First Look at Tobias Richter’s Star Trek Movie USS Enterprise Wallpapers |
jump to navigation

First Look at Tobias Richter’s Star Trek Movie USS Enterprise Wallpapers February 23, 2009

by Thorsten Wulff , Filed under: Fan Productions,Star Trek (2009 film) , trackback

In December TrekMovie featured some amazing ‘fan made’ images of the new USS Kelvin from the upcoming Star Trek movie, by German CG Artist Tobias Richter. Since then Richter has been at work on the new USS Enterprise, and today we bring a first look at what he has come up with. Check out his stunning Big E desktops below.


Do it yourself Enterprise
Tobias Richter is a big Trek fan  who also happens to be a veteran CG artist and owner of The Light Works graphics studio in Cologne, Germany, which does visual effects for games, TV and film. Although he has done some work on DVD covers for Paramount Home Entertainment, the following images are 100% ‘fan made.’ His model of the Enterprise is based solely on reference material available (the official image release, the three trailers and even the toy images). Since the total source material is limited, some areas of Tobias’ version are conjecture, however he feels confident it is ‘fairly accurate.’

And here they are:

Desktop images:

[Desktop Downloads: 1280×10241920×1200]

[Desktop Downloads: 1280×1024, 1920×1200]

[Desktop Downloads: 1280×1024, 1920×1200]

[Desktop Downloads: 1280×1024, 1920×1200]

[Desktop Downloads: 1280×1024, 1920×1200]

[Desktop Downloads: 1280×1024, 1920×1200]

[Desktop Downloads: 1280×1024, 1920×1200]

[Desktop Downloads: 1280×1024, 1920×1200]

[Desktop Downloads: 1280×1024, 1920×1200]

[Desktop Downloads: 1280×1024, 1920×1200]

It took Tobias about three and a half weeks of total time for modeling, texturing and lighting, all done using the Autodesk Maya software. The Enterprise features 150 light sources, more than 30 texture maps, and even has some furniture inside and blinking running lights to add a lifelike feeling. Tobias says that he still prefers the shape of the TMP ‘refit’ Enterprise, but feels this new one will grow on people. While working on the model he was impressed at how many references to previous Enterprises were worked in to the new ship, such as the color scheme on the neck area (the green and red stripes).

More to come at FedCon
Tobias will be doing a more elaborate animation video showing the Enterprise and the USS Kelvin together, which will be premiered at the big FedCon convention in Bonn, Germany in May. Although he is pretty certain they don’t interact with each other in the actual film, he thinks seeing them together ‘looks cool’…indeed.

For more on Tobias, visit The Light Works.


1. keith - February 23, 2009



2. nmajmani - February 23, 2009

I def love these downloads. Good work

3. capttravis - February 23, 2009

She actually looks pretty good – nice work!

4. Gorandius1256 - February 23, 2009

in the Words of Mister Spock: o.0 fascinating.

5. Dennis Bailey - February 23, 2009

Looks like the Enterprise. :-)

6. David (Flaming Wings Forever) - February 23, 2009


7. Starfleet06 - February 23, 2009

These beauty shots are fantastic. You have to admit, the Enterprise (even this newest incarnation) is a beautiful ship. Well done, Tobias. Well done.

8. xizro345 - February 23, 2009

I remember when he did the opening animation for Team 17’s Alien Breed like 16 years ago…A lot of time has passed indeed.

9. OM - February 23, 2009

…Yeah, but what some of us *really* want are 3-views – side, front, top – like the Franz Joseph Technical Manual layouts, as if they were displayed on an LCARS of some sort.

10. Chroma - February 23, 2009

I know some people won’t like the changes but damn! I love her.

11. ety3 - February 23, 2009

Wow. Nice stuff.

I hope once the film’s out, he goes back and corrects whatever need correcting (like if the Bussard collectors glow a certain color).

12. Alexander - February 23, 2009

WOW!!! Great work!!! Incredible!!!!

Can’t wait to see the video at the FedCon!!!!

Live long and prosper!!

13. Devon - February 23, 2009


14. Harry523 - February 23, 2009

Wow, I hated the new Enterprise till now. Great work. Thank you so much.

15. weerd1 - February 23, 2009

Wow. If those prove accurate, they really isn’t bad. Much better from those angles. I still want red nacelle caps though…

16. Scott B. here. - February 23, 2009

Those are some astoundingly beautiful renderings of a couple of supremely clunky starship designs.

I admire your craftsmanship, Tobias. Beautiful compositions and colors. I particularly like images 1,4, 5 and 9. Great work.

Scott B. out.

17. Tb1 - February 23, 2009


18. That One Guy - February 23, 2009

Thanks Anthony! I was about 5 minutes from dropping a line to you asking when these were coming out. And I mean literally. It’s been on my mind all day!

1701 looks better than ever.

19. falcon - February 23, 2009

Tobias does some very good work given the limited reference material.

Having said that, I’m back to not being a big fan of the redesign. The angles are good, but the ship itself…”looks like a swollen-up balloon at a Starfleet shoving-off party.”

But, like Tobias said, maybe it’ll grow on me. We’ll see.

20. Quarksbartender - February 23, 2009

Well done I think this ship will continue to grow on me.

21. I'm a Doctor not a ______! - February 23, 2009

I didn’t know what to make of the (official) first images…I didn’t like them too much…I didn’t hate was .. more different that I would have thought….then the toy images softened me some…and now ..even though these aren’t official…wow….I dunno…I think she is really growing on me…’s a thing of beauty….

22. boborci - February 23, 2009

so cool

23. DATA KILLED SPOT! - February 23, 2009

This ship isnt worth 1 meg. I’d take the backgrounds over the ship anyday, thank you.

24. Angry but i'll get over it - February 23, 2009

“And Admiral…it is the Enterprise!”


25. InSaint - February 23, 2009

Now I get it. I finaly figured out what does the new ship remind me of…It reminds me of an Enterprise with a clown nose and big flappy shoes…

26. Spud - February 23, 2009

Beautiful rendering work, outstanding in fact.
Even achieves the impossible and makes the design look good from some angles.

But I think this just shows up how the classic and elegant lines of the original are ruined in the new one. It’s what remains of the original 1701 that attracts the eye. Everything new in the design repels.

27. senwod - February 23, 2009

“These are the voyages of the starship…Enterprise.”


28. Janeways Knickers - February 23, 2009

nacelles are too big and way too close together in the new enterprise. doh! gimme STTMP refit any day

29. Phil - February 23, 2009

I’m still not sold on the proportions of the new ship, but these images do put my mind somewhat at ease – the angles are better than the official images shown thus far. Really nice work, made all the more impressive by the limited amount we’ve seen the actual ship. Major kudos, Tobias. And thank you for sharing.

30. weerd1 - February 23, 2009

22- So Bob, are you allowed to tell us how accurate these seem?

31. That One Guy - February 23, 2009

I’m tempted to bring up the “TMP” argument, since it’s my second-favorite E (First place goes to E-E). But this isn’t a TMP movie. This takes place 20-30 years BEFORE TMP, so I’m not gonna argue too much.

“Gentlemen, we’ve come home.”

32. Will_H - February 23, 2009

from some angles the new E isnt ugly…from some, but for the most part I still hate it. Yep, nacelles wayyyy too big and close together, and how bar back the pylons are, and how the collectors are all dark and lifeless on the fronts…ugly ship, I dont think I’ll ever like it. Still some of those wallpapers that avoid the ugly features look good.

33. Bradley1701 - February 23, 2009

Absolutely stunning!

34. Capt Mike Of The Terran Empire - February 23, 2009

These are so Kool even Bob Orci was Inpressed. I know I am .These are very beautifull and Wow What can i say. If the big E in the Movie looks anything like these then we are all in for a wonderfull treat. Oh and did I say WOW!!!!!

35. boborci - February 23, 2009

30. weerd1 – February 23, 2009
22- So Bob, are you allowed to tell us how accurate these seem?

they seem pretty accurate…

36. I'm dead Jim - February 23, 2009

This Enterprise is truly a thing of beauty in these screens. I wasn’t sure before but if she comes across like this in the movie then I’m a fan. This big E shows elegance and power (although I still wish the engineering hull extended a little farther back as has been mentioned ad nauseum).

Oh, and I hate clowns.

37. Kirokwannabe - February 23, 2009

Wonderful work. I too feel the new E growing on me; though the STTMP is still my favorite.

38. weerd1 - February 23, 2009

Mmmm- no bridge window? That’s a MINOR nitpick on gorgeous work though, which may not be reflected on the movie Enterprise…

39. Capt Mike Of The Terran Empire - February 23, 2009

Hey Bob Orci. On the Next Trek Movie you should hire Tobias Richter. He does outstanding work.

40. ucdom - February 23, 2009

Beautiful artwork Tobias! Thanks

41. Bradley1701 - February 23, 2009

I remember how much the Enterprise D was criticised when TNG came on…but it grew on everyone. The rest of the show vehicles after that just became familiar and accepted in their designs (defiant, akira, intrepid, etc.) even though they were far out for Federation design.

The critics will become familiar with the new Constitution class and fall in love with her as well.

42. weerd1 - February 23, 2009

35- Cool! Thank you Mr. Orci!

43. Smittmaestro™ - February 23, 2009

My first love is still the original 1701 from the series, but this version just may become a second or maybe even a tie for first.



44. The Jui$tain - February 23, 2009

Wow it actually looks like its from the 23rd century and not the 1960’s. Shock……


45. Commodore Lurker - February 23, 2009

Decloaking . . .

The big E is the best thing this team has done, Design Wise, for the future of Trek.

Recloaking. };-D>

46. Newman - February 23, 2009

This guy does amazing work. But to tell you the truth, it has made me like the new E a bit less. The nacelles are too bulky and crowded. They need to be slender and graceful.

47. The Jui$tain - February 23, 2009

Truly awesome work.

Mr. Orci, like #39-Capt Mike said, you should definitely consider hiring him.


48. DmsDyMach - February 23, 2009

The new ‘old’ E looks better here than the ‘official’ images, but she still comes across as aesthetically compressed and clunky, like she slammed into an asteroid during a test flight. Not a bad design, but definitely room for improvement.
Of course, if we accept it as a pre-TOS and TMP design, and Scotty ovehauls the whole thing later on, then it’s not so bad.

49. Enterprisingguy - February 23, 2009

If the Big E looks this good in the movie coupled with some awesome sound effects I will be happy! It’s not my favorite Enterprise. But I can live with it. We’ll always have the others too.

Thanks Tobias for making this version look the best it can be. I’ve enjoyed all of your other work and display them on my monitors. I know you didn’t design this ship but you sure did it justice!

50. Mirror Jordan - February 23, 2009

These are absolutely amazing! Best Trek wallpapers I’ve ever seen!

51. DmsDyMach - February 23, 2009

Oops. Forgot to add that Mr. Richter’s work is supremely top notch.

52. Mazzer - February 23, 2009

Fabulous work! Congratulations!

53. MattTheTrekkie - February 23, 2009

Something about that last Image, the one where the Enterprise really pulls at my heart strings. Son following in Fathers footsteps :,)

I’m sold on the new Enterprise. I hated the design when I first saw it, but I really do quite love it now. It adds interesting contrast to the Kelvin which is SO old school :D

54. cpelc - February 23, 2009

man… no offense to the guy who was working on this over at TrekBBS

But his

Compared to the first one of these….man. Little different.

But I guess it’s partly that Tobias is a pro and this guy is just starting.

55. MattTheTrekkie - February 23, 2009

*where the Enterprise [is following the Kelvin]*

Sorry, left that part out XD

56. Admiral Waugh - February 23, 2009

It’s awesome art work… but it does bring home some bad news about the Enterprise.

From the top, she’s not a very pretty ship. Not nearly as much as the refit Constitution class, which still sets the standard, anyway. From the side, aft, and front, a pretty good looking ship though.

57. James - February 23, 2009

A LOT more attractive than the screenshot.

Although – that screenshot is my desktop now.

The new design is starting to grow on me… a bit like fungus…

58. captain_neill - February 23, 2009

it looks good but she is not as beautiful as the original Enterprise.

I can’t warm to this Enterprise look, it just doesn’t look right to me

59. The Invader (In Color!) - February 23, 2009

As much as I love the CGI work presented here…I still don’t care for the JJPrise Warp Nacelles…way too clunky looking. I still don’t like the nacelle caps either.

That’s not Tobias’ fault though…it’s inherent in this design.

60. Trekee - February 23, 2009

Ohhh, I dunno… it just looks *wrong*, sorry. But I do really want to like it.

Great renders though, and nice composition. Paramount really did give us the worst angle possible for that first shot.

Anyway, doesn’t really matter I suppose, it’s near enough to the old girl that when the tears of joy are coursing down my face at how wonderful the new film is, I won’t be able to see that her nacelles have a bit too much celluite, and she’s got too much makeup on.

I might even overlook the bandy legs…

61. Canon Schmanon - February 23, 2009

Good God, get the official images out already. This is ridiculous.

62. Unbel1ever - February 23, 2009

Looks better, than the pictures we’ve seen so far. The secondary hull seems longer and more balanced.

63. Chris Pike - February 23, 2009

Excellent renders, superb!

But that E design…ughh!

64. Duncan MacLeod - February 23, 2009

i was hoping for some Widescreen ones, but i can crop a bit. AWESOME work.

65. NX01 - February 23, 2009

I scratched my head when I saw the first picture. From the first picture I saw I thought this new Enterprise was going to be a disaster. But the more pictures that I see, I am falling in love with this new enterprise. Star Trek lives and is in good hands!
“My friends we have come home.” (Star Trek 4)

66. The Bear - February 23, 2009

Excellent modeling work! Thanks for the wallpapers!

67. Green-Blooded-Bastard - February 23, 2009

What are those two red lights on the back of the Enterprise, turn indicators?

68. Chadwick - February 23, 2009

Tobias Richter you have outdone yourself, these are a visual orgasm of Trek goodness.

“Somebody had asked me, ‘What’s going to become of ‘Star Trek’ in the future?’ And I said that I hope that some day some bright young thing would come along and do it again, bigger and better than I had ever done it. And I wish them well.”

– Gene Roddenberry

69. Chancellor Jake - February 23, 2009

Wow! That is one beautiful ship!

70. Jim - February 23, 2009


71. Captain Roy Mustang - February 23, 2009

I love it Danm she’s beautiful
I want tht ship

72. radroz - February 23, 2009

That is one beautiful ship…. “All I ask is a tall ship and a star to steer her by…”

73. drij - February 23, 2009

looks like crap from the back and side.

74. Calendar owner - February 23, 2009

If this guy isn’t featured in Ships of the Line, he should be.

75. ProperTrekkieUK - February 23, 2009

WOOOOOOOOOOOOW!! Love it!! They are the sex!! I am very impressed and ANY concerns I might of had about the new design are gone! I think it keeps the flavour of the Entripse, pre and post refit but brings it foward and modernises it! This is Trek in the 21st Century no doubt it my mind :D

76. cagmar - February 23, 2009

Despite the beautiful rendering and Maya skills (thanks Tobias Richter!), this ship is still just trying to be as majestic and beautiful as the other enterprises. It isn’t. Still clumsy. The only one that’s worked so far is the head-on from the trailer.

77. Nikos - February 23, 2009

The ship is cool, but I really hate that they did the warp nacelles so close together. It gives to the whole thing a different prospective. Kind of odd prospective which I don’t really like. But apart from that, she looks gorgeous

78. Art•Rob - February 23, 2009

Sexy. My only nit-pick is that the nacelles seem too close together for my taste.

79. redbellpeppers - February 23, 2009

I could almost learn to like this new Enterprise.
Good work Tobias.

80. Marc B. Lee - February 23, 2009

Shameless Plug Warning!!!

His videos are even more impressive.

Known this guy for 15 years!! Luv ’em to death……….in a manly sort of way. His work comes second.

Glad to have you with us as always Tobias baby!!!! See you in a few months!

81. Lou - February 23, 2009


82. Adam Cohen - February 23, 2009

Awesome artwork, Tobias. I still don’t like this ship’s design, but I do love seeing it up close nevertheless.

83. McCoy - February 23, 2009

Still don’t like it as the TOS Enterprise. Would be OK with it between TMP and TOS but even so there are many things about this design that are indecisive (IMO). It requires certain angles to provide greater recognizability as the 1701—why not design it closer to begin with.

