods being raped. I enjoy a critical discussion as much as the next geek and I think its great that we HAVE something to talk about! But where I draw the line — and I think this is what Josh is reacting to also — is the mistaken notion of “collective ownership”: that somehow Trek (or Wars or Galactica) somehow REALLY belongs to the fans and they deserve an input in creative decisions. Hell NO! Fans are entitled to tune in to the broadcast, buy a movie ticket or purchase merchandise. Beyond that, they’ve got bubkis. That sort of mentality is one of the driving factors behind all the bad energy toward Star Wars. You got “fans” like the dudes over at the XO Project “restoring” Lucas’ original footage in the hopes of “taking back the trilogy!” Take it back?! They never HAD it to begin with! I think THAT’S the sort of thinking that’s at the core of Josh’s complaints. Respect the artists enough to let them do their job without the armchair quarterbacking and whining where the intent is to somehow be a part of the creative process. If the artists want feedback, they’ll ask for it or seek it out in more constructive ways than to read fan message boards.

67. THEETrekMaster - November 2, 2006

I don’t like the Enterprise looking white.

It looks more like a toy when it’s white…and don’t give me the ST:TMP ship. That one had a ton more detail than the series ship had. I like the bluegray look…to me it helps compensate for the lack of detail and gives the ship more weight.

To me, the best the ship ever looked was in the new shots that were done for the third season of TOS.


68. Brian - November 2, 2006

Pretty good. I’m glad that they kept the Klingon Cruiser too.

69. JON - November 2, 2006

It would be cool if light reflected OFF the ship.Example;When firing phasers the blue should reflect off the primary hull and certain parts of the rest of the ship,perhaps enchancing surface detail of the ship ,not just the area imediately around the phaser streams.Or,when the ship enters orbits,nebulas etc.pigmentation from those environments should mix/reflect off with the ship’s own color.

70. Dr. Image - November 2, 2006

# 46 – John N-
My comment (#44) was aimed at # 41- Josh, not you.
Just to clarify.
YOU I agree with.
(They really should just get a Master Replicas Enterprise and shoot it green screen. That would solve everything- and, at this point, it would probably be cheaper!)

71. John N - November 2, 2006

#70 – Dr. Image – Now THAT is funny… :)

72. John N - November 2, 2006

#66 – Dip Thong – I am willing to concede to some of your points, but I think that what most people are finding hard to swallow is the manner in which it is being communicated, and by that, I don’t mean you.

To be clear… Like Josh, I think that some people are WAY too harsh on this site, particularly in a thread like this where you’re basing all opinion on a single shot of a photo of a monitor. Any negative criticism at this point is a bit premature in my humble opinion.

I also think that it’s wrong to call the Remasterd artists or their work: “lame”, “crap”, “stupid”, “shit”, etc.

These guys are UNDOUBTEDLY working VERY hard, and doing the BEST that they can under the circumstances.

However, I also think that it’s entirely reasonable for people to (constructively) suggest ways that they think something could be improved. If some people think that the ship looks too white, blue, or grey, then LET THEM! Don’t tell them that they are whiney, or as I was told in another post, “that I have no artistic merit”.

With regards to the nacelles, I’m not OVERLY bothered by them, but regardless of whether they match the ones shown in episode 22, 45, or 63, the one thing I CAN tell you is that they are bright enough to the point that I find them distracting in a sense that I never noticed when watching the TOS.

Does that make me whiney, or come across with a feeling of entitlement? No… does it make me observant, with an attention to detail? Probably. Does it make me change the channel on these new, beautiful versions of the episode… heavens NO!

In conclusion… if appeal to all of you:

For those with criticisms, try and say them constructively.

For those who hate “entitled fanboys”, please consider that we actually MAY have some artistic talents, and can contribute to our collective vision of what we as fans think would be “really cool”.

73. Scott of the Morgites - November 2, 2006

On a more positive note… I’m glad the folks at CBS Digitial are striving to do a better job. That goal, to do better, is perfectly aligned with Star Trek in philosophy and aspiration. And knowing the demands of the film and television industry, it is a goal that is always being undermined by time and money.

