Exclusive Previews Of 2012 Star Trek Calendars | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

Exclusive Previews Of 2012 Star Trek Calendars June 27, 2011

by Anthony Pascale , Filed under: Art,Merchandise,TOS,Trek Franchise , trackback

One way to make counting the days going by a big more fun is to do it with a Star Trek calendar. In 2012 there will again be two choices: an original series calendar, and a "Ships of the Line" calendar. Today TrekMovie has exclusive previews for both.  

 

Ships of the Line 2012 Preview

The 2012 Star Trek: Ships of the Line calendar is also a big fan favorite. As with each year, the calendar includes brand new artwork featuring Star Trek ships. The 2012 calendar kicks off with a cover featuring reflecting USS Enterprises, a CG reinvention of a classic painting by Andrew Probert.


Front cover for 2012 Ships of the Line [click to enlarge]

The calendar itself includes some interesting firsts, such as June’s "Ambassador Class Sea Trials." The artwork done by Tobias Richter, in conjunction with Andrew Probert, has the first fully realized version of the Ambassador class.


Ambassador Class June by Tobias Richter (w/ Andrew Probert) [click to enlarge]

Here are three more exclusive shots from the 2012 Ships of the Line calendar.

 here are exclusive looks at four months from the calendar:


April’s "Terminal Descent of the Starship Allegiance" by DM. Phoenix [click to enlarge]


August – USS Enterprise E "Call the Ball" for August by John Eaves (original designer of the E) [click to enlarge]


November – original NCC 1701 (from "Tomorrow is Yesterday") by Douglas E. Graves  [click to enlarge]

You can get a look at the rest of the months by zooming in on the back cover of the Ships of the Line calendar below.

 
Back cover for 2012 Ships of the Line [click to enlarge]

The Star Trek: Ships of the Line: 2012 Wall Calendar comes out on July 15th. You can pre-order yours now at Amazon (note: Amazon shows wrong cover, the final version will have the one from above).

2012 Star Trek: TOS Calendar

2012 will also have a classic Star Trek calendar, featuring images from the original Star Trek series. Here are the front and back covers and an exclusive look at a couple of months. 


Front cover for 2012 Star Trek calendar [click to enlarge]


Back cover for 2012 Star Trek calendar [click to enlarge]

Closer looks at April and December.


April with "For the World is Hollow and I Have Touched the Sky"


December with "The Immunity Syndrome"

The 2012 Star Trek: The Original Series Wall Calendar will be released on July 15th. You can pre-order now on Amazon.

 

 

 

Comments

1. rm10019 - June 27, 2011

Beautiful images. Love the Tomorrow is Yesterday entry!

2. trekker 5 - June 27, 2011

Love the TOS calendar!! (Great,now I’ll have to have one!) :)

3. Philip Dunlop - June 27, 2011

The link for the back cover of the Ships of the Line Calendar is børked, unfortunately. But they look quality, as always!

4. "Check the Circuit!" - June 27, 2011

I miss the daily tear-off calendar. Always a nice treat to start the day with a new classic Trek moment. I’m sad they don’t make them anymore.

:_(

5. Bill Peters - June 27, 2011

wish the New E was in there, though I love the Enterprise E from Next Gen in there:)

6. Anthony Pascale - June 27, 2011

SOTL back cover link fixed

7. Wouldn'tyouliketoknow - June 27, 2011

No love for the intrepid?

8. DJT - June 27, 2011

re: “Tomorrow is Yesterday”

OMG! That is exactly what I wanted to see on TOS-R for that episode. A shot showing the relative hugeness of the Connie. What a beauty!

re: Ambassador class

Um….I think they have taken artistic license with the nacelle pylons and the nacelles. They are a little more aerodynamic than in the show. I like ‘em though, as part of a re-fit.

9. Michael Hall - June 27, 2011

@ DJT–

There actually is a shot of Christopher’s F-16 approaching from behind the Enterprise, though due to the difference in scale you’d have to look pretty close to see it.