The textures and generic ideas say ‘Trek’ but certainly not ‘TOS’. The shapes and gaudy additions do not make the craft appear any more futuristic than the original 1701 (IMO). The textures and the saucer design are providing the refresh most are feeling. If this same saucer and same textures were applied to the original design from the 60’s, it too would look just as modern, just as fresh, and none of the newbies from MTV would know.

So the end result, for me, the feeling is that the changes here appear to have been made for the sake of change. Not saying that is true, just what I am getting. I am still hoping the timeline allows this “exciting” ship to explode.

84. tman - February 23, 2009

Impressive modelling! I think the ship really does look incredible in these views.– I’m starting to enjoy the large round nacelles alot more than TMP era nacelles in many of the views and from the angles Tobias used, the neck looks quite natural. Ship looks fast.

I’d be very curious if Tobias found the ship’s beauty to be very dependent on angle and lens used or it looked beautiful and natural most any angle.

85. Bart - February 23, 2009

From the back she reminds me of the Enterprise-D… The neck, the attachment of the nacelles…

86. Devon - February 23, 2009

“Still don’t like it as the TOS Enterprise.”

Then don’t tell yourself that it is.

87. Rudy M Alapag Jr - February 23, 2009

it’s cool as the enterprise e. the outside is cool. looking outside of the ship and @ space. “Space, The Final Frontier”.

88. Elise - February 23, 2009

See, THIS is how you sell the new ship! Beautiful.

89. Pinky - February 23, 2009

Great work Tobias! Wonderful. You are a master.

But as far as the design, sorry, the neck’s in the wrong position. All the angles that work are the ones that hide the placement of the neck and the saucer. Shoot it from the top, from the front, at an awkward angle with the swollen nacelle blocking the neck… all looks best.

Maybe Orci or someone could explain why the neck is back so far? Is that a functional, science-based design? I’d love a reason.

90. Spock - February 23, 2009

Nice images. I really don’t care much for the new design. The nacelles are too close together. It is just an ugly ship.

91. "Uncle" Clay Farrow - February 23, 2009

67. Leave it to Jim Kirk to leave his hazard lights on during his first command!

92. Dave Schilling - February 23, 2009

That’s the Enterprise, alright. These are the sorts of angles we are used to seeing.

93. Crewman Darnell - February 23, 2009

Tobias is obviously one heck of artist. I wish felt nearly as enthused about the design of the “new” E.

94. BK613 - February 23, 2009

LOL only it was the faux Enterprise a.k.a USS Ranger in TVH

Outstanding modeling, lighting and rendering, Mr, Richter. Wonderful compositions. As for the ship itself, well, I like it more than the Constellation-class anyway so there is that.

But it doesn’t replace the cultural icon, the one that had the space shuttle testbed named after it, the one that appears on a collector’s stamp, and the one on display at the National Air and Space Museum.

IMO, anyway.

95. TobiasRichter - February 23, 2009

Wow, thanks for the praise. I had a great time modelling her, although it was not an easy task, with that little reference and some rather complex shapes. But she turned out nice. And yes, it is a bit harder to find good angles. The best ship in that respect is still the TMP Refit Enterprise. Well, maybe this one will also get a refit should there be more movies following (which I hope)…

96. CaptainRickover - February 23, 2009

Great work!

But I still don’t like the new design – from any angle. If they have left out the torpedo-ramp and given the secondary hull more mass, that design would look much better. I like the nacelle-design, but not how they are assembled on the hull.

97. jas_montreal - February 23, 2009

gosh the nacelles look just TOOOOO big. I hope its not like that in the movie or the actual models, because those are just too big.

98. CMX54 - February 23, 2009


“How does a nightmare begin?” ;-)

With the landing of a craft from another galaxy? Thanks for the reminder!

And now, back to my DVD player for the rest of Season Two of my favorite sci-fi series from the ’60s. Gene Hackman as an Invader, indeed! :-D

PS: Yes, very nice CGI work from Tobias, on a rather awkward-looking redesign of the Big E.

99. AJ - February 23, 2009


It seems there are few “labels,” i.e. the horizontal red striping on the port and starboard of the secondary hull with the Starfleet Delta pointing toward the bow, etc.

Perhaps not adequately revealed in the available materials.

Terrific renderings, though. You have changed a lot of minds!

100. Jefferies Tuber - February 23, 2009

97. Funniest comment ever.

Tobias, great work! Beautiful shots!

101. Lord Garth, Formerly of Izar - February 23, 2009

Awesome work

Still no likey the overall design. Like a bit there and a bit here and like this and that but not combined they way they did it, too mish mashed

102. Phil - February 23, 2009

Liking this more every day.

103. Lousy Canadian - February 23, 2009

Wow! :O

104. KJTrek - February 23, 2009

As much as I want to like and love this ship, I still feel it is unbalanced and steals too much from the refit and onwards when so much could have been done with TOS elements. I commend the creator for a decent job at designing a SHIP… but it’s not an Enterprise… it just looks like an extreme lack of functionality and form.

I commend Tobias for an outstanding job with these visuals, and I have always been a fan of The Light Works.

105. TrekMadeMeWonder - February 23, 2009

Is that the New Enterprise??!!!

Wow!!! I WAS a bit hasty to critique so harshly in my earlier design reviews.
And that’s after only seeing a few of these new pics closeup.
Why are’nt some of these images loading??

Anyhow, these images get me psyched again for the next Trek! Right on.
Great job!

106. Spock with a Crowbar - February 23, 2009


…either that or impulse engines. :P

107. x0epyon0x - February 23, 2009

Absolutely gorgeous work, Tobias. Number 6, to me anyway, really captures the sense of scale about this ship.

While the first image released of the new old E didn’t really strike, this design has definitely grown on me and while it will never surpass the refit-Constitution in my mind, it comes in at a close second.

108. TOY - February 23, 2009

Great work, would love to be able to create such fine images. TMP E is my favourite, I see more hints to it on this ship than to the TOS ship. Would be interesting to see this E and TMP E side by side, close up and personal. Overall I like this ship, and I won’t be missing this film. Haven’t seen the Star Trek films at the cinema since VII.

109. That One Guy - February 23, 2009

She’s a fine ship with a fine crew.

I hope that we see her sailing for years to come.

110. Spockanella - February 23, 2009

What awesome creativity. These look fabulous. Since they have the Orci seal of “look pretty accurate”, I’m really amazed, since I was one of those originally saying how ugly the ship looked!

111. Izbot - February 23, 2009

I have maybe one little gripe about the new E design and the Kelvin. It’s really a nit-picky thing and i can live with it but the reduced amount of exterior signage, call letters and pennants kind of disappoints me. There are several big angles of theses ships where no signage whatsoever can be seen. The underside of the saucer and the lower hull in particular are almost totally unmarked. Just seems like a no-brainer you’d want someone in close proximity to be able to identify your ship if their sensors or comm was down or they were drifting in a lifepod, etc and had nothing to go by other than the visable markings.

This kind of really bothered me about all the new ships we saw in Insurrection, too. The scout ship was unnamed (not even given a class designation), the holo-ship was unmarked (this might be understandable given it’s illegal mission), captain’s yaht, too. On INS I felt it was just a bunch of people being very lazy and the rest of that movie kind of bears that out as true. But this appears to be a very deliberate choice on the part of the new design team.

112. buddykarl - February 23, 2009

It’s growing on me….definitely growing on me

113. Dr. Image - February 23, 2009

Absolute masterworks, Tobias.
I still like your “Kelvin-prise” design better than the “real” one though.

114. NCC-73515 - February 23, 2009

My love has wings
slender, tethered things
without grace in upward curve
and tapered tip…

115. NCC-73515 - February 23, 2009

May we use the Richterprise freely on community sites etc. (Thomas, ich denke da an Lokalisten und so… als Profilbilder)?

116. Quatlo - February 23, 2009

Yes indeed, Tobias is very good. He’s made the most out of what was available to work from and a design which has many weaknesses. Too bad Tobias or Gabe Koerner didn’t get the nod to create the new Big E for the new big movie.

117. NCC-73515 - February 23, 2009

Tobias, sorry! Not Thomas.

118. Jon - February 23, 2009

Best looking Enterprise EVAR.

119. Tom - February 23, 2009

I still like the old Enterprise better. Why fix something when its not broken.

120. Montreal Paul - February 23, 2009

Wow! The Enterprise is back baby! As beautiful as ever!

121. Johnny - February 23, 2009

Excellent work. This new Enterprise is clearly a improvement on the TOS Enterprise. My favorite picture is number 6 & 7. I like the thickens of the neck when it connects to the engineering backside(picture 7). The thicker the neck is the better.
I also think the nacelles are 10% to big.

122. Third Remata'Klan - February 23, 2009

This gentleman does fantastic work.
Those are beautiful.


“Different” does not automatically mean “bad”.

123. Darkowski - February 23, 2009

I love those wallpapers. Nice work Tobias!

Even the ship looks nice from some angles :-P

But I still have trouble getting used to the new design. It’s those nacelles…. Man, are they huge! They seem to have a different design – more futuristic than the rest of the ship and don’t really fit IMO. And they are a little too close together. And the pylons are so thin… The proportions are really bad – we can see it clearly on images 7 and 10.

It’s true that the Enterprise lost its ‘majestic’ look.
The classic and elegant lines of the original are almost all gone…

I know the designers put a lot of effort to create this new Enterprise. I do hope my perception will change for the better when I see the movie, and the design will grow on me :-) I will buy the model kit though.

TMP E is still by far my favorite.

124. SCOTT - February 23, 2009

These are some of the most beautiful wallpapers I have ever seen! Thanks so much!

125. The Governator - February 23, 2009

Impressive……. Most Impressive. Referring, of course, to both the design and the rendering.

126. Capt. of the USS Anduril - February 23, 2009

Gorgeous. Absolutely gorgeous from every angle. I especially like pic 10. I can imagine someone on the Kelvin-type ship looking out at the Enterprise and saying, “My god that’s a big ship.” And 5 and 6 need Trek music with them. Those two seem to say “To explore strange new worlds, to seek out new life and new civilizations.” This Enterprise seems like she was built to do those things and be able to withstand anything that gets thrown at it. If this is as close to the new movie as it seems to be, then I have no complaints about the new Enterprise. Let her fly. Let her go boldly where none have gone before.

127. Negotiator - February 23, 2009

These are trully awsome! Makes me almost like the new design.
I still prefer TMP big E like Mr. Richter does.

128. Yspano - February 23, 2009

Neat, I’ve been waiting for these to come out. The stuff TLW has done on Trek are amazing.

129. BrF - February 23, 2009

Beautiful job, regardless of reservations I still have about the new E. Here’s a new question, though. Paramount has been very relaxed about copyright and fans having their way with stuff that’s been on the shelf for a while. What will they make of fan-made desktop images of a hot new property, though? Probably the cat’s already out of the bag, but I imagine they’re talking about it.

130. Neal - February 23, 2009

bigger engines = more power!
I agree that the design will “grow” on people.

131. Plum - February 23, 2009

They pimped mah Enterprise! Sweet! :D

132. Montreal Paul - February 23, 2009

It’s really funny… all the people that have a problem with the nacelles.. I remember the first time the TMP Enterprise was unveiled. All people talked about was how much they hated the nacelles… they thought they were too thin.. too square… not as streamlined as the TOS nacelles. Here we are with a new Trek.. but the same old issue about the nacelles.. LoL.

But I think the “old girl” looks wonderful… in ANY incarnation.

133. Paulaner - February 23, 2009

Wonderful ship. I love her.

134. Capt Mike Of The Terran Empire - February 23, 2009

I have one of the Big E on my screen savor at work and i have had a lot of people say how much they love the Big E. Beautifully done

135. Dark_Lord_Prime - February 23, 2009

I, too, thought the neck was too far back when I saw the first official picture (or the hull extended too far forward).

But then I started comparing it to shots of the original ship at a similar angle, and I finally reallized that it’s just the new deflector dish design creating the illusion of wrong neck placement/extra hull length. As far as I could tell from the pics, the neck is in just about the same position as the original.

The extended taper of the back of the engineering hull, strut position and tapered shape of the nacelles still feels slightly off, but the overall design has grown on me, and I love her just as much as the other Enterprises I grew up with. :-)

As far as Tobias’s wallpapers, all I can say is, “That’s a beautiful ship.” Awesome work!

Now, kindly do a render with the nacelle caps glowing red. ;-)

136. THX-1138 - February 23, 2009

Beautiful work. It’s not what I had wanted for the Enterprise but I guess that, as they say, is that.

137. Ran - February 23, 2009

Very impressive!

138. Will - February 23, 2009

I’d been following this over at Scifi-Meshes and, while I really like his work on this and the Kelvin, I still think that some bits of the design for the movie need to be moved a bit(neck lengthened some, engineering moved back along with the nacelle struts… the overall shapes don’t look bad… it’s just this design looks so squished to me.

139. Capt. Jax. - February 23, 2009

Always disliked the nacelles on the TMP refit Enterprise.

These nacelles look “functional”, more so than any other design.

The Bussard collectors actually look like they can collect space gases.

Really GREAT work Tobias. Been following your progress on Remarkable talent, to do so much with so little information.

140. Adam Cohen - February 23, 2009

Hey Tobias,

Care to make a follow-up to your Star Trek game from way back?

You are a legend, sir!

141. fred - February 23, 2009

The things that I like about the new ship are what resemble the others. The awkward neck and nacelles throw off an otherwise fine design… but I guess they had to do something different to make their mark, and anything they did I would probably not have liked.

So, as awesome as it is in these shots, it’s primarily because a great deal of it is bascally like a mix between the old and the TMP ship.

142. Tony Whitehead - February 23, 2009

Does anyone remember Tobias’ Commodore Amiga Star Trek game? Even at a blistering 7.5 mHz speed, it’s still one of the more fun ST games I have ever played.

Tobias, I would love to see it ported over to the PC. “To The Next!”

Beautiful work on these images. I have been trying to learn various 3D programs for awhile, and work like this inspires us all. Thank you!

143. SerenityActual - February 23, 2009

These are beautiful shots, but I still dont like the design. Hopefully when I see the movie, this will change.

144. harley3k - February 23, 2009


145. Cranston - February 23, 2009

There she is. THERE she IS!

Gorgeous. I especially like the view from above in image #3.

146. Tony Whitehead - February 23, 2009

140. Adam Cohen

Thanks for the link. That was cool!

147. Carlg - February 23, 2009

Bravo, Tobias! You’ve done it again!

I love the extreme close-up in pic 6, it really gives the new E a sense of mass (weight? heft?), I think is the right term.

You all should check out his site, there’s some pics of Trek ships from all eras that can only be described as jaw-dropping. :) Also his work-in-progress threads for the Enterprise and the Kelvin on Sci-fi Meshes are really interesting to anyone curious about 3d art.

Congrats again, Tobias!

148. Sean4000 - February 23, 2009

I like these shots better than any promo pic released yet.

149. JT - February 23, 2009

This really is fantastic work! TMP refit is still my favorite! I think that JJ’s Enterprise has the nacelles to close together and they are tooo big in the front! Great work on the renderings Tobias!

150. weerd1 - February 23, 2009

The more I look, the more this reminds me of the Enterprise-C, Ambassador Class…

151. Viking - February 23, 2009

Tobias, you have more talent for this in your thumb than I’ll ever have in two lifetimes. A tip ‘o the horns to you, sir. Just incredible.

152. Hix - February 23, 2009

I wasn’t a big fan of the new Enterprise, but these pictures are beautiful.

153. st-midway - February 23, 2009

now i´ve got a hard choice to make. which one will be my ne desktop background?! they are all great!

154. jiat2001 - February 23, 2009

I’m sorry but I still think it’s the WORST design ever and I also believe that the movie will bomb at the box office.

155. Tony Whitehead - February 23, 2009


I wanted to wish you and the rest of the team working hard to bring Star Trek to us all the best, as I know that you have all put your talent into delivering a true motion picture experience. The rest is up to the audience in May.

Take her out. Straight and steady!