The Enterprise is an image is that belongs to the world. That “perfect” image is is as diverse as the world. As some one who was there in 1966 when that image first appeared, i am grateful that it is being re-introduced to a whole new group of folks that might engage (no pun intended) themselves in great characters and wonderful stories that have inspired and delighted me for years.

Moreover, the artists and craftsman that have formed those images associated with Star Trek will continue to do their jobs the best they can. And yes, they listen to fans and their comments but ultimately the things that allow them to “make their days” are dictated by the resources that are available to them.

More astonishingly, I’m often amazed at the things they accomp[lish when those resources are… well, slim.

At the risk of sounding painfully anachronistic… Keep On Trekkin’

74. chris - November 2, 2006

agreed, josh is an ass…


75. Matt Wright - November 2, 2006

let’s not go there please.

76. Jeff - November 2, 2006

John N, you’ve hit the nail on the head with regards to my feelings about those darn caps. It’s not whether they’re accurate so much as they are so colourful and SO bright that they are distracting in a way that was never noticable in the originals. Personally I think the ones Scott Gammans has done are about the best I’ve seen.

77. Holo J - November 2, 2006

I think the new model looks very good, from what I can see. It does look an improvement from the first model. From that particular shot it seems to have more of a solid feel to it.
I look forward to seeing some more screen shots soon.
On another note I don’t know if any of you guys have seen this

It’s slightly off the above subject but the links should take you to and the remastered pictures. It shows the design of the Gorn ship… it seems like they put a lot of work into the design of that ship only to do the long shot that ended up being a blob on the screen… hopefully they will eventually show the Gorn ship in more detail if they go back to this episode in the future. The design is there it just needs the metal skin adding for detail. Hope they do eventually do this now it seems they are prepared to break from being so faithful to the original angles of the Enterprise and the other ships it encounters on its 5 year Trek.

78. Granger - November 2, 2006

Frankly, I’m just as excited about seeing at least a glimpse of a remastered Klingon D7 battle cruiser as I am about the new Enterprise model. While the far more detailed K’t’inga class seen in Star Trek: The Motion Picture and The Undiscovered Country was gorgeous, I have to admire Matt Jefferies’ original design for the D7. It has the same clean elegance as the Federation’s Constitution heavy cruisers but with that wonderfully menacing pose – it just looks mean!

Can anyone think of some non-space shots that need touch-up or error-correction in this remastered episode? I am aware of numerous minor tribble continuity glitches, but those don’t seem worth fixing.

79. TomBot2006 - November 2, 2006

I haven’t seen enough to do backflips or such… but I’m still hopeful and excited.

Can’t we just express our opinions, even if they are a little harsh, and then move the heck on! You will never win support by berating or boring the hell out of us. ;-P.

I’ll be excited to see how this episode pans out, and heck ya, they should stick dat sisko and dax in there… ;-D

80. jonboc - November 2, 2006

The new model looks great. I liked the old one, just the lighting seemed off at times making it look more like a video game ship. As far as the endless debate of the nacelle caps go, I agree there were many different looks, the problem is the “wonka-fied” caps of new Enterprise rendering doesn’t look like any of them. With the nacelle caps, it’s not matter of “lighting” or making it look real…it’s very simply a matter of making the spinning blades/ christmas lights/ behind a frosted dome match the colors and “look” of the blades and christmas lights seen in many of the original series FX shots. The new domes simply don’t look like the multi-colored domes of the model and since they took great pains to measure the model, it’s not unreasonable to ask that they replicate that engine effect with equal authenticity.
Having said all that…the effect, as is, NO way detracts from the incredible fun I’m having each week watching these episodes. The engine effect aside, the talent over at CBS are doing a bang up job and I really look forward to this weeks debut of the new E model. The lighting and texturing of the new model really kicks ass…maybe it’s just a matter of showing the ship closer so the textures and details show up more. Anyway, great episode coming up, looking forward to it.