10. Christopher Roberts - June 27, 2011

Sooner or later, I always end up getting a Ships of the Line calendar each year.

Miss June – the Abramsverse Enterprise, she’s on the wall in my hallway right now.

11. Commodore Lurker - June 27, 2011

Decloaking . . .
Now that’s a frakking set of REAL Star Trek calanders!!!
Recloaking . . . .}:-D>

12. ety3 - June 27, 2011

An odd thing about the name/registry number of that Planck-class ship on the back of the SOL calendar: it seems upside-down to me.

Otherwise, great stuff.

13. dmduncan - June 27, 2011

November, Ships of the Line cal. Still the best looking starship ever!

14. John Gill - June 27, 2011

The November “Tomorrow Is Yesterday” shot is AWESOME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

15. James T. West - June 27, 2011

Immunity Syndrome (December) is reversed…WTF???

16. dmduncan - June 27, 2011

9. Michael Hall – June 27, 2011

Lockheed F104 Starfighter. A real beauty.

17. VZX - June 27, 2011

OK: So it looks like the “Call the Ball” one is from the view of a shuttlecraft window, but why? And why is it titled “call the ball”?

18. Miraclefan - June 27, 2011

8: JDT ”re: Ambassador class

Um….I think they have taken artistic license with the nacelle pylons and the nacelles. They are a little more aerodynamic than in the show. I like ‘em though, as part of a re-fit.”

Because this ”Ambassador” is based on the ORIGINAL Andy Probert Concept Art that was not used on the series.

19. Jeyl - June 27, 2011

@17: “And why is it titled “call the ball”?”

Call the Ball: (When landing on US aircraft carriers) Is a request to sight the lights from the multi-colored optical landing system that shows a pilot to be on the correct approach path or how to correct his/her approach path.

20. Electron - June 27, 2011

@8

The Ambassador Class pictured is based on Andrew Probert’s original design not the one that ended up being the Enterprise-C. It was done by Tobias Richter of The Light Works.

21. Captain Dan - June 27, 2011

Love Ships of the Line and 2012 will be no different. Some great shots in there, love the one of the -D. Am looking at the ‘Terminal Descent of the Starship Allegiance’ and wondering if she rammed through the Borg ship in that shot?

The ‘unrealised’ Ambassador looks great although there’s no shots from ENT, DS9 or VOY.

22. haynes1701 - June 27, 2011

dmduncan –

Totally agree. The original Enterprise has NEVER been outdone. The design is balanced, graceful, powerful all at the same time. A true capital ship of the line. Gorgeous.

23. Damian - June 27, 2011

I always loved the Ship of the Line calendars, Always great artwork. The original series calendars are generally good, but they seem to be overdone anymore. We get one every year and it starts to seem they are getting repetitious. I’d almost like to see a calendar covering scenes from all the shows at this point, maybe in addition to the 2 that are already out there.

24. Michael Hall - June 27, 2011

“9. Michael Hall – June 27, 2011

Lockheed F104 Starfighter. A real beauty.”

I stand corrected, thanks. :-)

As a CGI-dabbler myself I have a great deal of regard for the artists who contribute to the SOTL calendars and who rarely disappoint. It would be a dream of mine to join their ranks, someday. *sigh*

I always loved Andy Probert’s concept artwork of the two Enterprises (originally released around the time of TMP if memory serves), and would have been glad to buy a poster of it if one had been available. Looks like someone did a very nice job translating it to the digital realm.

25. Oz - June 27, 2011

Tobias Richter, if you are reading this I just want to say you do great work.

26. Michael Hall - June 27, 2011

Oops, forgot to mention that SOTL fans should check out Doug Drexler’s site at drexfiles.wordpress.com, which occasionally features animated versions of scenes from the calendars, along with some other very cool stuff.

27. bill hiro - June 27, 2011

Lovely work, deg!

28. CaptainDonovin - June 27, 2011

Love the SOTL images. The Planck class is called something different in the new Voyager novel “Childern of the Storm” but one ship carries that name.