156. James - February 23, 2009

I agree the nacelles are too big and all. Everything outside of the saucer section is blah. I’m never 100% going to like this ship so no need in trying to convince me otherwise. Yeah this is some kid’s drawing of an Ambassador class haha. Nice to look at but I’m glad I’m not stuck with this shit.

157. khan Singh - February 23, 2009

Does anyone know if there is a size chart comparison that shows the difference between this new TOS rendering and the actual refit TMP enterprise? It would be interesting to see if those nacelles are ACTUALLY as big as they seem. Maybe it’s just that the level of detail on them is more pronounced and obvious than in all the other Big E models that it makes them seem overdone. The engineering hull is smaller than the TMP design by a lot. What about the saucer though? ..
Design is growing on me. Thanks for these pictures! really brings hope to the movie for me as a die hard TMP enterprise fan.

158. Charlie in Colorado - February 23, 2009

Just wanted to throw my “That’s Awesome!” into the thread…

159. Enterprise - February 23, 2009

I wonder if this one has saucer sep?

160. DJT - February 23, 2009


161. Clinton - February 23, 2009

Beautiful work. Well done!

162. Doomsponge - February 23, 2009

@154: Ever seen Ralph McQuarrie’s Phase II designs?

Well, let’s all be honest here.

Give us a pen and a piece of paper, and none of us would do her any better. There are things I don’t like about her (fantail looks awkward from aft below, and the impulse drive needs a bit more of a housing), things I do like (I like the big nacelles! What’s fun is, they now get smaller with each refit. Big in the ’50s, slender and functional in the ’60s and small and nippy in the ’70s) but… well, I’ve tried to do it and I couldn’t. Isn’t gonna please everyone, but some people are only happy when they’re unhappy (and the rest of us just wanna make them as happy as we can). In truth, the reaction to her has been a lot more positive than I had expected.

Effectively, they’ve managed to get it to… very, very nearly… work just fine by not trying to please everyone. They’ve gotten a lot closer to it being as good as it can be than could have happened. Of course they couldn’t just use the TOS ship design, it doesn’t translate well to the big screen at all, that’s why they refitted her for TMP. It’s like Bob and Alex’s other project. What works on TV screens often just looks clunky and downright bad on the big screen due to simple lack of detail, you can’t get the scale looking right. It wouldn’t do the Jeffries 1701 justice to put it in a situation where it would look bad, and although we love her dearly, we don’t want the passers-by laughing at her. It’s like dropping Sir Stanley Matthews* into today’s Premier League. Different generations. In the 50s he was a genius, today he’d just lack the skill or the pace to keep up with the game. You love him to bits, but you don’t want to see him mocked by people who don’t know better.

It’s the same with the whole film, to be honest. I challenge anyone here to write a non-sarky script (i.e. that isn’t just a cynical, unfunny bullying pisstake) that will please more people than May will. You play to the hardcore fans and you’ll bore and alienate everyone else. And frankly, that ‘hard core’ who seem to exist now only to complain and belittle anything that’s turned up in the past ten years, need removing from the fan base far more than the kid who likes Voyager, or the girl with posters of Chris and Zach on the wall. Because cynicism and bitterness are about as un-Star Trek as it gets, and I;d rather the uneducated who enjoy than the ‘educated’ who think it’s their god-given right to spend every minute making other people feel small for daring to like stuff.

As I’m fond of saying, I’d rather be happy than right.

*English footballer from the 1950s who was regarded as one of the greatest players of his age.

163. Swollen Ballz - February 23, 2009

I got to echo the words of all my fellow shipmates: B-E-A utiful!

164. Ed - February 23, 2009

Fantastic, the man has great talent.

165. matt - February 23, 2009

I cannot stand the fact that the bottom of the saucer is flat…

It really kills it for me. I know its small, but it added so much to the Enterprise, the slightly concave bottom of the saucer.

166. lodownX - February 23, 2009

This rendering of the E. Rocks…

167. BK613 - February 23, 2009

Personally I think the old girl holds up pretty well with just a minimal amount of update:

And they built a new model because they had to: the TOS shooting model was donated to the National Air and Space Museum in 1974 (where it still is on display: ).

168. Sylvain - February 23, 2009

The Wallpapers are really nice… too bad the stupid Enterprise design is so bad… it looks like the original TOS ship draw by a little kid…

That movie will be just a huge mistake!

169. Montreal Paul - February 23, 2009

168. Sylvain

then by all means, DON’T go see it! Why are you wasting your time on here then?

170. Render - February 23, 2009

So sexy

171. Valar1 - February 23, 2009

to quote my buddy Khan: “There she is! Not so badly damaged as we were led to believe!”

172. Valar1 - February 23, 2009

As Khan might say “there she is! Not as badly damaged as we were led to believe!”

173. Valar1 - February 23, 2009

Double your post double your fun!

174. Balok - February 23, 2009

Excellent work on poor subject matter…

175. nephron - February 23, 2009

Looks cool.

They took the original design & fixed it up, so it has the same basic proportions of the original but nowhere near as primitive, clunky, or fragile.

The big, beefy warp engines look hot-rod powerful, the neck & pylons don’t look like delicate fragile little components always on the verge of snapping off.

The lines, contours, and surface details make for a design that actually looks futuristic in 2009 instead of cobbled-together-cheapness like the 60’s TV version.

176. hawke - February 23, 2009

I agree with most folks that it looks awesome, but it strays more than we would like based on what we’ve loved FOREVER.
Here’s the thing that I haven’t seen mentioned and most likely the biggest selling point to all of us die hards-

Is James Kirk going to have a hard on/love affair with this ship that we are going to feel along with him?

Who wouldn’t agree that the original Enterprise is about the coolest looking SciFi ship ever created? BUT- The biggest thing that drew us to LOVE her (albeit over many years of reruns) was Kirk’s LOVE for his ship, ya know? I know you do!!!

If, between Kirk and Pike and even Scotty, we feel that this vessel is some kinda special MF, we fans will be only too happy to be swept away and get on with the point of the whole thing- that this film, based on a good script and it’s execution is going to tell a great story, otherwise ALL we are saying here is that we don’t like the wheels on the new wagon, and we have to agree that the movie has to be about SO much more than its asthetics otherwise our beloved ST is all about nothing more than nostalgia for plywood sets and cheesy FX.

We know better

177. Montreal Paul - February 23, 2009

176. hawke
“Who wouldn’t agree that the original Enterprise is about the coolest looking SciFi ship ever created?”

For TV.. yeah.. I do agree. But it would never hold up on film. That’s why they had to change her for TMP.

178. The Dog Faced Boy - February 23, 2009

I’m getting by by thinking it’s before a refit or a slightly altered reality. I like the shots where it looks the most like the one from the original series (1,2,4,7,10).

Who knows. If it is an altered reality, we may find out things have been corrected when the original slowly flies by (the white cruise ship look , not the pewter looking one from the remasters).

179. The Dog Faced Boy - February 23, 2009

“175. nephron – The lines, contours, and surface details make for a design that actually looks futuristic in 2009 instead of cobbled-together-cheapness like the 60’s TV version.”

The reason I kind of like it is that it looks more retro, almost a Buck Rodgers quality to it. (Buster Crabb – Buck Rodgers from the 1930’s.)

180. hawke - February 23, 2009

177. Paul,
I hear ya, but we aren’t talking about a TMP time frame and
by the same token if the original “Connie” had all the aztecing texture and plasma filled Bussard collector’s, and peeps inside the little windows at 1080p, yada yada yada she’d fly just fine on ANY screen. it’s all about the texture.

My whole point was that none of the external trappings are what really drew us to her. It was about Krik treating his ship essentially like another character that he loved. She wasn’t just a tool to Kirk.

Now I know why it’s called she. Never lose you… (Naked Time)

181. =A= - February 23, 2009

look great new enterprise but i think everything are wrong! this new Enterprise is belong in FUTURE! it’s not look like from the original series.

182. Enterprise - February 23, 2009

It’s not supposed too.

183. Rocket Scientist - February 23, 2009

If I did the redesign, I probably wouldn’t have made the choices these guys did, but I gotta say: these images give me a good feeling that this E is going to look great on the big screen!

184. =A= - February 23, 2009


185. Steven - February 23, 2009

W-O-W! Wow! That is awesome!

God bless!

186. Jorg Sacul - February 23, 2009

Beautiful renderings- Makes me glad we live in the age of advanced computers and artists who know how to use them.

My only disappointment with the ship is the lack of those massive red pennants down the side of the ship. I loved how they said, “WE’RE A STARSHIP!!” Ah well… young minds, fresh ideas.

187. Ken Thomson - February 23, 2009

Tobias, again you have succeeded in making me like a design that I wasn’t very thrilled with from the official photos. This being really the first chance to see it at all angles, I have decided that I actually can see it as a precursor to the TOS Enterprise, which has a more simple design. This ship has bulky nacelles and a smaller secondary hull, whereas the TOS version, with advances in technology, will have smaller yet more powerful nacelles and a larger secondary/engineering hull. I think the TOS version still fits in between this ship and the TMP era.

Thanks for some very well done images!

Ken Thomson

188. dmart - February 23, 2009

does anyone else think that warp nacelles are too close together, idk if that is how jj wanted it, other than that the renderings are fantastic
Keep up the good tobias

189. The Governator - February 23, 2009


No offense, but I’m not quite sure what you are trying to say. However, I do seem to get the feeling that you do not like the new design. That’s too bad.

To me the design looks like what the Enterprise could look like if it were actually built 200 years from now. That to me is good, because it gives a sense of realism to the ship. I don’t understand why people have a problem with the realism deal. Making a fantasy future experience seem as real as possible only makes the experience of seeing the movie much more authentic and helps to draw in the audience. Don’t know about everybody else, but as far as I am concerned, the more I am drawn in to the movie the better!

190. BaronByng - February 23, 2009

Doomsponge – you nailed it.

Can I be objective for a second here? Every sci-fi design is a product of its times, and in later years tends to show its immediate influences more sharply as we get an idea of what that period meant.

When TOS was in development, the visual design of spaceships was heavily influenced by Chesley Bonestell and other aeronautical / pulp sci-fi illustrators. When you see the original sketches for the Enterprise, done in white conté crayon on black cardboard, dang but it looks like something from Plan 9 From Outer Space — a flying saucer with rockets attached.

Forget what we “know” about the Enterprise. It was a flying saucer with rockets on it.

Yes, Matt Jeffries took that original sketch and polished it into something more, just detailed enough, balanced and tapered, exotic and believable. But when I look at it, I can’t help but be reminded of the saucer ship from Forbidden Planet with a couple of Atlas rockets attached, connected with very retro-50s-pulp-rocket-ship straight popsicle stick struts. It is VERY much a product of its era, and lovely, but it isn’t “timeless” any more than a Chevy Corvair or Plymouth Barracuda is.

The TMP Enterprise was a very 1970s sci-fi design, created in the wake of Star Wars with its “used universe” super-detailed greebly ships (hence all the visible body panels and aztec-ing), but even it looked to the then-popular Art Deco revival in its styling details — the nacelles are pure streamline style, in fact I read somewhere that the nacelle ‘noses’ were influenced by the radiator grille of a 1930s car.

And so we have this new Enterprise — visually different, maybe the product of an altered timeline. It is different to what we know, and that is what is throwing people. People who are scared of change cling to the things they know, until they get to know what it is they think they are scared of, but in the interim, they reject that which is new.

Now, that’s not to say that new is always better. Look at the recent brouhaha over the Tropicana orange juice rebranding.

When I look at the new design, though, I instinctively think it makes sense if you think about where the mass of the components of the ship are distributed.

The components of the warp drive, fuel tanks and nacelles (with those lines of huge, cast exotic-metal warp coils inside them, the Bussard collector apparatus, etc.) are the heaviest. Moving them closer to the center of gravity of the ship makes it more maneuverable.

By contrast, the saucer section is a relatively hollow bubble, and thus needs to be a bit wider/larger to counterbalance the engineering/nacelle weight. The neck therefore makes sense being tapered towards the saucer, like the neck of any living creature, to enhance rigidity. The shape of the struts, wider at the base and with a compound curve, speaks to what we ‘know’ is a load-bearing design that has to not come apart under the inertia of its components under tremendous acceleration.

As for the nacelles’ size – well today, in the 21st century, we have machines miles in diameter that can barely smash apart some particles. Bending space and time around a starship in under a few hundred meters’ worth of space counts as realistic to me.


I think there is a

191. Bradley1701 - February 23, 2009

Baron Byng said it perfectly!

192. BPS - February 23, 2009

Beautiful artwork.

I still hope those nacelles get circumcised at some point.

193. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - February 23, 2009

These shots give me more reason to be sold on the new design. I particularly think the thicker neck, more integrated into the design of the secondary hull, makes the Enterprise look more solid overall. The nacelle pylons still look a little spindly sandwiched between all the mass of the nacelles and the primary and secondary hulls, but on the other hand, they are graceful, and one can easily imagine that in the future, they are strong enough to withstand whatever punishment they need to take to keep hold of the nacelles in a fight.

194. Robert H. - February 23, 2009

When ever I think of a criticism of the new Enterprise, I keep thinking that the original Enterprise was like that.

195. Thorny - February 23, 2009

That’s excellent work by Tobias, but I still think that’s an Enterprise only a mother could love. Blah.

196. Alex Rosenzweig - February 23, 2009

I think the art is gorgeous. Wonderful work!

In some ways, the richness of the images themselves highlight the…umm…ungainliness of the ship’s design. I think the shots from the higher elevations, either on the level of the primary hull or higher relative to the ship, are really quite nice, but the ones that highlight the secondary hull really emphasize how awkward this version is.

Church’s detailing on Jefferies’s design would have worked so much better. This’ll do, but it’d be nice to see a minor refit between this film and the next, adjusting the proportions a little.

That’s just a feeling, though, and shouldn’t take away from Tobias’s clearly excellent work modeling her.

197. The Dog Faced Boy - February 23, 2009

“190. BaronByng – The components of the warp drive, fuel tanks and nacelles (…) are the heaviest. Moving them closer to the center of gravity of the ship makes it more maneuverable.”

If you’re saying “heaviest” instead on “densest” when talking about an object in space, I assume you are considering the MC2 factor. I would think moving them closer to the collaspe factor would not be advised, huh? Not to mention the radiation from the matter/anti matter field created in the nacelles.

The only way we know where the collaspe factor is is by looking at every ship Star Trek has ever produced. JJ has said that this is the same Trek universe and that canon is consistent. Even in an alternate universe, this would not change. And as Scotty said, “You can’t change the laws of physics man!”

198. BaronByng - February 23, 2009

197 – my bad. Yes, I meant mass / density, not weight, in a relatively weightless environment. Still, you know, built in a gravity well, capable of handling intense gravimetric / spatial distortion and the googol-joules of energy output for FTL travel :D

also — Tobias, fantastic work, I forgot to say originally. You make us believe it’s “real.”

199. Christine - February 23, 2009

Oohhh!!!!!!! They’re beautiful. I want to print ’em out and hang ’em on my wall. xD;

They’re magnificent. I’d kill to get Autodesk Maya… -drools at thought-

200. Norbert - February 23, 2009

Fantastic work!

201. AqAZAr - February 23, 2009

I like to imagine the new Enterprise as sort of a “rough copy” of the original and TMP designs. Almost like a Starfleet inbetween stage. Whose to say the Enterprise didn’t look like this before ‘The Cage’? Or after, but before ‘Where No Man has Gone Before’? Or by a farther stretch, the movie having the scenes we’ve seen so far between Year 4 of the mission and TMP? There are always possibilities.

Even if none if these are the case, she looks very modernized. I doubt the remastered model, despite it’s authenticity, would have given the same effect that this one does. I’ve always maintained that a blueish color scheme suits her best for films, with the orangier ramscoops saved for TV.

202. Kirk's Girdle - February 23, 2009

That second pic from underneath looks a lot like the Enterprise B

203. Chris J - February 23, 2009

The nacelles are too close together.

Other than that, liking it a lot more than I did with the official “Constipation Class” image shown a few months back.

Great work!

204. The Jui$tain - February 23, 2009

@190– You hit the nail on the head, people are afraid of change.

But people need to remember this isn’t the E that’s in the movie. Mr Orci said it’s pretty accurate, not spot on.