81. Jim J - November 2, 2006

Quick and to the point…I STILL like it! lol

82. Dogen - November 2, 2006

Nice to see the FX work is in the capable hands of someone’s 14-year nephew…

83. Dogen - November 2, 2006

I meant…

“Nice to see the FX work is in the capable hands of someone’s 14-year-old nephew…

Oh, never mind…

84. MichaelT - November 2, 2006

Hmmmm… what are you all looking at? I see one photo of the E on a computer monitor. I digital pic of a guy working on the shot. Is he done? If there are other pics I am not seeing, I’ll remove my post, but if this argument is over one shot that likely isn’t color balanced…. well anyway… I will reserve MY judgment of the FX untill I actually see the product. If there are other shots…please direct me to them.
And some of you are far nastier than you need be. Quit degrading the site.

85. Josh - November 2, 2006

Wow the circle jerking and perpetual ass kissing in here must be contagious, or maybe it’s in the water.

Scott of the moronigites, you used the word “folks” in your diatribe thereby negating any semblance of rationality one could come close to accuse you of possessing. I came close, then I came to my senses.

As for Old Timey, Jeff, and the rest of the merry vagabonds, if I’m an “Ass” for postulating my position on this website then that would undoubtedly make all of you hypocritical, pedantic, self-absorbed, petulant, smug and condescending bastards and you all can go **** yourselves righteously.

You guys REINFORCE the negative sterotype of Trek fans.

Spin on that nacelle cap.

86. Anthony Pascale - November 3, 2006

OK…that is that

next personal attack from anyone gets banned

87. Spockariffic - November 3, 2006

“You’re a jerk.”
“No, you’re a jerk.”
“No, YOU’RE a jerk.”
“No, YOU’RE a jerk.”
“NO, YOU’RE a jerk!”
“NO, YOU’RE a jerk!”

Don’t you see where we’re headed? An article away from all caps. ALL CAPS!! That’s how the eugenics war started ya know.

For all you “Star Trek” fans out there slandering each other on your digital soap-boxes, what is it you’re trying to defend by the back and forth name-calling? Your screen name’s honor? Would have been excellent (and evolved) if one of you would have strapped a pair on and said “We’re all entitled to our opinions and I got carried away. While I still disagree with your view, I shouldn’t have slandered your opinion or you as a person. I apologize.” But you didn’t. You perpetuated it. Way to not be civil. Way to not be men.

Now grow up.

88. ZardoZ The TechMage - November 3, 2006

They forgot again the blue plasma in the nacels !!!!!!

89. Josh - November 3, 2006

Someone needs to post that photograph from over at Trekweb showcasing all of the MANY variations on the warp nacelle bussard collectors, over 20 throughout the run of the show.

There can be no consensus on the appearance of the domes since there was no clear consensus during the shows run itself.

That’s why I have been postulating that nitpicking doesn’t service any desired result, because peoples perceptions often times dictate “reality” to them, and there is no standard concrete “reality” on how the starship Enterprise should appear. It’s completely subjective and open to interpretation and there can never be a unified concensus.
The original series never accurately depicted the true appearancew of the photographic model, we certainly didn’t percieve it accurately in the many generations of television transfers over the years.
One need only look at the divisive interpretations and desires posted here in these forums. No one is going to be pleased.
That’s why I’m such an advocate of just letting the CBS digital team do what they want and interpret the material how they best see fit.
As with any artistic endeavor it comes down to choice, people can either tune in, or tune out.
The U.S.S. Enterprise can NEVER appear on a television screens the same way it does in peoples imaginations.

90. Jim J - November 3, 2006

This back and forth bickering about the nacelles makes about as much sense as a debate about whether 7 of 9’s chest was saggier in season 7 rather than in her first season on the show (was that season 4, if I recall). Sure, I have expressed some concern about the shots of the Enterprise, but I still like everything they are doing and…”bickering is pointless…”, to quote a Vulcan friend of mine.