29. Dee - lvs moon' surface - June 27, 2011

Great … I loved it …

:-) :-)

30. CmdrR - June 27, 2011

PLEASE make a 6″ edition!!! I love it, but only own my bathroom for displaying Trekaphernalia.

31. Red Dead Ryan - June 27, 2011

Ships Of The Line is great! Beautiful images. And what a great cover!

I really hope Pocket Books publishes another Ships Of The Line book.

32. Alex Rosenzweig - June 27, 2011

#31 – I think we need another couple of years, and then there’ll be enough images for Volume 2. Does anybody know, though, how well the first one did?

#28 – The actual class name is the Merian-class. There’s more info on it in the centerspread. Mark R. seems to be having ton of fun designing all the new designs of the Voyager fleet as featured in the current books.

I’m so getting this calendar. :D

33. Red Dead Ryan - June 27, 2011

#32.

The book came out in 2006, five years ago. So I think we’re almost due. Plus, if I’m not mistaken, some of the images from the first book were not previously published.

34. Odkin - June 27, 2011

On the Ships of the Line calendar, Is the cover shot the only one that actuially shows the FRONT of the ship???

Weird that all the ships seem to be moving away – not exactly the most dramatic compositions.

35. Captain Karl - June 27, 2011

image link to embiggen the front cover is not functioning…page not found error

looking forward to getting this calendar

36. GarySeven - June 27, 2011

#9- Michael Hall
Where is this shot? Do you mean in the opening, after the teaser, of the remastered Tomorrow is Yesterday episode?

37. moauvian waoul- aka: seymour hiney - June 27, 2011

Love the landing party stance as well. Bad ass.

38. Michael Hall - June 27, 2011

@ GarySeven–

The shot is in TOS-R, shortly after Christopher sights the Enterprise for the first time,with the fighter jet rising into the frame from below. It doesn’t appear on the YouTube fx reel, btw, probably because it got cut for syndication.

39. Trekboi - June 27, 2011

Love the shots especialy the tomorrow is yesterday shot but its been used before in the claenders- 12 new images please lol

40. sisko - June 27, 2011

Anthony, fix the front cover link, pretty please!

Ok, you’re the man.

41. NuKirk - June 28, 2011

For the Love of The Prophets, why can’t these people include the newer ST: Online ships in this? I mean ST: Online is considered official canon, so why not? :S

And they can’t mix in some ships from NuTrek? :S

42. falcon - June 28, 2011

The pic in “The Immunity Syndrome” page (December) is backwards. As many times as these folks at Simon & Schuster have seen these pics, and as often as the CBS/Paramount people have had to review and approve them, you’d think they’d get it right.

43. falcon - June 28, 2011

@38 – No, that particular shot was never in the episode. It is inferred, however, by the EFX shots that show Capt. Christopher looking up at the Big E through his canopy (from the pilot’s POV). In the original episode, we never saw the canopy rail or the bowframe, but in the remastered edition we do. (Too bad the F-104 didn’t have a HUD – heads-up display – then we could better gauge the size of the E.)

44. Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire - June 28, 2011

Tomorrow is Yesterday is one of my Favs. To see an Air Force Jet going after the Enterprise is just so Kool. I love the Pic in the Calender of the Air Force Jet and the Enterprise.
(Black Jack this is Blue Jay 4. What ever this things is it’s big. 2 Cylindercle Projections on Top and one below. Purpose Undetermaned.)
Brings chills to me when ever I see that Ep.

45. captain_neillbog - June 28, 2011

Funny how no one mentions the live models that we’re used back in the 2010 SOTL Calender.

46. Niall Johnson - June 28, 2011

For those that are interested, Andrew Probert is working on a concept kit for the “original” ambassador class. The soapbox shuttle is already out, with the sphinx workpod and concept Romulan warbird in development.

Check out Andrew Probert’s Site. (you’ll have to Google it, I can’t remember the URL.)