As far as the engines go BaronByng said it best:
“…As for the nacelles’ size – well today, in the 21st century, we have machines miles in diameter that can barely smash apart some particles. Bending space and time around a starship in under a few hundred meters’ worth of space counts as realistic to me.”

Can’t get any clearer.


205. The Jui$tain - February 23, 2009

I just noticed something in pic #8. Correct me if i’m wrong, but that looks like the space station in Starship Troopers…. o_O


206. Markus McLaughlin ( - February 23, 2009

I will ALWAYS love TMP “Refit” Enterprise but Trek XI’s has a style of both TOS and TMP that is truly inspiring! I hope the Enterprise D could be redone somehow in a TNG “Fan Film…” That would be COOL too!

Three more months to go until Trek XI!!! I can’t wait to own a Phaser, Communicator, Uniform Costume, and the Soundtrack and THEN the Blu-Ray Disc!!!

207. The Governator - February 23, 2009

190. BaronByng,

Very well said.

203. Chris J


208. Brett Campbell - February 23, 2009

Sure looks like a swan next to that ugly duckling Kelvin.

209. Robman0908 - February 23, 2009

So nice to see the Enterprise back! I love the big bold NCC-1701. Those four numbers and nothing after makes it that much better of a ship.

210. Spock - February 23, 2009

I feel the same way about the new Enterprise as I did when I saw Marvin in the 2005 Hitchhikers film.

Having said that, Tobias has done a brilliant job with his model. Top drawer, absolutely top drawer.

211. Spock - February 23, 2009

I should add; I hated Marvin.

212. Hat Rick - February 23, 2009

Great images, Tobias!

213. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - February 23, 2009

Here’s a thought. Although many (Including #209) are happy to see this ship identified as the NCC-1701, I wonder if it would have appeased some of the nitpickers if this Enterprise had been identified as NX-1701 — like some kind of experimental design that could at some point later be modified in certain ways to appear closer to the Original Series look…?

(Not that I personally need any such wrangling — I am happy to see this design as a new element of canon).

214. Bob - February 23, 2009

I think my favorite is the last one. And they’re all better than that lame version that’s been released by Paramount. I don’t think the people over there are good at picking out good ship beauty shots

215. MAT - February 23, 2009


216. Markonian - February 23, 2009

At first sight I was somewhat surprised that the new Enterprise looks so different, but she grew on me fast. I liked the design – until now.

Now, seeing Tobias’ fantastic artwork – I love it! This may become my favourite Enterprise!

217. Fast Eddie - February 23, 2009

Nice Ship!!!!

218. Sid - February 23, 2009

Man, he does nice work.

I still think the Abrams saucer’s too big for the rest of the ship.

219. nephron - February 23, 2009

“The nacelles are too close together/too big” – No, the TV-version’s were too far apart/too skinny. Abrams’ people fixed it.

“The secondary hull is too far forward” – No. You see, the TV-version’s secondary hull was too far back & Abrams’ people fixed it.

“The ‘bussard collectors should be red” – The “bussard collectors” on the TV version should not have been red. Abrams’ people fixed it.

“Cpt. Kirks eyes were brown, not blue.” – No, Cpt. Kirks’ eyes are blue. William Shatner just didn’t wear contacts, & they finally got a guy that actually looks like Kirk should look. They fixed it.

It all comes down to, as others have pointed out, a knee-jerk reaction against change. “AAAAGGGH! It’s not what I’m used to!!!!!!!”

Let’s pretend the original TOS Enterprise was the new design, and the 2009 version was Jeffries’ design. What would people be saying? I doubt anyone would say stuff like “Wow, what an improvement. The nacelles are finally skinny, farther apart, and red-tipped”.

It’s all arbitrary PRETEND-stuff anyway, so what’s the difference if it doesn’t look like the original? Just pretend the original was wrong in the first place, and Abrams’ people just fixed all the mistakes.

220. Jonathan - February 23, 2009

That last pic just became my wallpaper. Beautiful work!

221. That Nutty Fanboy - February 23, 2009

#213, I doubt that would’ve appeased the rabid fanboys, considering they’d pick at the NX then, as ‘she isn’t the first of her class and thus can’t carry the NX designation’.

Something along these lines, I would guess.

222. StalwartUK - February 23, 2009

219 – Way to go to insult Matt Jefferies’ work.

This ship will never be nothing more than an alternate universe oddball ship anyway in my eyes (like the three nacelled Enterprise-D). In other words not part of the “Enterprise” legacy, if you could call it that.

223. Alex Rosenzweig - February 23, 2009

#219 – “Let’s pretend the original TOS Enterprise was the new design, and the 2009 version was Jeffries’ design. What would people be saying? I doubt anyone would say stuff like “Wow, what an improvement. The nacelles are finally skinny, farther apart, and red-tipped”. ”

I dunno. You’d probably get at least as many people preferring the wider-spread, more slender, red-domed nacelles in comparison to the Church version as are preferring the Church version to the original. It’s all in the eye of the beholder, m’thinks.

“It’s all arbitrary PRETEND-stuff anyway, so what’s the difference if it doesn’t look like the original? Just pretend the original was wrong in the first place, and Abrams’ people just fixed all the mistakes.”

Another way to look at it is that the story we’re seeing might actually be a future dramatization of the events of the TOS era, and the folks portraying those events didn’t get the look exactly right…or altered it to appeal to the audience of the time. ;)

In the end, the difference might well be mainly aesthetic, though I’ll reserve judgment on the nuts-and-bolts of the fictional vessel ’til I’ve seen more of it in close-up, and in action.

224. nephron - February 23, 2009

222 – Way to insult (whoever designed the new one)’s work.

Jeffries’ ship was good for a beginning rough-draft, but it will never be nothing more than an alternate universe oddball ship anyway in my eyes – the nacelle’s were too skinny, clearly too far apart, and why in God’s name did they make the tips red?

Was Jeffries handed down the TOS design from on high or something? Was it bequeathed to him like the 10-Commandments? No, the Enterprise was JUST A DRAWING HE DID, and who’s to say he wouldn’t look at the new design and thing “Wow, I wish I would have thought of doing it like that! This is way better than mine!”

225. McCoy - February 23, 2009

The Jeffries design is not perfect…but it’s the original. It’s the ship that started it all and that should be enough to have honored it with greater respect in this TV series prequel. The original is also a simpler design and for me, less is more.

Anyone that makes a dollar of this film owes it all to the original and the fans that followed.

This is science fiction. There’s no real added functionality to the new design as both are not real. It’s purely change for change’s sake. If you evoke “but the story calls for…” remember that the story was written from scratch to accommodate change for change’s sake.

226. Marcellus - February 24, 2009

The last pic with the Enterprise and the Kelvin reminds me of the shot with the Enterprise and the Excelsior near the end of The Undiscovered Country…

227. Mark Lynch - February 24, 2009

Absolutely stunning work Tobias! It’s a shame that the ship does not have that many angles she looks good from. But to see such detail with the relatively you must have had to work with, I am so impressed. But I have been a fan of your work since the good old days of the Amiga.

The thoughts that come to me on seeing these new images. Bloated and too curvy springs to mind, and don’t get me started on the uncircumcised nacelles and the placement of the pylons.

Still, must remember to tell myself, ‘It’s only a movie….’

228. Mark Lynch - February 24, 2009

Oh bugger. That should say ‘relatively little’

Too early in the morning.

229. Rob - February 24, 2009

Thanks Tobias and trekmovie guys – sad as this may sound, but these images have just elicited the strongest orgasm my brain has ever experienced.

Such craftsmanship must surely originate from a Planet other than Earth :)

Thank you, thank you, thank you.

230. Kev - February 24, 2009

Good work tobias, pitty we couldn’t just email JJ telling him to move the neck closer the the defector dish to make it look more balanced.

231. Buddy Deering-68 - February 24, 2009

Lovely work, but the one thing that still bugs me about the design is the engines. They still look too close together.
But Aye, She still a beauty.

232. Fubamushu - February 24, 2009

Tobias Richter: A+

Talent and skills: Amazing.

Those Who Designed the New Enterprise: NC/F

Talent and skills: Needs improvement. Perhaps a remedial summer course or two?

233. TK - February 24, 2009

these are amazing! If I was shown these instead of the first image we saw of the enterprise, i would have had less problem with it. BUT, I still am finding it difficult to accept the new design, the ship is supposed to be a “she” i.e. female, instead it looks like a pumped up male with too much testosterone!

234. BK613 - February 24, 2009

“And so we have this new Enterprise — visually different, maybe the product of an altered timeline. It is different to what we know, and that is what is throwing people.”

No I am thrown by the disproportional ugliness of it.

“People who are scared of change cling to the things they know, until they get to know what it is they think they are scared of, but in the interim, they reject that which is new.”

Perhaps true for some but I embrace change-if that change is good. This however, is a New Coke-esque change: giving us an inferior replacement. I would have preferred something new and better, but a fully-detailed TOS Ent would be better than this thing.

IMO of course :-)

235. Kev - February 24, 2009

yeah I agree with you on that buddy deering and in addition to that I think the neck needs to be taller and further forward like on the tmp enterprise, but it is a proper enterprise, unlike the nx 01.

236. Selor - February 24, 2009

Beautiful… it was really bad that they had released this beautiful ship at a horrible angle first… but those… wow can’t wait to see that thing moving at the Big Cinema!

237. Dom - February 24, 2009

Very nice. The Enterprise doesn’t really all look that different from before. A little more sleek and feminine, perhaps, but still entiorely recgnisable as the ship we grew up loving!

I certainly like this a good deal more than the Enterprise-D, which I ever really warmed to!

238. Holger - February 24, 2009

These renderings are breathtakingly well made. Kudos to Tobias.

But this new ‘Enterprise’… I still don’t like it and I can’t imagine I ever will. It just strikes me as wrong, fake.

239. Holger - February 24, 2009

I really disagree with the suggestion that those who don’t like the new E are just too inflexible to embrace something new. One should keep an open mind, true, but one need not accept any change just because it’s something new.
In return, I could suggest that those who like the new E are people who will just blindly follow any trend and fad. But I don’t suggest that. Change is neither good nor bad just because it’s change. It depends on what the change is. In the case of the new E, I think the changes are very bad, not merely because they are changes but because they strike my eye as ugly.

240. Richard Martin - February 24, 2009

The new Enterprise looks uglier then it did previously.

241. Kirk's Toupée - February 24, 2009

Lovely, lovely work, Tobias!!

Very impressive indeed..!!

Best wishes from snowy Switzerland

242. THE REAL Kobyashi_Maru - February 24, 2009

The fact that you made that horrible ship look that good is unbelievable work.


243. NaradaAlpha - February 24, 2009

OK…not to critique Tobias’s amazing work here but he got the deflector dish colors very wrong…the center piece of the deflector is a faint yellow/gold with a sky blue border with the outer area blue in the film caps from the super bowl commercial (see link below)

244. jodax - February 24, 2009

i love the new proportions as evidenced by rendering 3, i think the long close set nacelles are gracefull. they make her more ladylike and at the sametime look stronger.

great job!

245. Captain Dunsel - February 24, 2009

Well, I’m in awe of the artistic skill shown here. And after everything that’s been said in this thread, this may sound like nit-picking – but image number 5 looks a little odd to me. Perhaps it’s a trick of the lighting, but in that one image the nacelles and saucer section look to my eye (screwed up as that eye is) to be at an odd angle to each other, as if the aft end of the nacelles is “drooping” relative to the plane of the saucer section. Does it look that way to anyone else?

246. T'Cal - February 24, 2009

I always thought TOS’s Enterprise looked fragile and spindly. The refit from the films looked much better, although the ambassador class Ent-C was always my favorite. This new one for STXI looks just great. While the proportions are different from what we’ve known, they look more substantial and powerful. It’ll look fantastic on the big screen, I have no doubt.

247. Danpaine - February 24, 2009

…even though I’m not too crazy about this newer design of the old classic, I have to agree with the folks that have said it’s better than Ent-D. After watching the entire run of Next Generation (numerous times), I never really got into that design. My favorite, TMP.

248. Danpaine - February 24, 2009

…beautiful renderings, however. Forgot to say that.

249. JP Saylor - February 24, 2009

God… this makes Everything up till the Ent-E look out of date…

They are really cool though.

250. William Kirk - February 24, 2009

These are beautiful pictures of an ugly ship. It is very well dona, good job, really. But it doesn´t change my mind, that the ship is disproportional, mainly the secondary hull. For me…I stil say NO to it. Sorry, but no money from me :-).

251. James - February 24, 2009

They are too close together, the pylons didn’t need to be curved upward like that. Again I will never 100% like this ship. My main gripe is the nacelles and the curved pylons, they violate streamlining big time.

252. NaradaAlpha - February 24, 2009

#245…that would be called an optical illusion…LOL

253. Brett Campbell - February 24, 2009

Mr. Richter, although I do think the Kelvin is a particularly ugly ship, the design of the ships is not your responsibility, if I did not make that clear in my earlier post.

Your work here, however, is nothing short of amazing!

254. McCoy - February 24, 2009

What year was the Enterprise supposed to be built? If the Uglyprise is a refit, is it possible we get to see the ship as it lands BEFORE the refit?

255. NaradaAlpha - February 24, 2009


256. NaradaAlpha - February 24, 2009

TYPO…TRACTOR beam emitters LOL

257. CmdrR - February 24, 2009

These renderings are great, but the dish and nacelles are butt-ugly. I hope the nacelles blow up at the top of the first sequel and we get something more streamlined.

258. Captain X - February 24, 2009

this is how the enterprise should look, futuristic not primetive like the TOS enterprise.

259. InSaint - February 24, 2009

The JJ Enterprise revealed:

260. ~~TARA~~ - February 24, 2009

Wow! What a great job and I love the way the new E looks :)

261. Ville - February 24, 2009

What is it for spaceship in the center of the 8:th image? Is it from the Earth Forces in babylon 5?

262. Fenrir767 - February 24, 2009

When I look at the designs when compared to the first shot of the ship revealed I notice that there are slight differences in Tobias design and that of the official movie shot. Such as the Nacelles are a little farther forward, the way the neck of the ship looks is different. There are a few other minor changes my eye seems to notice that I can’t exactly describe.

In any case these picture look way better than anything official and I say Bravo no if only he had done the redesign.

263. Husher315 - February 24, 2009

Amazing Job!!

264. Jon - February 24, 2009

This look keeps the real beauty and grace of the first Motion Picture design and adds muscle and power. A good combination. Some folks think the nacelles are too close. To me she looks like a tucked-in fighter.

265. Terran emperor - February 24, 2009

it looks like something that could exist ca 250 years from now, unlike the Tos enterprise.

don’t judge me hard i still like the origin al design. it just looks to old to me.

266. Nathan - February 24, 2009

Well, that looks about 2000% better than any official image of the “New E” we’ve seen so far…kudos to Mr. Richter for his (amazing) efforts.

If the ship looks anything like this in the actual film, then I will be significantly happier. Of course, I still would have preferred a real “Original E” look…but this design (or at least this version of this design) does look very good regardless.

267. Dom - February 24, 2009

251. James: ‘My main gripe is the nacelles and the curved pylons, they violate streamlining big time.’

Why does a ship in space need to be streamlined? I mean, the Borg just use cubes!

268. Shat Hands - February 24, 2009

It’s really starting to grow on me, don’t think I’ll ever get used to the swollen nacelles but it does look good.

Great work, tip of the cap to you Tobias!

269. Saavik001 - February 24, 2009

Amazing work, Herr Richter…. Must of taken a lot of effort to get all the details.

270. commander - February 24, 2009

i like the blue glowning deflector it really fits

271. touchstone35 - February 24, 2009

I have changed my opinion about the new design for the new film. The first photo they released didn’t do it justice. It’s a fine looking ship.

272. HMS Enterprise - February 24, 2009

one word: amazing.

273. Chris Basken - February 24, 2009

224: ‘Was Jeffries handed down the TOS design from on high or something? Was it bequeathed to him like the 10-Commandments? No, the Enterprise was JUST A DRAWING HE DID, and who’s to say he wouldn’t look at the new design and thing “Wow, I wish I would have thought of doing it like that! This is way better than mine!”’

To further your point, when Roddenberry approached Jeffries to redesign the ship for Star Trek Phase II, he jumped at the chance to “do it right.” His Phase II designs served as the basis for Probert’s work on the TMP refit.