91. Greg Stamper - November 3, 2006

“I am pleased to see that we have differences. May we together become greater than the sum of both of us.” – “Surak”

92. Scott of the Morgites - November 3, 2006

Firstly, my apoligies to you, Josh, for the “asterick-ed” invective I launched at you. I could have made my point without resorting to using or repeating your own expletive. To be honest… I enjoy reading your commentary. It is usually well-written, funny and often insightful. My issue with you has been that too often there is sense of “bully-ness” from you to those that don’t agree with you. But again, genuinely… my apologies.

Secondly, those apologies extend to anyone that I may have offended or otherwise “put-off.”

Thirdly. a question for you Anthony (btw this is a terrific site and kudos for the job you do), I am curious… In your conversations with the folks at CBS Digital, did they give you any indication that they may go back to the first few episodes and re-do some of the earlier space shots that by their own admission they were less than happy with?

One of the things that is most promising is given the learning curve they’re experiencing and as their skill-set and abilities become more attuned… more efficient … more refined, the episodes down the line should really be gems.

Lastly, I hope to hear your pontifications of perspicacity again, Josh. Although, for a short time, I thought we really had a chance at peace in the Mid-East. Just kiddin’ ya’, fella!

93. John N - November 3, 2006

#89 – Josh – Can you post the link to the screen shots of the nacelles on Trekweb?


94. John N - November 3, 2006

#89 – Josh – I think we can all agree that you can’t please everybody all of the time.

However, consumer opinion means nothing, then why would companies waste their valuable time and money performing market research? Surely the test subjects will never come to a common consensus. However, the results of the survey are considered as valuable feedback nonetheless.

I would like to test one of the key assumptions to your argument, and that is it doesn’t matter WHAT CBS does, everybody will still be just as unhappy.

I propose that a series of unlabled screen shots be posted of the nacelles (i.e. design #1, #2, etc.) from the Remastered ship and a handful of the other fan-created nacelles out there. A poll should accompany the shots with the question ” I would be satisfied if the following design was made the standard for the Remastered series:”, and then of course, the various options to choose from.

If there is not a clear majority, then I think that we would all owe you an apology. If there is a clear majority, then it’s up to you if you would want to concede the point.

Anyone interested?

95. John N - November 3, 2006

Sorry… meant “IF consumer opinion means nothing…”

96. Cervantes - November 3, 2006

GRAY…mmm, just a thought…and in the scheme of all that’s wrong with this world, this is of no great importance really…BUT, if I was suddenly asked by someone what colour do I remember the Enterprise as being…hand on heart, OVERALL, I would have to rely WHITE.

However, if the CGI team, and certain posters here, maintain it came across as overall GREY on their television sets, I,ll grudgingly accept that this will be the case for my future high definition enjoyment.

But it means the likes of a lot of toy manufacturers such as “Dinky” got their perceptions wrong too… Oh well, still loving the idea of the upgrades.

97. Lao3D - November 3, 2006

Backtracking to #76 — I like Granger’s question: any non-space touchups we want to see? My biggest hope is for background replacements on the various windows in the office shots. Some great potential there. Or the hallway outside the bar. Those grid panels are screaming to be windows onto space…

Okay, I guess those are partly space touchups but still…

98. John N - November 3, 2006

#97 – Lao3D – I love what they did to the digitally added windows for Cloud City in The Empire Strikes Back, and would have no issue with the same kind of addition in any Trek episode.

99. cbspock - November 3, 2006

Yes, there were many different versions of the nacelle effect. The CGI guys should just pick one and go with it. I think the first one is what they should strive for…

Here is one×15/TOS_2x13_TheTroubleWithTribbles0439-Trekpulse.jpg

and another×06/doomsdaymachine_160.jpg

100. cbspock - November 3, 2006

Here are the links..

101. Dr. Image - November 3, 2006

The “version” of the friggin’ nacelle caps that they should standardize on are the functional ones on the later version of the 11 foot model.
That’s what they have been intending and attempting to do, and now they’re refining their efforts.
Hats off to Mike Okuda and the CBS team. Their efforts on this legendary property have been conservative and appropriate.
They also can admit their mistakes in subjective judgement- unlike some people on this board, who incidentally, are really starting to piss me off.