47. Janice - June 28, 2011

Looks like a nice ST calendar but I would be interested in a 2012 calendar that features the new crew and,of course, Pike. Like the one they had for 2010.

48. Peter - June 28, 2011

I always thought it a shame that they never made the format of these calendars as one large calendar without the fold. Some of these images would make excellent posters, but with a crease down the center, what’s the point?

49. Andrew - June 28, 2011

@ 24 (Michael Hall):

“… and would have been glad to buy a poster of it if one had been available.”

Check this page:

50. Andrew - June 28, 2011

Hmmm, looks like links aren’t allowed here. Try Probert’s site at probertdesigns dot com and visit the ‘store’.

51. rogue_alice - June 28, 2011

Regarding the “Tomorrow is Yesterday” image. I would think the E would be a bit more in focus. Is this suggesting shield distortion?

52. Michael Hall - June 28, 2011

@ falcon #43–

“@38 – No, that particular shot was never in the episode. It is inferred, however, by the EFX shots that show Capt. Christopher looking up at the Big E through his canopy (from the pilot’s POV.”

The shot I’m referring to appears at 6:20, right after Christopher says “Won’t be here–the UFO is climbing away, fast!” Christopher’s jet is very small in the frame, which it should be–but it’s definitely there, behind and to the left of the Big E.

TOS-R turned out to be something of a mixed bag, with episodes like “Tomorrow Is Yesterday” featuring some very competent work along with a few shots that are pretty questionable; this is one of the better ones.

(And, falcon? When it comes to politics, by all means take my opinions with a grain of salt–but when it comes to the important stuff, e.g. Trek, I don’t lie. :-) )

53. John Whorfin - June 28, 2011

***PLEASE FIX THE FIRST “CLICK TO ENLARGE” LINK FOR THE COVER!***

That’s absolutely gorgeous. (Would love to have a clean version of that image without text!)

54. BringBackTrek - June 28, 2011

Both calendars look great. I’m especially relieved they don’t feature the ungainly ST ’09 version. I hope this means we’ll be looking at a refit/post-refit E with a more classic exterior and engineering deck in the next movie.

55. Michael Hall - June 28, 2011

@54–

Dream on. :-)

56. sunspot - June 28, 2011

I love the artwork featured on the Ships of the Line calendars but hate the fact that the beautiful artwork is marred by a small and essentially useless calendar. I wish that they would just release the artwork as a posterbook and omit the tiny calendar. Face it. Fans buy the “calendar” for the artwork. No one would miss the numbers in one corner.

57. Bobby - June 28, 2011

wow. how can they release the same stuff year after year? i have had the ships of the line calendar for a few years now and its seems they get less and less original

boooo

58. Dr. Image - June 28, 2011

Now THAT’S an Ambassador class!
Great work, Tobias.
Did Andy do the cover CG version?

59. et - June 28, 2011

I don’t want to sound critical, but I LOVED the “Ships of the Line” calendars in the early days because CG really tried to be photorealistic.

These days it just looks like… well… CG. It’s beautifully composed, don’t get me wrong, but it seems like the idea to make these seem like real photos has gone out the window, and I feel like the offering is a little poorer for it.

I had thought — I suppose incorrectly — that the original point of “Ships of the LIne” was that you could be looking at actual photos of these fictional starships. Now it just seems like a case of “Hey! Isn’t this awesome!”

60. Smoking Robot - June 28, 2011

I hate horizontal calendars. They’re a PITA to hang.

61. Alex Rosenzweig - June 28, 2011

#33 – “The book came out in 2006, five years ago. So I think we’re almost due. Plus, if I’m not mistaken, some of the images from the first book were not previously published.”

IIRC, the ones that were “new” in the book were the ones from the upcoming year’s calendar. I’d have to recheck to be certain, though.

#34- “On the Ships of the Line calendar, Is the cover shot the only one that actuially shows the FRONT of the ship???”

The shot of the Planck and of the E-d in the Dyson Sphere are also somewhat forward angles.

“Weird that all the ships seem to be moving away – not exactly the most dramatic compositions.”