Yes, even Matt Jeffries considered the TOS Enterprise to be, in essence, a rough draft.

274. Jason P Hunt - co-creator of COMET TALES - February 24, 2009

While I agree that the new ship design is somewhat flawed, I think these images are extremely impressive, so much so that The Light Works is now on my short list for future CGI stuff.

Off-topic to Bob Orci: I see “Fringe” is leaving New York and considering Chicago. How would I pitch Kansas City as another option?

275. yodaman - February 24, 2009

This is news?

“Fan makes fan art. Film at 11.”

276. Jason Chappel - February 24, 2009

WOW! These captures are just stunning!
Great Job, Tobias!

277. McCoy - February 24, 2009

224 and 273 in regards to the classic E.

It doesn’t matter anymore what their thoughts were back then….every good artist is his own worst critic anyway. The fact remains that for over 40 years, the TOS ship represented the Pike/Kirk era and reprised it’s role in Trials and Tribulations and Mirror Darkly.

The original Enterprise is iconic at this point in time. It represents much more now than it did when it first came out. With minimal modifications, enhanced texture detail and perhaps a brighter color, the classic design would look just fine in 2009.

278. AdamTrek - February 24, 2009

This Enterprise is a pre-TOS Enterprise. Who’s to say it doesn’t get severly damaged during or after this movie timeline, Starfleet goes through a simplified design asthetic after this movie and it’s retrofitted with a simplified saucer, nacelles, etc, etc., for all Constitution Class vessels. Let’s face it, the Kelvin’s saucer is more in line with the original TOS Enterprise with it’s sharp edge lines. Who the heck knows.

The only criticism I have is the nacelles are very close together, IMO, but it’s definitely the Enterprise.

I don’t expect The Greatest American Hero super suit from the aliens to look just like the red one from the old TV show either, as we have to understand that it’s just a movie. Let’s face it, the uniforms are different, no matter how similar they are, but they are different, just more detail and changing some things here and there to add realism, perhaps.

279. Star Trek: A Fresh Look At The New USS Enterprise - Screen Rant - February 24, 2009

[…] today (thanks to we have some images looking at the redesigned ship from some different angles which may change […]

280. Star Trek: A Fresh Look At The New USS Enterprise - Screen Rant - February 24, 2009

[…] today (thanks to we have some images looking at the redesigned ship from some different angles which may change […]

281. Barking Alien - February 24, 2009

Beautiful shots and the Kelvin is quickly becoming one of my favorite Star Trek vessels. Sadly, nothing can make me like the revision Enterprise. She’s just awkward and unattractive to me.


282. Enterprise JJ - More Looks « Drex Files - February 24, 2009

[…] […]

283. Spock - February 24, 2009

It is just an ugly looking ship.

284. Javier Lorenz Jr. - February 24, 2009

My hat’s off to you Mr. Tobias Richter!!! I have to admit, when I saw that first officially publicized image of the new Enterprise, my reaction was almost fiercely negative. I refrained from any negative commentary here. Yet, man oh man, did I ever complain to fellow Trekkers on the phone and via emails!

Yet, these wallpapers have definitively warmed me up to the new design. I’m actually rather keen on the design now. It exhibits a far greater and logistically sensible design lineage from TOS to TMP. One could easily fathom that this Enterprise eventually becomes the Enterprise Refit, in ‘Star Trek The Motion Picture’…at least from its exterior. The ships interior is an entirely different animal, best left for scrutiny elsewhere.

This ship, to me, is now instantly recognizable as The Starship Enterprise; thanks to Mr. Tobias Richter! Whilst I had to debate which wallpaper would become my new desktop, I went with the first wallpaper…though could easily have gone with any of the others.

Brilliant, brilliant, brilliant work Tobias Richter!!! And you’ve got equally amazing work at your ‘The Light Works’ website!!! Cheers to you man!!!

285. Doug in Baltimore, MD (on my way to San Diego) - February 24, 2009

Looks great!

286. thorsten - February 24, 2009

Good one, Dom!

Almost there, Doug ;)

287. Brian Matthews - February 24, 2009

Reading briefly through the comments:

A few have mentioned the warp nacelles as being ‘too close’ together (whatever that subjectively means), but I inferred something I read somewhere (here, I think) that the pylons move like the Voyager’s nacelles… may not be true, but could perhaps be something that Starfleet found out about earlier (i.e., the TNG problem with warp drives destroying space) – due to the shake-up of the timeline (if you’re lookin’ for any ledge of continuity to hang on to by your nailbitten fingers).

Anybody who believed that the new Enterprise was going to look exactly like the old Enterprise was kidding themselves, really. There’s probably a good reason why we’ve never seen the TOS version on the big screen: it ain’t designed for the big screen. Hence, we get redesigns, and have had them out the ying-yang ever since the Reliant showed up in TWOK. I read all over these forums about the love for the TMP and the B and the C and the D and the E, and yet we are really talking about he same thing here This is the Enterprise, because those at the helm have said it to be. It is taken as fact that this new movie belongs in the same universe as all previous incarnations of Trek because that’s what it is – it’s called STAR TREK. The Enterprise has lost NOTHING in translation, only in details.

And somebody mentioned the clown thing: not that I dislike clowns, but that comment shook me out of my complacent reverie for a bit…yikes! I got the impression from the get-go of a couple of big-ass outboard motors on the back of a boat…

288. istewart - February 24, 2009

I’m still convinced that the design was created to be toyetic first and foremost. Certainly, an Enterprise like this probably would’ve had me jumping up and down with glee when I was 8 years old. The proportions are drastically different from what’s come before, and, dare I say, almost cartoony. The detail shots from behind look best to me, since the TMP-style impulse engine provides a nice centerpiece and the sloping neckline is graceful. From other perspectives, though, the neck still looks awkward, especially in between the bulging warp nacelles and protruding deflector. From an “in-universe” perspective, it almost seems like the ship was designed by a committee trying to bring together the most advanced technology available. Perhaps that’s what the producers are going for, though.

289. Dr. Image - February 24, 2009

#288 Designed by committee is as exact a description as possible.
Especially obvious if one is familiar with past Enterprise details.
If one isn’t, I’m sure they think it’s just fine. Or they don’t care- as the majority seems to feel.
Tobias did an incredible job, but the design direction could have been SO much better.

290. YARN - February 24, 2009

Great renders

Ugly ship

291. YARN - February 24, 2009

#287 “Anybody who believed that the new Enterprise was going to look exactly like the old Enterprise was kidding themselves, really.”

Were we also kidding ourselves that it wasn’t going to be butt-ugly?

292. McCoy - February 24, 2009

288 and 289.

I agree. As a designer, I’m familiar working with clients. Designing by committee is a very real phenomenon and usually yields inferior results.

But now that this ship exists, what are the possible things they could to smooth-out it’s existence?

1) show the ship BEFORE the refit and have it look much, much more like what we are familiar with; Perhaps the Enterprise is damaged in battle during a protracted Romulan war.

2) show it being refitted at the end of the film

3) have the thing blow up

4) Spock saves the timeline and everything is reset

293. YARN - February 24, 2009

I vote that the thing gets destroyed.

Half the reason I paid to see Trek in theaters was to see the Enterprise on the big screen.

Hope the movie scores high on the Tomatometer, because seeing the ship will not be draw for me this time around.

Man, this thing is criminally ugly. Pleas tell me that these renders ar e based on the toy and that the film version is a bit more graceful.

294. Donn - February 24, 2009

It’s not butt ugly. It’s a little different. I can hang with it.

I certainly had the Alexander Courage theme trumpeting in my head while looking at these. It’s the Enterprise as far as I am concerned.

295. Loskene - February 24, 2009

Damn, even the amazing work of Tobias Richter can’t make this ship look good. Nice render, shame about the source material

296. LordCheeseCakeBreath - February 24, 2009

I almost like this ship. There is just something ackward about it. It dosen’t feel right. I’m not a purist. It just dosen’t feel as balanced as the other Enterprises. Still hoping for a great movie.

297. istewart - February 24, 2009

I’m sure it will look less offensive in motion on the big screen, especially if there’s plenty of stuff exploding around it. The basic shape is the TOS Enterprise, so as long as there’s plenty of opportunity to ignore details, I can suspend disbelief. I’ll probably find myself sitting in one of the front rows to maximize the chances of this occurring.

I think the best way to reconcile this break from previous production aesthetics is to simply accept that Abrams and co. are playing in their own little side-universe. As soon as I saw 23rd century San Francisco filled with generic futuristic skyscrapers in the trailer (and no readily recognizable landmarks besides the Golden Gate Bridge), I accepted that the little details Trek fans love to nerd out over probably won’t be as deeply thought out this time around. On the other hand, if the film does include some sort of military/political reasoning as to why Starfleet’s flagship looks like a prototype slapped together in a hurry, then I’ll be willing to give the story more credit than I have up until now.

298. Jerry Mander - February 24, 2009

Whoever thinks this ship looks good can stick it up their TWOK!

299. YARN - February 24, 2009

#297 “I think the best way to reconcile this break from previous production aesthetics is to simply accept that Abrams and co. are playing in their own little side-universe.”

With respect, this amounts to nothing more than saying, “They are doing their own thing. Deal with it.”

Well, in the words of Public Enemy “**** your own thing, if your own thing’s the wrong thing.”

The BIG E is now BIG UGLY.

Different is not always better or good.

300. LordCheeseCakeBreath - February 24, 2009

Just went and looked at Gabe’s design. It’s so much more beautiful. Stays more faithful to the original but also looks new and high tech. Anyone agree?

301. LordCheeseCakeBreath - February 24, 2009

This is beautiful to me!

302. YARN - February 24, 2009

Gabe’s design is a little too BSG for me, but it is a much better design than this Hot Wheels toy that is being pawned off as the Enterprise.

Where is Sybock? My pain runs deep, I must share it!

303. Tiberius - February 24, 2009

I agree.

I am getting used to this design, but the way the pylons bow looks strange, and the neck sitting far back looks funny, too.

Also, did anyone notice that the underside of the saucer has no dimple in it before the conical section? It is completely smooth and then the conical section hangs down.

Originally there was a slight dimple under the saucer, then it tapered down to the conical section.

While it looks okay it did throw me when I noticed it.

Moreover, the bridge section does not sit upon a section beneath it. The bridge simply sits on a raised section much flatter than original. Again, it looks okay but it threw me.

304. Cafe 5 - February 24, 2009

Tobias these are most uncommon renders. Your work is truly remarkable. They are the quintessential visualization of the new U.S.S. Enterprise. Bravo!

305. Christopher Valin - February 24, 2009

Beautiful work, Mr. Richter!

306. McCoy - February 24, 2009

To weigh in on Gabe’s…I agree that the proportions are better than JJ’s ship but it too looks a little over-designed. Maybe a bit too militaristic.

This is all behind us now of course but out of all the “possibilities” I saw prior to the reveal, I preferred Dennis Bailey’s :

Although I still think one could tone down the three blocks that surround the deflector dish.

307. The Invader (In Color!) - February 24, 2009

Dennis’ E rocks the house!!!

Well, so much for what could’ve been…

I think any chance of a “reset” to the design aesthetic we know from TOS is a forlorn hope…

I am just not wild about the new ship. Sorry if that’s “negative”. I have no anti-JJ agenda or anything like that. I like Orci and Kurtzman’s previous work…I just don’t care for the new design.

It doesn’t grab me in the way the TMP Enterprise did…or even the NCC-1701-D did.

Unlike some people, no matter how much I WANT to like it, if I don’t like it…I’m not going to say I do.

Yeah, it sucks…but that’s the way it is.

Again, it looks clunky.

308. Rastaman - February 24, 2009

Just finished pasting nine of these shots into a single desktop image. Let me tell ya, it’s nice staring at all these images at once. Let’s my mind wander to the stars and all those infinite possibilities

Thanks Tobias!

309. YARN - February 24, 2009

#308 “Let’s my mind wander to the stars and all those infinite possibilities”

Me too. I think, “How many ways are there to screw up this classic design?”

310. barrydancer - February 24, 2009

Great job on the wallpapers. You’ve got talent, Mr. Richter.

The new Enterprise, though. Meh….I still don’t like it. Move the neck forward, straighten the nacelle pylons, and enlarge the secondary hull and I’d look on it more favorably.

311. Cylon - February 24, 2009

The new movie Enterprise looks frakin awsome. It actually looks like it is the direct decendant of the NX01, as opposed to the TOS Enterprise. Even when the NX01 was shown next to the Defiant in saeson 4 of Enterprise the Constitution class ship seemed more primitive than its predessesor. Thats not right.
The TOS E had its place and launched a pop culture phenomenon, but there is no way to make her pretty enough to work on the big screen. Even Roddenberry knew that when he made TMP. He had to build a new Enterprise anyway after donating the first one to the Smithsonian, so instead of rebuilding the old one he had a newer, cooler E built. What does this mean, you wonder? As a few fans have posted the Enterprise is a sign of her times when it comes to designing her. If they put the original Enterprise ont the big screen it would look like a fan film and not make any money. The new E needs to look fast and powerful and be good looking on top of that. I think that this new model fits the bill admirably.
One more thing, Herr Richter, your Enterprise is the prettiest girl at the ball. Well done.

312. istewart - February 24, 2009

I think the biggest problem with this design and the accompanying interiors is that it’s all virtually guaranteed to look dated in 10 years. I’m on board with those accusing the new bridge of having an “Apple Store” design aesthetic, and this new Enterprise is definitely solidly influenced by the soft, curvy aesthetic memes that dominated this decade.

But you’re already starting to see those design principles fall into the dustbin. Apple is an excellent example: through the middle of the decade, they were still pushing roundness and pretty colors, but their current computer lineup is devoted to very utilitarian-looking (although still sleek) bare metal cases. You can also see a similar shift in car design. As soon as gas prices spiked and gutted SUV sales, almost all carmakers butched up small wagons based on front-wheel-drive sedan platforms and called them “crossovers,” with the idea that they merged the ruggedness and utility of SUVs with the fuel economy, safety, and easy handling of smaller cars. Even something as boring as the Dodge Caravan now has blunt corners where once they would have been swoopy. Perhaps the last vestige of the cuter, curvier designs will be the Toyota Prius, and it was very specifically engineered for aerodynamics.

By contrast, the TMP Enterprise and the Enterprise-D are timeless. The interiors of the movie ship looked very utilitarian, very purpose- and utility-driven. The exterior wasn’t obsessed with detail, but still had many points of interest to make for a deeply thought-out design. Likewise, the Enterprise-D looks goofy at first glance with the humongous saucer, but there’s a purpose behind it. The saucer takes all the non-military personnel and their families and flies off while the battle section stays behind to take care of business. Add to that the fact that it was the centerpiece of one of the best sci-fi TV shows ever, and you have a recipe for a design that has staying power in the cultural consciousness.

This ship just doesn’t have any of that. At all. It looks like a mashup of Andrew Probert with Chris Bangle. If this were going to be on TV every week for the next seven television seasons, then yes, I might be willing to entertain the notion that the general public will remember this as the canonical definition of the Enterprise, rather than the old ship from the ’60s. But CBS is gearing up heavier TOS merchandising, ensuring that the original, simpler, cleaner design won’t be forgotten.

Bottom-line, I think after the movie comes out and the hype dies down, we’ll all end up sitting around repeating some variation of “yeah, that Abrams movie was a much better prequel than Enterprise… but the ship still looked like shit.” Unless they deliver high-quality sequels on a 2-3 year release schedule like the TOS movies did, this design could end up becoming an interesting footnote in the annals of Star Trek. Kind of like all those background-scenery kitbashes sites like DITL are devoted to, but much more visible because it had to carry a feature film all on its own.

313. Rastaman - February 24, 2009

#309 – “How many ways are there to screw up this classic design?”

Regardless of the technical nitpicks of the overall design. These renderings are still quite pleasing to the eyes.

Keep in mind they could have screwed up the design a whole lot worse. Ever seen this design from Star Trek: Planet of the Titans (cancelled 1970s feature film):


314. wkiryn - February 24, 2009

#311 Everyone I know in person does not even recognize the existence of the show “Enterprise” – the Akiraprise is what’s out of place and not right.