102. Horn - November 3, 2006

Agree with you big-time on the windows outside the bar area. My hope is they get tired of simply working on “space shots” and get real creative with sets and add more “touch-ups” to make them less clausterphobic. A good example would have been to add a window or windows in the science station that Tormolen and Spock ckecked out in The Naked Time. Views of the surrounding mountains outside said windows would have really expanded the set making it much more believable and put the viewer much more into that imaginary world.

If the CBS Digital folks read this board please consider doing this kind of stuff!!

103. Skippy 2k - November 3, 2006

Racer_X over on the trekbbs compiled this one which shows the various domes. I think the new domes work, obviously there are too many to say which is correct. I didn’t really like the old domes (allthough they looked better in some shots and seemed to be improving) but I think it wasn’t as much because they didn’t exactly match the originals, just that they made it seem off. I think they have made a great improvement, both with the domes and the lighting on the ship from the image above.

Anyway here is a link that image by Racer_X…

Here is a link to the thread itself…

104. JON - November 3, 2006

Enough with the nacelle caps !!!! Get a life!

105. Scott of the Morgites - November 3, 2006

#94. John N – An interesting, and certainly politically sensitive, idea… It would be interesting to see just how fractious or unified the results of the poll would be.

However, I don’t think Josh needs to concede his position regardless of the outcome. Not that Josh needs me to defend his inclinations but he likes the first incarnation of the Remasterd Enterprise, which is fine by me.

Art, or more precisely, the appreciation of it is such a subjective event. I may look at Wyeth’s Master Bedroom and be enraptured by the warmth of the sentiment inherent in the subject matter. Someone else may look at it and say the earth tones are depressing and it is derivative.

I felt the first pass of the Remastered Enterprise, et al. missed the mark but that criticism is painted on a broader canvass than just the rendered ship itself. But the people at CBS Digital seem to be getting better and more discriminating with each episode.

A bright future for sure!

106. Sybok - November 3, 2006

Well, a lot of people who posted here certainly learned the lesson of friendship and civility well from TOS!

Yes, I’m being ironic !

I think the new “model” is much better — I’m glad CBS Digital improved The U.S.S. Enterprise and look forward to the episode.

I respect people who try to improve, and take pride in their work.

On a personal note, I do regret Daren Doc isn’t involved with the project, but who knows what the future may bring? His ship was great, if a little dark; perhaps a lighter surface like the TMP ship, even if not “canon”, would have been better.

I’ll give CBS Digital a break, and hope they consider doing a “Remastered” Star Trek V! :)

107. Josh - November 3, 2006

Peace in the middle east Scott of the Morgites?

I can most unequivocally tell you it doesn’t start with a McDonalds and Wal-mart in Baghdad as some seem apt to try.

Dr. Image, better to be “pissed off” than pissed on right?

108. Scott of the Morgites - November 3, 2006

#106. Sybok – Comments about “mending fences” aside… I do agree with you regarding Daren Doc’s involvement…

I thought the choices he made (i.e., movement, composition and visual narrative) for his Doomsday footage gave the excerpts a vitality that the early efforts by the CBS team lacked.

Was the Enterprise too dark? Perhaps. However, I’d like to see the Remastered exterior space shots take on a life of their own with each episode even though they will be in most cases re-cycled.

109. Scott of the Morgites - November 3, 2006

Josh… just a joke… but your assessment regarding the placements of a sub-mediocre eatery and a belligerent, totalitarian discount store is, sadly, accurate.