Not quite all, but you’re right, a lot of the shots are from behind this time. I hadn’t thought of that. Hmm… Something to ask Doug about.

#42 – “The pic in “The Immunity Syndrome” page (December) is backwards.”

I’m a little confused by the references to “the Immunity Syndrome”. That looks like “Space Seed” to me, a shot of the Enterprise and the Botany Bay.

#54 & 55 – I’d be expecting a new Engineering set, because the vast majority of folks hated the brewery. ;) Also, they probably would have the budget to do it in this film, since a number of the other sets are completed. OTOH, reaction to the Enterprise was a lot more positive (perhaps with a fairly good dose of “It coulda been a lot worse!”), so I suspect the ship will be with us for a while. I just wish they’d move the nacelles a bit more outboard and the dorsal a bit forward on the secondary hull, but oh, well… :)

62. Michael Hall - June 28, 2011

@ Alex Rosenzweig–

“OTOH, reaction to the Enterprise was a lot more positive (perhaps with a fairly good dose of “It coulda been a lot worse!”

THE BLACK KNIGHT: I’ve had worse!

KING ARTHUR: You’re a liar!

Yeah, I suppose it could have been worse (e.g. Ralph McQuarrie’s radical redesign proposed for THE MOTION PICTURE). Still, given the beauty of the original and ILM’s pedigree, the new ship is a fair clunker that doesn’t read well from very many angles, including the orthographic ones. Ryan Church is a talented guy, but for me his STAR WARS prequel sensibility just doesn’t work in the Trek universe.

Agreed there’s a fair chance Budgineering will be revamped in the sequel. It doesn’t even really require any explanation, since there was nothing in the movie that said what we were looking at was the master control center.

63. UlicQel - June 28, 2011

While the love for the Ambassador is nice, they couldn’t show any love for the NX-01, Defiant, or Voyager?

Or something crazy like the Steamrunner or Norway?

64. Lt. Bailey - June 28, 2011

I will get the the TOS calendar as usual or I should say my wife will get it for me as she does every year for Christmas.

Although I do love that SOTL calendar with the F-104 and Enterprise. That was such a sweet plane back then. It was a rocket engine with a pilot attached to it, too bad we don’t have it any more.

65. Tenacious MC - June 28, 2011

@53 –

If you want the embiggened version of the first cover pic, here it is:

http://img.trekmovie.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06//Reflections_After_Probert_By_Craig_Frey_Final_SOTL_2012L.jpg

66. Robman007 - June 28, 2011

Bummed out on this one…no good shots of the Refit or a cool Trek 11 battle scene re-imagined. I would have loved to see someone take the Narada and the original TOS Enterprise and paired them together.

Oh well

67. Pensive's Wetness - June 28, 2011

about time Dak Phoenix got some love from *checks* 200-something. the Allegance pic itself isnt on his website anymore (neither is the ST-III looking post events video short of the same said ship). interesting…

68. captain_neill - June 28, 2011

These calendars look awesome

69. avenuePad - June 28, 2011

The Ambassador Class is amazing. That should have been the Enterprise E. It’s a nice mix of classic and next-gen design. I guess I prefer the sharp lines to the “line-less” Enterprise E.

70. M_E - June 28, 2011

That Ambassador is lovely… <3

71. dmduncan - June 28, 2011

Truth is I can’t get used to the new Enterprise. The TOS Enterprise looks like something you’d actually build. Straight lines and circles and some slight curves here and there. It looks like something that was hard to build and they didn’t want to waste a lot of energy trying to make it look “fast.” And that enhances it’s reality to me. You look at military vehicles and some of them look cool but they look cool in a practical no nonsense way, which is how the original Enterprise looked.

The new Enterprise looks like something they were trying to make look cool, which doesn’t really work to me.

72. Vultan - June 28, 2011

#71

Didn’t Hasbro design the new Enterprise?