I highly doubt the movie would lose money with a big screen version of a Constitution class – especially considering the love this new one is getting – which a high % of people on this board find undeserved. So I think it’s safe to say *IF* the original design was really that bad – it too would get a lot of undeserved love. And there would be zero original fans thinking it was ugly.

315. moauvian moaul - February 24, 2009

leaning towards ugly.

316. Cylon - February 24, 2009

314 “Everyone I know in person does not even recognize the existence of the show Enterprise. Thank you. You have proven another point of mine (not from this post) that there are alot of star trek fans out there that are hippocrites. You go on and on about canon and yet ignore vast tracts of official “in universe” stories. I think that this is pretty funny myself.

I was refering to the TOS connie class as opposesed to the new movie connie class.

317. jiat2001 - February 24, 2009

162-Doomsponge: Yes I’m aware of the Phase II designs. Regardless what you stated, I still think that the new Enterprise would have looked a lot better and follow continuity. Gene himself stated that STAR TREK is about moving forward…NOT BACKWARD. For example, STAR TREK ENTERPRISE was a disaster but I have to admit, it had a few very good episodes. Just wish the creators would listen to their designers instead of shunning them and that’s why a few quit the show before the cameras started rolling ’cause they felt that the Enterprise design didn’t look right.

168-Sylvain: About what you said that the new movie wouldn’t do well….THANK YOU! At least someone here agrees with me.

169-Montreal Paul: Bonjour mademoiselle. Why is Sylvain wasting his time here? Well correct me if I’m wrong but Sylvain has every RIGHT to be here to express his opinions whether you like it or not. Go read a MISS DYNAMITE cartoon or something.

318. Blowback - February 24, 2009

Nice, but the neck is too far back!

319. The Governator - February 24, 2009

You know, no offense to Gabe, but I really do not like his rendition of the Enterprise. It is really quite surprising that there are people who seem to think it looks more faithful than this version. To me, when I look at that ship, I see a big clunky space freighter. When I look at this new movie rendition, I see a very visually pleasing version that is faithful to both the TOS design and the TMP design.

Sometimes i think people just decide they don’t like it because it was created under the supervision of J.J. Abrams. It is pretty obvious that those who dislike J.J. Abrams in general seem to oppose the new direction of this movie and those who are J.J. fans have nothing but praise. It does make sense to a certain degree, but my point is that some people seem to have labeled the movie a stinker just because of the man at the helm. In other words, they are biased. I don’t get this feeling from all in opposition, but from a good many.

320. Chris H - February 24, 2009

GOD! trek fans can do some complaining, Your Never Happy. NEVER ! It’s a horrible ship, The necks to far back, The pylons bow looks strange, nacelles look just TOO big, The colours wrong, nothing like the first one, The letters are wrong, That star is the background is out of place. There was to much Air in that scene…….. Always complaining about something.

Dear god! just be glad your getting a new trek movie. IT’S A MOVIE

321. moauvian moaul - February 24, 2009

Don’t know about that D. Looked like anything but a starship. Anti-dramatic, looked more like a cruise ship. Anyone catch the Captain Stubeing similarities? Um, not a single sharp edge, sloped and smooth, sooo comfy, seating by Lazy-boy, carpeted in earth tones, nice. Didn’t help the storytelling. Probably why it was destroyed in its cinematic debut. The mini-van of space travel, complete with families and children. This only surpassed by the lame exterior and Data’s cat. Just sayin’ I’ve seen more exciting libraries… No?

322. Blowback - February 24, 2009

DEAR GOD…. Now we have the whiners who whine about the whiners….

Chris H…. Chill out…. Individuals making observations about nuances they don’t care for are allowed here…. I am eagerly awaiting the release of this film but positive or negative I will make my thoughts known…. Deal with it…

323. Chris H - February 24, 2009

Fair enough. I’m not saying stop with your thoughts lol. just saying people need to as you say ” Chill out “…. Wait untill you see film. then go nuts. I would.

324. Blowback - February 24, 2009

Chris H… Good advice… It’s a deal!

325. Chris H - February 24, 2009

Oh and i’am a trek fan not as big as most and i do understand people want this be perfect. and i hope we all great a great film.

326. Scanner - February 24, 2009

I definitely like this ship, though the engines do seem a bit too big, and I like Koerners just a bit better (if they had to make it different, that’s the one I would have preferred) but this one will do very nicely.

I’m not stuck on a “Oh my god, it’s not MY Enterprise!” rut like some, there are just some differences I’m willing to entertain, and some that I care less for. This is an acceptable difference to me, I can live with it.

I’d like to see more constructive criticism than “It’s different, so it sucks!” from people… hard to read a few hundred comments that complain that THEY don’t like the design so obviously the movie is going to bomb… be willing to expand your perceptions, isn’t that a main concept in the Trek universe?

327. LordCheeseCakeBreath - February 24, 2009

319. Gabe’s version just seems to fit better. There is nothing uncomfortable about it to me. I’m a big JJ fan. Best case scenario for me….a spectacular movie with an Enterprise than makes me feel uncomfortable. Jeese…I really want to love it.

328. tobi - February 24, 2009

if you’re a real star trek fan, who loves it no matter what, like your loved one (oooh mush), no matter what the ship looks like eventually, it’ll be fine.

but hey, this new movie version of enterprise totally fits the new generation!

329. mjmjr91 - February 24, 2009

this dude is extremely talented… like many others on this forum i didn’t really like the jjprise at first but this guy’s work has helped me to warm up to it. i love the first one and the one which looks like its in an asteroid field

great work dude.

330. Wil - February 24, 2009

I was only like 5 when TNG started… 3–ha, ha. But if I had been older, I think I would have thought that the Enterprise D was pretty out there looking, even quickly datable. Yet Star Trek has become infinity more popular since then, and it seems so much more scrutinized. I love the ENT D; I’m sure the new one will grow on me–no matter how much I dislike the big nacelles.

331. James Heaney - Wowbagger - February 24, 2009

My friends… we’ve come home.

At least, I have. These images do it for me. Thanks, TLW.

332. Pinky - February 24, 2009

#319. You’re drawing an erroneous connection. Seriously.

I love JJ Abrams. I think he has great personality, a great outlook, and he definitely makes good, fun entertainment.

But I still think this Enterprise design is a turd. NOT because it isn’t enough like the original. Because it’s esthetically displeasing. The engines look too big because the neck is back too far. I swear that neck’s in the wrong spot. NOT because it’s not where the old necks were. Just because it looks gross where it is. That’s it.

But I’m still a fan of JJ.

333. TrekMadeMeWonder - February 25, 2009

312. istewart

Perhaps the story will explain the obvious design deviation of the Enterprise .Hopefully.

Maybe the saucer section is all that survives this voyage. My wish.

I’d like to see this whole “Spock / Nero / quantum tale” wrap around an early Trek backstory concerning the 1st mission to Talos IV.

That would tie in Pike nicely too.

334. Trelane - February 25, 2009

Hallo Tobias!
WOW – wieder toll gemacht – eines der Bilder werde ich mir als Poster für über mein Bett machen lassen! da hängt im Augenblick noch eines Deiner Grafiken der 1701 A – mein Lieblingsschiff der Flotte!

Dank Dir!

335. Holger - February 25, 2009

265: “it looks like something that could exist ca 250 years from now, unlike the Tos enterprise.”

I disagree big time here. Real spaceships will almost certainly NOT feature all those cool-looking streamlines, curves and edges. There’s vacuum in space, therefore spaceship design will be straightforward and functional, as it is already in the present. (Maybe holiday-starliners will be an exception.) What a shame we probably won’t live to see the 23rd century, otherwise I’d bet you that future spaceships will bear a much closer resemblance to the TOS design than to this new design.

336. Scott A - February 25, 2009

That is top shelf digital art. It truly pays homage to the next generation of a legendary starship. Hats off!

337. Fubamushu - February 25, 2009

I am really surprised by the the amount of misinformation perpetuated here as fact. I am in Japan at the moment and do not have access to any of my texts, and I do not want to rely on my faulty memory, so I used this new fangled gadget called Google to come up with the facts.

On Designing the original Enterprise:

On Designing the refit Enterprise:

Some salient points:

• Source material for the original designs included then current concepts from NASA and material from the US Air Force Museum.

• Jefferies says he wasn’t keen to make drastic changes to the Enterprise, “As far as I was concerned, about the only thing we could update was the engines, so I changed the design of the pods and the struts.”

• On the smooth surface of the Enterprise–He theorized that since space was an extremely dangerous place, starship engineers would not put any important machinery on the outside of their vessel. This meant that, logically, the hull would be smooth. Not everyone agreed with Jefferies and he had to fight his corner. “I constantly had to fight anyone who wanted to put surface details on the thing.”

• On the smooth surface of his redesign–“I still wanted an absolutely plain exterior. Anything that man makes is going to break down; why put him outside in the worst possible environment when you can put him on the inside?”

• The model built based on Jefferies’ redesign was not used as due to being to small, not having enough internal lighting, and not having enough surface detail.

• Richard Taylor wanted to come up with a completely new design, but GR rejected this idea. Instead, working from Jefferies’ redesign, he and Andrew Probert created the TMP Enterprise.

Though I cannot confirm this recollection, I seem to recall GR making a comment about the redesigning the Enterprise. He felt that the Enterprise was as much a character and equally as important as the characters of Kirk and Spock. Furthermore, he felt that the Enterprise was iconic and it was important not to try to change an icon.

Unsubstantiated personal opinion follows:

Sadly, the more I learn of this movie, the more I am turned off by it. The writers and producers claim to be Trek fans who want to honor canon and what has come before, but I don’t see how this film does any of that. The design of the Enterprise is but one example of where this creative teams has failed to do just that.

It is well within the realm of possibility to “reinvigorate” and “modernize” Star Trek and make it relevant again having to bastardize Star Trek and throwing out what came before. Gene Roddenberry envisioned the Enterprise as being a great ship with a storied history with long pedigree of adventures and captains. But here we have a young Kirk watching the Enterprise being built in his native Iowa as he heads off to Starfleet Academy. When pressed for an explanation as to these canonical changes, the creative team cites the consequences of time travel. Using time travel and the consequences therein as a excuse to justify meaningless changes for the sake of making changes is unimaginative writing at best.

338. McCoy - February 25, 2009


Very well said. I agree.

Thank you for looking up those references to MJ’s and GR’s thoughts. Seems to make more sense than what’s been implied on the boards by others.

339. New Horizon - February 25, 2009

Yeah, i don’t have any problem with the Enterprise being redesigned and looking different, my issue is just with this design in general. It just looks wrong. I like some of the styling, but …the placement of things just looks squashed and awkward. It’s not flattering. The angles in the pics help hide it a bit, but it really looks like this ship has fewer good angles than the original Enterprise designs.

340. Closettrekker - February 25, 2009

#337—“The writers and producers claim to be Trek fans who want to honor canon and what has come before, but I don’t see how this film does any of that.”

So far, everything has been as promised (“Anything which appears to violate canon will have a canon explanation”—Roberto Orci)

“The design of the Enterprise is but one example of where this creative teams has failed to do just that. ”

I don’t see how. This is no different between the Klingon bridge in TSFS being totally different from the one in TVH. Asthetic designs are not (to me, anyway) canon. Canon has always meant story and the timeline of events to me, none of which is violated, so long as what unfolds differently does so after the timeline incursion of 2233.

Previously established “canon” remains intact and a vital part of the broader storyline. In fact, this story cannot develop without it.

Being critical of the design aspects of the creative decisions on the part of these filmmakers is one thing, but suggesting that as an example of “not honoring canon” is a vague and misleading generalization, IMO.

I cannot even see how the designs do not “honor” what came before. If these designs (like that of the Enterprise) are not instantly recognizable to you, then I would ask, ” just what show have you been watching?”.

341. COMMANDER KEEN - February 25, 2009

No other word(s) come to mind but….WOW!!! She’s a beauty. Very well done Tobias!!

I did not realize the NCC-1701 was painted on the bottom of the secondary hull instead of the bottom of the primary/saucer. Is that true on the movie version?

342. COMMANDER KEEN - February 25, 2009

To Closettrekker:
“I cannot even see how the designs do not “honor” what came before.”

I totally agree. Every angle has a different version from 1701 to the D…maybe E. The desinger really did a great job incorporating all the ships. I did not realize until I looked at the rear that how much it looks like the D. Amazing!

343. LordCheeseCakeBreath - February 25, 2009

#339 My thoughts exactly.

344. New Horizon - February 25, 2009

What I find sad though, is the awful official picture that was released…and yet paramount lets it fall upon fans to rescue the design by showing off the good angles. They really needed to put out another beauty shot of the ship. Lame.

345. McCoy - February 25, 2009


“Asthetic designs are not (to me, anyway) canon.”

“Canon” may not be the right word, but honoring the visuals that came before serves the exact same purpose as story or character canon (and is no less important).

Didn’t notice or care that the Klingon bridge in TVH was different than TSFS. Could have looked different because the lights were brighter or simply because they were in a different part of the ship. However, it’s just not logical to compare the iconic, first, Enterprise design to any generic Klingon bridge anyway.

“I cannot even see how the designs do not “honor” what came before. If these designs (like that of the Enterprise) are not instantly recognizable to you, then I would ask, ” just what show have you been watching?”.”

I feel for you that you can’t see it. But you are not factoring in that there are other ships throughout the history of Trek…this could be any ship from a Trek-verse. It is not “immediately” recognizable as Kirk’s TOS ship. The only thing that brands as such is the name on it.

Still, setting aside the fact it doesn’t match cannon or resemble TOS close enough, this thing is still ugly.

346. AJ - February 25, 2009


New Horizon

Totally agree. The “official” poster chops off pieces of the bow and stern. These are far superior.

I forgot…Who designed JJ’s Enterprise again?

347. Closettrekker - February 25, 2009

#345—“…honoring the visuals that came before serves the exact same purpose as story or character canon (and is no less important).”

I couldn’t disagree more. If visuals were anywhere near as important as story and characters, I probably would have a harder time enjoying TOS. As it stands, it is one of my favorite shows.

“…this thing is still ugly.”

—A matter of personal taste. I have no issue with criticism of the design decisions on the basis of asthetic appeal. If there are 2.5 million existing Star Trek fans, then there are likely to be 2.5 million opinions.

348. New Horizon - February 25, 2009

346. AJ – February 25, 2009 –

I believe Ryan Church, who worked on Star Wars, was credited with the design…though I get the feeling there were more hands pushing and pulling the design.

349. Closettrekker - February 25, 2009

#344—“What I find sad though, is the awful official picture that was released…and yet paramount lets it fall upon fans to rescue the design by showing off the good angles.”

While I agree that it is more impressive from different angles, I have to disagree that it ever needed to be “rescued”.

Take, for instance, the current poll here on this site.

Out of 685 visitors who chose to participate in the poll, only 16% of them do not like the new Enterprise (3% had said that “any” change was bad). The majority of fans (at least those who visit this site) do not seem to have a problem with it. And if anywhere near 84% of established (accustomed to the old design) fans end up thinking enough of it not to say “I don’t like it”, then it is not unreasonable to project a positive opinion among non-traditional fans who see it in the theater.
Those are pretty favorable numbers for the new design.

While polls should certainly not be taken for more than they are, one can get a far better idea of general opinion than by simply counting the number of negative comments on a relevant thread. As Anthony is often found of pointing out, the overwhelming majority of visitors never post in the comments section.

350. BK613 - February 25, 2009

Wohoo! Spin the Poll Results Game! I want a turn!

“Of the 698 responders, only one-third (33%) seemed to like the new ship as-is. The remaining two-thirds seemed to have some issues with it. Thirty-four percent said they “mostly liked it,” and another nineteen percent said they had “mixed feelings” about the design. Fifteen percent just down right dislike it (13%) or think any change to the ship is bad (2%.) Regardless, the new design seems to have caused some controversy amongst fans of the ST franchise.”

As the old wag goes: “There are lies, d*mned lies, and statistics.”


351. Holger - February 25, 2009

337 Fubamushu: I could not agree more!

340 Closetrekker: “I cannot even see how the designs do not “honor” what came before. If these designs (like that of the Enterprise) are not instantly recognizable to you, then I would ask, ” just what show have you been watching?”.”