110. Sybok - November 3, 2006

Scott, as I wrote, I am hoping for the best, based on the picture above, this version looks better. As to what you wrote about Daren, I agree and have said so on other threads here. Daren wrote, which to me is the last word on the problem with the “old” nacelle caps and seems corrected now:

… The domes should not be orange. They should be frosted white… and LIT from inside by the orange lights. The domes they have now are very uniformly luminant… this is just plain wrong. Real world objects do not behave like this… and it’s an immediate clue to “CG-ocity”… there are a few ways to do this effect correctly… apparently they have just given up and are satisfied with this cartoon look… or perhaps they are just content with this because it reminds them of the much more boring TNG nacelle cap effects. Whatever it is, I cringe when I see it… cause I know it can be done better…

111. Sybok - November 3, 2006

Oops, forgot to post link to Daren’s site:

I think if CBS Digital just adds now some more vitality to the visual effects, i.e., motion, camera rolls, etc., I’ll be happy, but I can’t speak for others!

112. Dr. Image - November 3, 2006

Well, Josh, (#107) I’ve never been “pissed on.”
Perhaps you speak from experience.

Now: How many out there would like to see the red and blue stars brought back? Hmmmm?

113. Jim J - November 3, 2006

I swear if you blow up that picture of the guy’s computer screen, you can see three “red stars”. Look very closely…hmmmm…”fascinating!”
(or maybe I need glasses-lol)

114. MichaelT - November 3, 2006

We done yet?
After seeing some of the posts AFTER Anthony’s warning, I am surprised the axe hasn’t fallen.
I come here for Trek News and some gossip and to look at the threads… maybe even comment. I think the regular posters need to look at what’s being said, commented on and discussed. There is so much repetition of a few pet peeves in all the threads. Ship color and those dam nacelle caps need to give way to something else. Please!!

115. Horn - November 3, 2006

Other people including myself have tried (to no avail) to bring up other topics of discussion regarding the remastered project, however, it always goes back to the color of the nacelle caps and the what color the Enterprise should be. It’s unfortunate, but that seems to be all anybody cares about around here.

116. Matt Wright - November 3, 2006

I tend agree, the nacelle cap thing is now quite old, and from the pictures Tony brought back from CBS Digital, pretty much a moot issue now.

Let’s keep the topics flowing.

We’ll have a picture of the Gorn ship up soon, I see already has it up. I think it’s pretty darn cool that the guys at CBS didn’t just make a quick little render to stand in for a ship — they actually designed a proper model, it just needs skinning if it were to be seen in closer detail.

117. Anonymous - November 3, 2006

“On Friday will have a full article on our behind the scenes tour of CBS Digital” — only three hours to make that deadline

118. John N - November 3, 2006

Just to be clear, I’m not suggesting that the poll be created in order to perpetuate the ever-lasting discussion on the nacelles.

Instead, I suggest it to demonstrate that those of us who post constructive criticisms, likely do so as a collection of people who can collectively recognize quality work when we see it.

And again, I repeat… I don’t have a problem with people prefering whatever version of whatever it is they prefer.

What I find sad is when constructive criticism is blindly categorized and subsequently disregarded as whining.

119. MichaelT - November 3, 2006

thanks #117. I look forward to a new subject.

120. Greg Stamper - November 3, 2006

Has anyone asked “Where did this New CGI Model come from?”
Did CBS Digital purchase this program from an outside source? Who was the source?
Or was it an inhouse project?

121. Spockariffic - November 3, 2006

Hey I know! How about nacelle caps?! No one’s talked about those yet!

I had to see for myself. I went into Dochterman’s video and did a screen capture from every shot of the Enterprise he has, from the opening credits on. I put them each next to the still image of the shot of the E on that guy’s computer monitor from above. I suggest anyone interested do the same. I defy anyone to come back and tell me that his are any more standardized than theirs in regards to color. What his DO have is better dome shapes. I’d like to see that, which he did a great job on! The one from CBS-D seems squashed-in a bit, but color?? Forget it. His blades are super dark and then not, his dome is candy red when it’s aproaching the Constellation (as seen from behind Enterprise) and mettalic-shiny colored later on and in some they look just like the CBS one above.

There are valid points from everyone here, but not EVERY point is valid. In this case let your eyes do the talking.

On to new subjects: I wanna see a WICKED COOL Apollos hand! That would be awesome! All energy and stuff. The new Botany Bay I hope will be cool. A new barrier for the galaxy edge in Where No Man!