Well, at least it looks that way to me. Not so much ready for space travel as ready for the shelves and discount bins at Wal-Mart. Branded. Packaged. Ready to go. [Batteries and lens flares sold separately.]

73. Naver Drol - June 28, 2011

If you want to check out more work by DM Phoenix visit his impressive website phoenixium.com. He’s got some great art work there. I just wish he had a listing of all that music he uses. I’d at least would like to know where it’s from.

74. Anthony Pascale - June 28, 2011

sorry. The cover link was fixed earlier. it should be working. Try hitting refresh maybe

75. Dr. Cheis - June 28, 2011

I love seeing the Ships of the Line calendars, and look forward to getting next year’s. But didn’t they already do one with the Enterprise and the fighter jet?

76. TrekMadeMeWonder - June 28, 2011

#74.
The cover em-biggin is still not working. Although I must thank #65. Tenacious MC for providing a link to a full sized image.

Impressive!

Nice cover art. It must have taken a lot of time getting that ice right.
Looks great all over!

The “Tomorrow is Yesterday” image is nice too. Although I think the E should have had more/sharper details. Nice scale!

77. TrekMadeMeWonder - June 28, 2011

On futher examination. The “Ship of the Line” calendar creators need to make better “Title Text” for the cover. The text at the bottom looks pasted on. Smaller text would sell the main image much better too. I like how the inside pages are typeset though.

The TMP E is a real gem in that shot.

78. TrekMadeMeWonder - June 28, 2011

Looks like Spock is shooting up on the cover for 2012 Star Trek calendar.
More tinkering with the timeline?

79. Simon - June 28, 2011

#71 – The TMP Enterprise spanks the TOS Enterprise, and the cover just proves it. The simplistic made-for-’60s-TV design was remade into a “real” ship by Andrew Probert.

80. Alex Rosenzweig - June 29, 2011

#62 – “Yeah, I suppose it could have been worse (e.g. Ralph McQuarrie’s radical redesign proposed for THE MOTION PICTURE). Still, given the beauty of the original and ILM’s pedigree, the new ship is a fair clunker that doesn’t read well from very many angles, including the orthographic ones. Ryan Church is a talented guy, but for me his STAR WARS prequel sensibility just doesn’t work in the Trek universe.”

Can’t disagree with any of that! ;)

OTOH, I do think that we can’t blame it all on Church. Based on the sketches and notes I’ve seen, some of the changes came straight from Abrams, who really doesn’t seem to have had a good sense of what makes the Enterprise tick. But, as you say, it was that Star Wars sensibility getting in there.

#71 – No disagreement from me there, either. :)

81. Tobias Richter - June 29, 2011

Thank you – it was a pleasure working with Doug and Andy again. The Ambassador was a real challenge, but turned out very nicely.

I love the other artworks – this is my first look on them as well. I especially like the “Allegiance” one. Great stuff!

82. diana - June 29, 2011

How about an appointment/desk calendar? Then we can carry the pretty around with us all the time. :D

83. Rocket Scientist - June 29, 2011

The original TOS E is a thing of beauty. Even though the TMP E is considered a step up by many, it wouldn’t be what it is without the technical and aesthetic sensibilities that went into the original. “She’s a beautiful lady and we love her!”

84. Towerpower3000 - June 29, 2011

Front cover of SOTL won’t enlarge – goes to error page.
Can you please fix?

85. Michael Hall - June 29, 2011

Mr. Richter,

Thank you for your inspirational work, most recently the shots of the Enterprise in drydock seen at the conclusion of New Voyages’ “Enemy: Starfleet!” I know a couple of guys who worked on the visual effects for that show, and they were as blown away by those shots as I was.

@dmduncan #71–

“The new Enterprise looks like something they were trying to make look cool, which doesn’t really work to me.”

Who would design an Enterprise with curved nacelle struts? I can’t see any reason that it makes any logical design sense, and so is totally out-of-keeping with the clean, efficient (yet attractive) aesthetic previously established for starfleet tech.