I don’t think that instant recognition is the proper criterion here. Instant recognition depends on the most general, large-scale features. But ‘roughly the same shape’ is not enough if the question is whether what has come before is honored, IMO.

Take a more extreme example, the unused McQuarrie TMP Enterprise design. It would still be instantly recognizable as an Enterprise, because, well, it’s all there, a saucer, nacelles, a secondary hull. But that design could hardly be said to honor the TOS ship.
I’m glad, though, they didn’t go with a more radical redesign, like the McQuarrie ship, for example. But to my eye, the changes are still far too salient.

352. Closettrekker - February 25, 2009


34% Love it.

33% Mostly like it.

18% Mixed Feelings.

13% Don’t like it.

3% Any change is bad.

Assuming that the answers are honest ones, these are neither lies, nor damened lies…merely statistics. :)

Your perspective doesn’t change the fact that only 16% felt strongly enough to say “I don’t like it”, and 3% were admittedly not going to like anything that wasn’t precisely like the original anyway.

67% at least “mostly like it”.

Any politician would kill for that kind of approval rating!

If you really want to put it into perspective, it has always been extremely difficult to get Star Trek fans (as evidenced on this site everyday) to agree upon anything other than the fact that they enjoy Star Trek in some form or another—yet somehow this creative team has managed to change the design of the original NCC-1701 and obtain a strong majority approval rate of 67% with 18% somewhat undecided, and only 16% outright disapproving.

Anyway you slice it, that’s pretty impressive to me. Whether you find the design asthetically pleasing or not, it is hard to imagine anyone who has thought this thing out not being impressed with that achievement.

Controversy? What’s a Star Trek film without that?

353. Victor Hugo - February 25, 2009

Don´t want it to sound wrong, but she needs to open her legs!
It´s too close together, it´s like it´s choking to death, about to implode.
Since the writers are on this cybertronian mode, it´s might “transform”, and adjust, like the USS Voyager little nacelles, to be wide open like the real/original Enterprise for STAR TREK 12.

354. BK613 - February 25, 2009

“34% Love it.
33% Mostly like it.
18% Mixed Feelings.
13% Don’t like it.
3% Any change is bad.


Controversy? What’s a Star Trek film without that?”


The only parts of what you said I agree with. The rest is interpretation by you, emphasizing the positive and minimizing the negative with semantics. A.K.A., spin.

Could just as easily say that 33% couldn’t bring themselves to say they “loved” the new ship, only that they “mostly liked it.” That another 18% had such reservations that they couldn’t even go that far, opting for “mixed feelings.” And 15 %,etc.

Or you could do a take that emphasizes the middle numbers as fence-sitters. Or a host of other ways. Which was, jokingly, my point before.

Ultimately, interpreting the numbers to mean anything is a specious argument for at least two reasons:
a) the poll is in no way scientific
b) it’s too easy to vote multiple times (all you need is different IPs for each vote).

355. Mr. curtis - February 25, 2009

can i get a job at light works? im good with 3DS max.

356. Closettrekker - February 25, 2009

#355—Which is why I said this in my original mention of the poll:

“While polls should certainly not be taken for more than they are, one can get a far better idea of general opinion than by simply counting the number of negative comments on a relevant thread. As Anthony is often found of pointing out, the overwhelming majority of visitors never post in the comments section.”

I only wished to say that it was ‘more’ indicative than simple notice of dissention in the comments section. It isn’t completely scientific, but it is more so than counting negative vs. positive comments. That was the point.

And anyway you spin it, only 16% founds themselves willing to say “I don’t like it.” The rest have positive feelings (otherwise, why the “mixed” feelings?) to at least some degree. 1 out of every 3 have no problem with it whatsoever, and 2 out of 3 at least “mostly like it”.

You can “spin” that toward the negative, but you cannot say that it isn’t true (acknowledging, of course, that people can “cheat” if they have the knowledge, means, and motivation).

And IMO (which is all that I have), 2 out of 3 ain’t bad—particularly when it comes to satisfying Star Trek fans!

357. Buzz Lancaster - February 25, 2009

Really NICE work to say the less…!!

I knew already the renderings of The Light Works and loved them…!

Although I still don’t like 100% the new design, the images are superb!

And “loving” them or not, it is what it will be, so… be it…

One can’t fight the future… and we are seeing the future of Star Trek…

“Life… but not as we know it”… or “knew it” so far…. ;oP


358. Tombo - February 25, 2009

apart from the nascelles looking like disco balls, this is great.

359. Jeff C - February 25, 2009

These are proof that you can make beautiful images out of an ugly design. I really hate what Ryan Church has done to the Enterprise–not that it is his fault. JJ and crew picked the ship. I really have to accept that there is nothing I will like in this new Star Trek…and just walk away. Which is too bad since I have spent my whole life as a die-hard Star Trek fan.

This new film is not a Star Trek film. It is an adaptation of Star Trek, with a bunch of kids pretending to be the characters and this new ship pretending to be the Enterprise.

360. Jesse - February 25, 2009

The pictures are beautiful, but I still don’t like the new ship. Not yet, at least. I might get used to it eventually. I hope I don’t.

361. Dr. Image - February 25, 2009

Hmmm…one can’t help but wonder how much Closettrekker is collecting per post from Paramount to relentlessly attempt to refute any and all even remotely critical points leveled at this movie.

#359 “These are proof that you can make beautiful images out of an ugly design.”
Truer words never said.

362. Jeff C - February 25, 2009

#361 I think we have to accept that Paramount doesn’t want us as fans anymore. Either tow the line or you are an enemy of the state, even if you have spent the last 30 years waiting breathlessly for new Star Trek in the theaters. I still have my old Happy Meal boxes from when TMP came out! But, I guess they don’t want their Trek Geeks to be “Geeky” anymore.

We should Just shut up and take what they give us, I guess.

363. The Dog Faced Boy - February 25, 2009

I voted mixed feelings. The ship looks fine, in some shots pretty sexy.

Quinto looks like Spock and I can see a little bit of Shatner in Pine. But with the rest, …eh, I’ll probably will have a hard time remembering I’m watching Trek.

They had a chance to seal the deal and passed it up.

But hey, I like a good sci-fi story.

364. Fan Art for new Star Trek | - February 25, 2009

[…] A German fan of Star Trek has made some really great fan art. […]

365. Pinky - February 25, 2009

This isn’t even an issue of canon as I see it anymore.

#340. yeah, the Klingon bridges changed, but we didn’t explode about it because they still looked good, served the desired purposes and fit within our comfort zone as far as Klingon aesthetics in lighting, textures, and sound. All the redesigns of the enterprise thus far have done the same! We like maybe the 1701 better than the A, B, C, D, or E — or maybe some like the D best — but they are all acceptable, they all have their moments. We look at it and we know it’s just another slant on the same design that we have always loved.

What’s wrong with this Enterprise is that it is out of place. It’s twisted for the sake of twisted.

366. TrekMadeMeWonder - February 25, 2009

Tobias’ going mainstream with these renders. Nice. Good for Trek.

See here…

367. ThreePuttinDude - February 25, 2009

WOW, great job.

368. MAT - February 25, 2009

New Enterprise Original vis-a-vis New Superman Suit. J.J. vs Gene vis-a-vis Singer vs Donner, yep nothing but another heavily overdone redux. Enjoy it while it lasts.

369. Jason - February 25, 2009

There are parts of this ship I absolutely looooove, but the warp nacelles look about 50% too big and too close together, It makes the ship look disjointed. I personally love the details on the nacelles, just make them smaller!

370. Hetoreyn - February 25, 2009

Hmmm .. I’m REALLY gonna have to play with the model of this ship before I like it. I think it looks too much like a lampoon of the TMP Enterprise. Perhaps my view will change when I’ve seen the movie .. I’ll give it the benefit of the doubt. Images look very nice though.

371. Jack - February 25, 2009

I was kind of hoping for gold light on the nav deflector, rather than the blue, a la the tmp’s e at sublight, and yje non-lit colour of the tos’s e

372. Alex Rosenzweig - February 25, 2009

#359 – “This new film is not a Star Trek film. It is an adaptation of Star Trek, with a bunch of kids pretending to be the characters and this new ship pretending to be the Enterprise.”

One idea that crossed my mind, for those who are uncomfortable with the design aesthetic and/or the playing fast-and-loose with basic continuity, was that perhaps this film could be looked at as a 26th or 27th Century commercialized adaptation of 23rd Century events, the same way that some of our movies today about the 18th or 19th Centuries and the Age of Sail are rather stylized as compared to the realities of the era.

373. legion - February 26, 2009

not bad at all, i like it.

374. AJ - February 26, 2009


Dr. Image:

From what I know, Closettrekker is a die-hard fan who runs a furniture business in Texas, and has no relation whatsoever to anyone related to the new “Trek” feature. No cash for posts.

He has gathered info from the site and has expressed his opinions, as have we all.

It’s alright to disagree, but no accusations, please. We’re all on the same side.

375. BK613 - February 26, 2009

Again could equally say that only 1/3 could bring themselves to click on “Love it” and the rest has issues with the design. BOTH are fallacious arguments and are the same kind of pick-and-choose bad science the media throws at us every day.

However, since you put some validity to them, let’s compare February’s results to the same poll taken in November:


Love it………………………. 43 …………………33
Mostly like it………………. 26 …………………34
Mixed feelings……………..16 ……………….18
Don’t like it…………………..13 ……………….13
Any change is bad……….. 2 ………………… 3

It would be another fallacious argument to suggest that people liking this design is trending down so I am not going to make it. But if the numbers were reversed, you would probably make the “trending up” argument.

Look, the polls are meant to be fun, not the basis of a rhetorical argument. They are not scientific, the results can be easily tainted (access to trekmovie at work, at home and on your iPhone gets you three votes, for example), and the categories are biased toward the positive (I voted “mixed feelings” because there was no “mostly dislike it”). Any conclusions drawn from them need to taken with an entire bag of salt

376. LordCheeseCakeBreath - February 26, 2009

The nacelles look so huge and misplaced, it appears that they would simply fall off due to lack of structural support. I understand the zero gravity thing. Simply pointing out another bizarre feature. The photos are stunning in detail. Man o man I want this design to grow on me! Nothing I do seems to change my mind.

377. Holger - February 26, 2009

The fuzzy ‘mixed feelings’ option is the problem. To make the options more symmetric we should have two further options, ‘indifferent’ and ‘mostly dislike it’, and delete the fuzzy ‘mixed feelings’ option.
If one is very scrupulous, the ‘any change is bad’ option should perhaps have an ‘I embrace any change’ counterpart, but that doesn’t seem necessary.

This revised poll could settle the dispute whether the mixed-feelings votes count as rather positive or rather negative.
But please, in this hypothetical poll, no more spinning the indifferent votes towards the positive or the negative.

378. Mr. curtis - February 26, 2009

359. Jeff C – February 25, 2009
These are proof that you can make beautiful images out of an ugly design

this is true. i wouldnt waste 3 and a half weeks modeling it, although it would probably take months instead of weeks for me.

356. Closettrekker – February 25, 2009
#355—Which is why I said this in my original mention of the poll:

is that a typo? im sure thats not for my post.

379. Brian Matthews - February 26, 2009

Personally and aesthetically, I despise the NASA probes that have the nuclear power supply stuck out on the end of a long boom arm. It just looks ugly to me.

But I also know WHY they do this: to keep the damaging radiation from the reactor as far away from other parts of the probe as possible. You yourself give a good-as-any answer to a subjective design defiency – for a FICTIONAL spacecraft. It’s like arguing over what the Roswell UFO looked like – it looked like nothing, because it never existed. The details will never matter, and there are plenty enough poor believers in that crap out there to match anyone’s mark-out for old-school TREK.

And to add to your answer: let’s not forget about the matter/antimatter-powered structural integrity field that I personally haven’t heard being tossed out with the bathwater. For a FICTIONAL ship. It does its job to hold the ship together because the writers have said so. Also, a spaceship that was designed to look like an Easter basket would work in space as well, all other things being equal. Thankfully, we have a fully recognizable starship design coming at us.

Trust me – I have been known to be a TREK mark over the years, but I remember my moments of doubt when seeing the TMP Enterprise for the first time. But that passed. And then – after DS9 was lucky enough to suck off the last vestiges of the TREK mother’s milk – we get the beginning of the fall: VOYAGER & ENTERPRISE. I had high hopes for VOYAGER’s premise in one way (that BSG actually got to – wear ‘n tear), but the closest they get is a timeline story that eliminates all the ship troubles. Blecch! And ENTERPRISE? Unfortunately, they were set up for the fall back in the 60’s. My take on TREK canon up to then – and this (not only my) viewpoint ought not be news to anyone – is that predecessor vessels to the TOS Enterprise would have never looked like that one did, not one 100 years in the past. They blew themselves out of the water by not trying hard enough to make it unique but more importantly, canonical. Hell, the idea of a prequel series was probably the first big no-no, what with 35 years of special FX refinements to add to the mix.

Anybody that has produced TREK over the years has been in the unique position of having a lot of groundwork laid for them by fandom and the like in terms of encyclopedic knowledge of the Trek universe. But they don’t listen to us except for the sound of bill-counting machines counting our box office take, and that doesn’t happen until after they’ve already made whatever crap they may have made for us. Then we’re unhappy and they think TREK is a loser and we either get another NEMESIS or nothing… or something different.

The point is, STAR TREK – 43 years on – is in need of change to evolve, and is accountable only to the pocketbooks of the possessor of said license. We have communicator cell phones and tricorders and energy weapons… and TREK is more and more in danger of being antiquated. Something new has to be tried. And this newness will seep into many aspects of production design. Look at BSG. If the new TREK movie dives anywhere near this level of powerful storytelling and revitalization, I’m there.

Not front row, though. I like to sit just a bit more than halfways back and in the middle. ;-)

380. Closettrekker - February 26, 2009

#361—“…one can’t help but wonder how much Closettrekker is collecting per post from Paramount to relentlessly attempt to refute any and all even remotely critical points leveled at this movie.”

I hope that was a joke.

Otherwise, when did general enthusiasm become something which could only be motivated by monetary gain?

And I don’t try to refute everything. Indeed, I have my own criticisms (however tempered by the fact that I have yet to see the film and thus the entire context). One of them is the apparent ascension of James T. Kirk from cadet to captain.

The asthetic design of the new/old Enterprise is not something which bothers me.

381. Sam Belil - February 26, 2009

I LOVE the pix, their beautiful!
Do I love the new design? NO
Do I hate the new design? NO
It just does not seem right to me.
Maybe, just maybe it will grow on me
Alternate timeline OR not, this could have been handled better.

382. Closettrekker - February 26, 2009

#375—“However, since you put some validity to them, let’s compare February’s results to the same poll taken in November:…Look, the polls are meant to be fun, not the basis of a rhetorical argument. They are not scientific, the results can be easily tainted (access to trekmovie at work, at home and on your iPhone gets you three votes, for example), and the categories are biased toward the positive (I voted “mixed feelings” because there was no “mostly dislike it”). Any conclusions drawn from them need to taken with an entire bag of salt.”

Here’s my initial statement (once again):

“While polls should certainly not be taken for more than they are, one can get a far better idea of general opinion than by simply counting the number of negative comments on a relevant thread. As Anthony is often found of pointing out, the overwhelming majority of visitors never post in the comments section.”

I heven’t lost perspective on polling. I only said that these polls were better tools for guaging general opinion than simply counting the number of negative posts.

As for the difference in response from November to now—-I don’t see the significance, except that the November poll received significantly more responses. If anything, that makes it a better sampling—by sheer numbers alone.

In fact, the “Mixed feelings”, “Don’t like it”, and “Any change is bad” figures have remained at much the same level.

As for cheating on the polls, all I can say is that I only visit in my office. I can’t speak for anyone else. I suppose if someone were motivated to vote several times and had multiple IP addresses, they could. As you say, that’s one of the things that make these polls imperfect. However, I never claimed them to be. I simply said that they were “better” tools than counting and categorizing posts.

383. Holger - February 26, 2009

379: Star Trek is Sci Fi, not Fantasy. So I believe it DOES make sense to speculate about the credibility of spaceship design, and about the quality of the extrapolations involved, even if the spaceships are entirely fictional.
If it were like ‘doesn’t matter, anyway, it’s all made up, after all’ then we wouldn’t be talking Sci Fi anymore.