It’s like candy-land!! WOW us CBS and Okuda!! We’re behind you!!

122. Spockariffic - November 3, 2006

Hey Tony, where’s the new article? It’s getting LATE here!

123. Josh - November 4, 2006

John N

It’s rather easy to categorize “constructive criticism” as perpetual whining when every third post in the forums is a “constructive criticism” repeated ad infinitum.

How many different ways can people incessantly say they don’t like something before it becomes mundane?

That old chestnut grew old the first week a new episode premiered.

We get the point already, some people don’t enjoy the effects.
Stating it once is making a point, stating it every third post to the forums is obsessive crying and whining about an entirely subjective matter.

And then when someone rightfully points out the Nacelle fetish, they are labeled an “ass” for pointing out the obvious.

My question is, why didn’t the forum moderators and creators simply create a tagged subject forum for people to go in and voice their complaints all day long?

Every topic that comes up reverts back to ” The Enterprise sucks”, “The nacelle dome caps are too orange” ,”why can’t they get it right?”, “Why can’t they this, that and the other?”

It gets tired.

That’s been my only point all along.

124. Koko B. Ware - November 4, 2006

I enjoy this site. It is great to have photos and info. about the remastered episodes. I am a little sick of the “nacelle caps” discussion. Will be looking forward to watching “The Trouble With Tribbles” tonight.

125. John N - November 4, 2006

#123 – Josh – Well, if THAT’s your point, I tend to agree with you.

It’s just that in your effort to get people to stop talking about it, I think that you may have stepped on a few toes, because some of us are genuinely voicing our artistic concerns. You can generally tell who we are by the lack of profanity and extremism in our posts… ;)

And I also agree with you that a tagged forum would be nice, but I don’t want to look a gift horse in the mouth… Anthony has an awesome site, and that would be a great improvement down the road if he has both the time and inclination.

126. Scott of the Morgites - November 4, 2006

125 – John N – It is an awesome site, full of terrific and timely information.

To me, it is amazing that there is still this passion for this show. I can remember the discussions (and arguements) I’d have with my friends about the characters, stories and effects.

To date myself, I watched the whole first season and part of the second in black & white ’cause we didn’t have a color TV. I clearly remember the first episode I saw in color, “A Private Little War.” Wow! Seeing Star Trek in color was… epiphanal.

What’s really great about this site is the threads and commentaries… Sometimes they’re enlightening, sometimes they’re funny, sometimes they’re this strange snapshot of a collective mood.

And unlike the verbal banter of year’s ago replete with the same thrusts and parries found here… You can actually go back and read what this person said or that person’s point… over multiple pages. No revisionist history here.

127. John N - November 4, 2006

#126 – Scott – Well said.

128. Anthony Pascale - November 4, 2006

RE: Forums
of course they are on the todo list, but this isn’t a full time gig obviously. I am working on other projects a lot right now. I plan on moving to a new host and then launching forums and then doing a total site redesign. If anyone with experience wants to help feel free to email me (click contact button below)

One thing that concerns me about forums is that I do not want it to descend into the typical trekkie pissing matches that so many other BBSs turn into. I hope that in the future people involved in both TOSR and STXI actually participate. ANd the problem with that is that it will require a level of moderating I do not have the time to do…hence the need for help

129. Matt Wright - November 4, 2006

I totaly agree with Tony and Scott.

I haven’t gone near a Star Trek website in 5+ years for the very reasons mentioned.

I only started frequenting when I saw the quality of information Tony was able to find, much of it exclusive, and the fact that he was a nice guy and the site hadn’t become a mess of thread crapping.

He and I soon started talking outside of the site via e-mail and phone and before I knew it because of my extensive Media Center PC background he had me on the staff for taking screenshots of the new remastered TOS ;)

130. Anonymous - November 9, 2006

Heh, are they ever gonna let you back in? is represented by Gorilla Nation. Please contact Gorilla Nation for ad rates, packages and general advertising information.