@Alex Rosenzweig #80–

“OTOH, I do think that we can’t blame it all on Church. Based on the sketches and notes I’ve seen, some of the changes came straight from Abrams, who really doesn’t seem to have had a good sense of what makes the Enterprise tick.”

True. If you look at Church’s preliminary sketch in the Making of Trek 2009 book (yeah, I own the thing) it’s fairly reminiscient of the look of the TMP version, and would probably have worked pretty well. Then J.J. Abrams comes along with his red pen, and the rest is fictional future history. What makes a producer/director, however talented, think he knows anything about redesigning spaceships, particularly for a franchise he never cared for all that much in the first place?

In fact, if you look at the initial design concepts for Trek ’09 (shuttles, drydock, hangar bays, Starfleet Academy, Engineering, even the bridge) just about all of them look better than what eventually wound up on film. I know some of that was due to budgeting, but I’ll bet that you can also lay it at the feet of J.J.’s real desire with this project, which was to make his own version of STAR WARS.

(Okay, rant over. Back to my copy–special uber-geek subscription rate!–of Nacelles Monthly. Hubba, hubba.)

86. CaptainDonovin - June 29, 2011

#32 – Thanks Alex, I just started reading the book but couldn’t remember the name of the class. Kept thinking Mulciber class but that’s the Achilles.

87. dmduncan - June 29, 2011

79. Simon – June 28, 2011

#71 – The TMP Enterprise spanks the TOS Enterprise, and the cover just proves it. The simplistic made-for-’60s-TV design was remade into a “real” ship by Andrew Probert.

***

Wait…checking…and…nope, I still don’t share your enthusiasm for the Probert E. It’s not bad, but the flat pencil nacelles don’t work for me. Probert obviously followed some design cues from Matt Jefferies’ own redesign sketches for the aft portion of the nacelles and the torpedo bays, which is cool, but the primary advancement of the TMP Enterprise over 1701 is that it was built for its image to be projected onto a big screen and it shows the wonderful detail necessary to create the illusion of size and reality for that venue. The design itself — not the comparative production values of each ship — says “different for the sake of being different,” and that is usually a bad reason to me to change what is already working so perfectly.

88. dmduncan - June 29, 2011

Also, watching the teaser for ST.09 we see the round nacelles again and we also see what look like turbines spinning in the wind, reminding us of the swirling pattern of light on the nacelles we saw in TOS. That was really cool. The Probert E lost that cool feature and actually made the E less dynamic. So it wasn’t as interesting to me.

Unfortunately they also added those weird bulbous cowlings to the nacelles in ST.09 which look pointless. I don’t like pointless features on the Enterprise. Every thing on it should look like it’s a feature whose function is definable.

That would be my vision if I was running things.

89. Anthony Pascale - June 29, 2011

try cover link again. it really is working i swear

90. Simon - June 29, 2011

#81 – Tobias – Are we going to be able to see the Ambassador from other angles, etc on your website?

91. Vultan - June 29, 2011

#85

“J.J.’s real desire with this project, which was to make his own version of STAR WARS.”

BINGO! The radically different designs aside, what really clenched it for me was when Pike told Sulu to, “Punch it” when going to warp. Sound familiar…. Chewie?

92. Michael - June 29, 2011

#73 – I checked out DM Phoenix’s site and I agree it is very impressive. I too liked the music he used. The music on the introductory page is “The Venture Departs” from the 2005 version of “King Kong” by James Newton Howard. I didn’t recognize the music on the main page, so I used Shazam on it. Turns out its “A Kaleidoscope of Mathematics” from James Horner’s score to “A Beautiful Mind”.
Some of the other tunes:
Gallery 3 – “It Was Nice to Have Met You” from “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button” – Alexandre Desplait
Gallery 2 – “Saying Goodbye to Those You Love” from “A Brilliant Mind” – James Horner
Gallery 1 – “Governing Dynamics” from “A Brilliant Mind” – James Horner
Archives – “Dance of the Knights” from “Romeo and Juliet, Op. 64/Act 1)
About – “Central Park” from “King Kong” – James Newton Howard

I’ll probably get the score to “A Brilliant Mind” based upon listening to these tracks. I already have “King Kong”.