“We have communicator cell phones and tricorders and energy weapons… and TREK is more and more in danger of being antiquated. Something new has to be tried.”

On the other hand, I don’t believe that the quality of Star Trek is all about the nice accuracy of some of its extrapolations, like cell phones etc. I mean, this is really nifty and it makes for one fascinating Sci Fi aspect of Trek, but I don’t think Star Trek is really carried by this kind of stuff. So I don’t think that in order to re-invigorate Star Trek, we have to overcome the fact that some of its extrapolations are reality today – the extrapolation is not the most important theme.
And after all, we DO NOT have warp drive, androids, beaming, fast sublight propulsion, alien contacts, sentient computers, etc. There’s still enough Sci Fi stuff in Trek which is not antiquated.

“Look at BSG. If the new TREK movie dives anywhere near this level of powerful storytelling and revitalization, I’m there.”

Well, one person’s paragon is another person’s worst case scenario :-)

384. Closettrekker - February 26, 2009

#383—“On the other hand, I don’t believe that the quality of Star Trek is all about the nice accuracy of some of its extrapolations, like cell phones etc. I mean, this is really nifty and it makes for one fascinating Sci Fi aspect of Trek, but I don’t think Star Trek is really carried by this kind of stuff.”

Nor do I.

None of that is what attracted me to the Original Series. It was the characters, the action, the drama, the romanticism, the humor, the sensuality, and the optimistic vision of the future.

It was certainly never starship schematics and technobabble.

385. Holger - February 26, 2009

384: “It was certainly never starship schematics and technobabble.”

Starship schematics without story are empty, and story without starship schematics (i.e. technological Sci Fi elements) is not Sci Fi.
Technobabble, on the other hand, is empty on any account. IMO the technobabble was one of the greatest weaknesses of the later shows.
But I admit it, I love starship schematics.

386. wkiryn - February 26, 2009

I was discussing this with a coworker…an interesting comparison would be to have the exact same backgrounds and angles BUT use the original design and see how they compare – because the space scenes are undeniably fantastic.

#384, 385 One nice scene in DS9 was when Worf was using a bunch of technobabble and Sisko told him something like he didn’t ask for an explanation he told him to go get it done – IMMEDIATELY.

Voyager obviously never had an anti-technobabble moment in its entire run.

387. cagmar - February 26, 2009

#386 –
yeah, or that moment in DS9 when Kira gets a warning on her control panel and says, “Captain, sensors are picking up a subspace oscillation! … What the hell does that mean?” hehe

But the ships are definitely part of enjoying Star Trek. They always have been. Star Trek has ships completely unique to Star Trek. Even Star Wars ships are so typical you can find similar in most sci-fi. They just weren’t special enough, unique enough. Star Trek has something very special about its designs. That’s something that must be respected. (And I do see that respect in the Kelvin.)

388. CiCI - February 26, 2009

Nice job on the renderings but that has to be the ugliest design for an Enterprise in the history of Star Trek. Thanks JJ

389. frederick - February 26, 2009

I’m STILL hoping that this is an earlier Pike-era version, and before the movie is over there is hope given that it will be refit… or even shown at the end after a refit, somewhat later in time after Kirk is captain… looking more like the one we know and love. Wouldn’t that be awesome, it all this time we were just complaining about a ship that gets updated later, like the actual ship did in the original timeline after Kirk got command?

Huh? Huh?

390. mjmjr91 - February 26, 2009

@ 389 i agree. i hope they honor canon inasmuch as they consider the original design of the Enterprise as canon as this design.

391. Mike - February 26, 2009

ehh… the nacelles seem a bit too close together to me… but other than that… nice work!

392. Brian Matthews - February 26, 2009

No one in their right mind would drop back with this shiny new football and punt back to the old school design. Ridiculous fantasy… unless JJ is hiding a gigantic surprise behind the time travel plot.

393. Dean Hollingsworth - February 26, 2009

Tobias does some fantastic work I tell you! That said, I really like a lot about this new design. I just don’t have a WOW feeling about certain proportion aspects of design: Nacelles are way too close together for my taste and the registry number looks unbalanced where it’s placed. Otherwise… it’s a great new look.

394. Max - February 27, 2009

Great work Tobias, echt geil! As far as the differences, they are stark — it looks like the Enterprise on steroids. The curvature in the nacelle pylons really changes the whole look, as does the fact that the pylons connect at the very front of the nacelles and not more towards the middle, like the original and TMP versions. And they connect right underneath the nacelles, where the TMP pylons connected more on the side of the nacelles and allowed for that really spread-out look. While the curvature looks weird on the new ship, it recalls the the New Generation Enterprise.
All takes a bit getting used to. But I like it. I looks muscular. Looks more like a Starfleet Destroyer than a the dainty science vessel of the ’60s.

395. Spock - February 27, 2009


396. Oktoberfest - February 27, 2009

I’m speechless.

Mr. Richter is an extraordinary talent, and I can’t wait to show friends how cool the Big E redesign looks.

(And this comes from a guy who quietly fumed at the “Edsel look and feel” of the first preview shot.)

Thank you!

397. Star Trek Daily Pic » Archive » Daily Pic # 377, Enterprise art by Tobias Richter - February 28, 2009

[…] Tobias Richter and his company The Light Works have created some more amazing art images of one of the vessels from the upcoming Trek film.  This time out – it’s the Enterprise herself.  He does some amazing work and I really love it.  See more of these in the article HERE. […]

398. More cool Trek film ship imagery : TREKS in SCI-FI - February 28, 2009

[…] and now they have done some of the Enterprise herself.  Check more of these out in the article HERE and at his web site at the link […]

399. John - March 5, 2009

Wow!!!! I love it! I love the mixture of starship elements

400. scottym - March 9, 2009

Are they going to credit Andrew Probert?

401. Charles Miller - March 17, 2009

Too bad this latest flick isn’t ONLY about the redesigned Enterprise, which looks gorgeous. I’m afraid the stupid focus on “interpersonal relationships” is going to ruin the new film for me. C’mon. Kirk bedding Uhura? They couldn’t come up with anything better than juvenile Trekkie masturbation material?

402. DeanH - March 24, 2009

Kirk isn’t bedding Uhura. He’s bedding a green Orion slave girl.

403. DeanH - March 24, 2009

This Tobias guy does some of the best work I’ve ever seen in 3D. The fact he seems to get it done fast and on his own time just amazes me. Ryan Church’s design leaves me feeling blue… VERY blue. As in: all I SEE is BLUE. Blue glowing shit everywhere! lol

The design itself is sort of warming up to me. Sort of. We’ll see. Oh man, those blue bussard dome and blue this and blue that… not feeling so warm anymore. lol

404. Beetlescott - March 25, 2009

These are some of the best wallpapers I have ever seen!!!

405. eyemfedup2 - March 25, 2009

ok i cant take it any more
where can we get the model of the new enterprise????

406. MPM_1978 - March 26, 2009

First of all, the images being displayed here are incredibly well done. Is this however what the Enterprise is going to look like for the new Prequel Movie? This ship is obviousley a “Constitution-Class” type, as is resembles. Except that it looks larger, and more advanced than the original Enterprise from the series.. WTF! Freakin George Lucas messed up his Prequel Movies doing the same damn thing. He made his ships, and clones, and droids look, move, and fight with way more advanced LOOKING weapons, and skills than the original Star Wars Movies. Technology isn’t supposed to look more advanced in the past, right????? This new Enterprise looks more like what the old old one from the original series should evolve into. Not the other way around. It just doesn’t look right. It still looks badass, and cool as hell, but it’s a far cry from the original NCC-1701.

407. Old Bobsmith - March 31, 2009

A bit back heavy for my tastes.

408. Erick - April 1, 2009

cool pictures hopefully there’s gonna be more new starfleet ships to see

409. Yeti - April 13, 2009

i will admit… i absolutely hated the screenshots of the new E, and cursed Abrams name and damned him to hell.. but these shots are growing on me…
i don’t like the new ship, but these pictures sure do it some justice! good job! :-D

410. Carnival0fSouls - April 16, 2009

This new Enterprise is ugly. I just hate it. Best design ever was the TMP Enterprise.

411. Yonderboy - April 25, 2009

What a train wreck.

412. Mario Merino - April 30, 2009

All I can say is this; they should have gone with Digital Domain for the design of the ship and effects. I love Star Wars design influences, but they don’t belong in Star Trek. The Gabe Koerner design is so much cooler. This movie version looks like a kit-bash of different perviously seen Enterprise designs. I’ll still go watch the movie, but the ship’s design and Apple store-looking bridge really disappoint me, particularly the amorphous engineering section, droopy warp nacelles, ah yes, and the lack of a lower saucer concave indentation. Just the opinion of an old fan.

413. kingcyrus - April 30, 2009

The ship is the main hull, the secondary hull was designed separated from the primary for a reason. It is not all that difficult to retcon the idea that because the Constitution class was originally designed to be modular, this secondary hull & nacelles are simply the early configuration. Perhaps the SF engineers decide the nacelles should be further apart for greater warpfield control; and perhaps they decide that the connecting dorsal neck should be set back some for better structural integrity of the primary hull at some point in the future. The refit of a ship is not really all that big a deal, one would expect to do it as much of the systems are too valuable to scrap all together, the Enterprise would represent an enormous investment on Earth and the Federation’s capital. Add this all to the fact that we know the Constitution’s main hull was always assumed to be detachable from the secondary hull (including the nacelles) and this isn’t all that much of a problem for ST fans. Come I mean this isn’t even the worst example of continuity snafu situations, you guys remember the klingon issue made light of by a ds9 episode? “Trials and Tribble-ations”?

414. Crazy Guy - May 6, 2009

Wow. Now I REALLY can’t wait for the movie (or Star Trek DAC, for that matter).

415. Captain Robert April - May 6, 2009

A galactic bird, breathtaking in it’s perfection!

416. Chad D. Keith - May 8, 2009

I like much of what I see. I do agree the Bussard collectors did need a little light to them and the connection to the main hull came up futher than I expected. Other than that it’s a darn good design. The old Constitution class ships still tend to be my favorate. I do like the idea of the navigational deflector actually doing somthing as well as the nacelles. But if this bothers some die hard fans they could just say that this early version of the ship was equiped with a defferent engene and was eventually replaced with a more modern one latter (the tv series). I have seen some video on the movie and just like always the ships are always my favorate. You did a GREAT job guys. :)

417. joseph - May 18, 2009

I’ve seen the movie, and the design still looks awful! There’s no way you can polish a TURD.

The Original Design was just fine, although for the silver screen, it merely needed some enhancement on the outside. The Motion picture design was beautiful, and still widely beloved. The Enterprise “D” model looked OK, but it’s design was too advanced for the Trek Universe. The Enterprise “E” design is out of this world! I love it. Even though the Constitution Class, and the Enterprise Class (Refit Enterprise) are my very favorites, I’ve come to truly love the Enterprise “E”, which is the best by far.

As for JJ Abrams design, that is the weirdest design by far. No attraction, beauty, or grace. All angles look so out-of-proportion.

I can’t believe that people actually like this thing. The Warp Nacelles appear overly-sized, and too close together. It just doesn’t look natural with the rest of the ship.


418. James - May 22, 2009

Great Work!!!
Your really captured the essance of the new Enterprise!
Just watched the movie and you were spot on with your design. Loved you movie also.

419. Lee - May 27, 2009

I still prefer TOS NCC-1701, but this is growing on me

420. Keith - May 30, 2009

You “TOS Purists” need to consider a few facts here that relate to the design of the Enterprise. First of all, this ship was built ON THE GROUND if the 60’s Enterprise had been built this way, just from looking at the original design (not that I don’t like it also), it would probably have collapsed under its own weight. Second, the original Enterprise design wasn’t even Matt Jefferies first pass at the design. Gene Roddenberry told him, “Keep the design simple..” and so he did. Third and most importantly every starship in the Franchise, this includes all movies and series’ (with the exception of the Defiant) all exhibit features first created by Matt Jefferies, you know nacelles on pylons, saucer modules, secondary hulls, deflector dish, bussard collectors,etc…
This new Enterprise has a basis in reality. And as far as the bussard collectors glow, they only glow when the ship is at warp, and not at any other time. Which makes sense.

To sum it up I really like this design. It pays tribute to everything Matt Jefferies created when he first designed the Enterprise which is the most important part.

421. Joseph - June 3, 2009

This design still sucks. I’ve seen the movie three times, and each time, the ship didn’t look any better. It’s impossible to replace a legend.

Besides, on Star Trek New Voyages, a poll was taken and less than 4% percent liked the new design. More than 70% percent still prefer the TOS design.

This new design has got to go.


422. steve - June 4, 2009

Lightworks always has the most awesome images to use as wallpaers… very happy to see that the company likes star trek … ( amongst other stuff ) its nice to have fabulous wallpapers to choose from

423. Marcos - June 6, 2009

The Enterprise has grown on me, and now I consider it a work of beauty, and I consider myself a die hard Star Trek fan…so to all those fans who hate it, I respect you all, but get over it. Overall it’s pretty retro. What in my opion, and it’s only my opinion, would have made the new Enterprise a piece of art, would have been combining elements of the Enterprise NCC-1701A, which is a piece of art.

424. Alex - June 12, 2009

i am glad they changed the ship it looks good now

425. ORACLEGOD - June 15, 2009

You are a Genius…. now have a rest and a drink

426. H_Mudd - June 17, 2009

Nice, it’s the hot wheels version, but still nice… though the original will forever, and always be my gal… she had heart…

427. armingeorg - January 4, 2010

Great artwork. Compliment. But then again the new Enterprise simply makes an excellent model. I know that oppionions on the subject of which Enterprise looks best differ quite a lot. I think the new Enterprise is the most beautiful ever to venture into space. She’s got an elegant shilouette, slender and compact yet she gives the impression of being a sturdy reliable workhorse. I also like the fact the the interior is designed closer to reality on how a space ship would have to be built. And I sure as hell like her more spacious and bright command deck. But as I said, oppinions are and will always be subject to personal taste and should therefore be respected and accepted as to be expected from an advanced civilisation exploring the infinite reaches of space.

Salutations from a Swiss Star Trek outpost.

428. Manuel Alvarado - January 25, 2010

I like how the hot rod Enterprise combines the elements of both the W.M. Jefferies original design and the Andrew Probert refit design.

429. Joseph - February 6, 2010

You guys call that the Enterprise? What a peace of junk! LOL! And I thought Star Wars had bad designs (some anyways). But this design is the most hideous thing I’ve ever seen.

That’s no Enterprise….


430. Previews Of NX-01 ‘Refit’ from 2011 Ships Of The Line Calendar | Live Long and Propser - February 9, 2010

[…] Tobias Richter will be doing a “original and soulful image” of the new USS Enterprise from the 2009 JJ Abrams movie (see previous article featuring Richter’s work) […]

431. VANHAN - May 21, 2010



432. Jag - March 4, 2011

I remember the first time I came across the work of Tobias back in the days of the amiga , think i was still on a 500 or 500+ and a USrobotics 8 bit modem , it was better than finding the rocklobster B52 stamped on the motherboard

433. Arlean Benitone - April 10, 2011

That sounds excellent nevertheless i am just still not so sure that I favor it. Anyways will look a lot more into it and decide for myself! :)

434. RichUK - November 27, 2011

TOBIAS RICHTER – I remember your name on tons of COMMODORE AMIGA demos :) good to see you and I have two things in common


Great to see you those Amiga Days paid off for you in the long run,
same for me :)

I see us as long distant AMIGA BROTHERS !! :)

I wish they had not made the new Enterprise look so flat and fat….. the thing I liked most about the original Enterprise from the 1960s was the “curvy Architecture”….. You did a great job recreating these images… it is a shame that JJ did an AWFUL job at designing this Enterprise…… the Hull needs rounding off … the engines need to have less McDonalds inside them and the stems that hold the Engines in place are upside down.

The Bridge is about as perfect as it could get – he designed the Bridge nicely.

Tobias – Keep up your great work…. perhaps JJ should have consulted you and me on the design of the 2009 Enterprise :)

435. Mark - January 9, 2012

Fantastic! is represented by Gorilla Nation. Please contact Gorilla Nation for ad rates, packages and general advertising information.