93. Tobias Richter - June 30, 2011

#90 probably – I´ve rendered a couple of views of her, maybe a few will be used in Doug Drexlers blog this weekend.

94. COMPASSIONATE GOD - June 30, 2011

The “Tomorrow is Yesterday” image captures all attention. Obviously, one of the great Trek episodes, and a dramatic interpretation of the contact event.

The TOS calendar…must have. Lovely images.

95. Michael Hall - June 30, 2011

@ dmduncan #87–

“Wait…checking…and…nope, I still don’t share your enthusiasm for the Probert E.”

If your point is that the original Jeffries design (with a few tweaks, obviously) could have looked just as ‘good’ and ‘modern’ given a new miniature crafted with the attention to detail a multimillion-dollar film budget and newer model-making techniques allow for, I’d have to agree.

The TMP design–which actually had inputs from a lot of people, including Jeffries, Mike Minor, Douglas Trumbull (and maybe even Robert Wise), in addition to Andrew Probert–is more streamlined and graceful in some ways, but I could never really buy into the notion that it was a refit of the same ship that had appeared for three seasons on TOS. The lines are altered in every way and in every dimension to the extent that if you really wanted to end up with something like the movie version, you’d probably have an easier time just building it from scratch. (The evolution of the ship as seen in the series’ pilots to the regular episodes is actually far more believable).

Overall it’s a beautiful design, though I could have lived without the clunky ‘torpedo room’ and the engine nacelle effect was definitely missed. (Probert must have agreed, since he restored it for TNG and all of the series and movies that have followed.) For my money, the original television and first movie versions still photograph better from the greatest number of angles than all of their successors, which is the real testament to the appeal of Matt Jeffries’ original concept.

96. COMPASSIONATE GOD - June 30, 2011

Re: Michael Hall –
“For my money, the original television and first movie versions still photograph better from the greatest number of angles than all of their successors, which is the real testament to the appeal of Matt Jeffries’ original concept.”

Great point. Few things prove the point about how solid the original 1701 design was than to look at the model work of DS9’s “Trials and Tribble-ations” and the CG of ENT’s “Through a Mirror, Darkly.” Both EFX disciplines sold the 1701 as a “real,” massive ship as much as any “E” to follow on TV or the movies.

Like certain legendary auto designs, great fictional craft rarely appears “old” no matter the age of the work.

97. COMPASSIONATE GOD - June 30, 2011

My bad–I meant, “In a Mirror, Darkly.” “)

98. dmduncan - June 30, 2011

95. Michael Hall – June 30, 2011

I do like the Probert E. Just not as much as 1701. One thing I would surely carry over from the TMP Enterprise to a big screen rendition of 1701 is the self illumination, and I do really like the aft ends of the warp engines. The engines aren’t bad; I’d like to see them unflattened, keeping the same design cues, and with round nacelles. The torpedo section would go bye bye.

If my stamp of approval had any ink on it, I’d err on the side of keeping it original if I had any doubt at all. Same thing with the bridge. One thing I would change about the TOS bridge is having the turbolift as the only way on and off the bridge. I would probably change the walls flanking the forward viewscreen such that there was a ladder on either side leading to the lower deck, and I’d probably make them perpendicular to the viewscreen rather than parallel.

You absolutely have to have a means of accessing or escaping from the bridge if the turbolift is out of service.

99. dmduncan - June 30, 2011

In other words, the viewscreen would be forward of the ladders; the port and starboard side walls that the viewscreen is mounted between would be the mounting surfaces for those perpendicularly placed ladders.

100. dmduncan - June 30, 2011

I would NOT have two turbolifts, and I would never have any entrance to the bridge to the back of a seated captain. From his chair he should have at least peripheral knowledge of who is coming on the bridge.

101. Michael Hall - June 30, 2011

I don’t know. . . ladders, on the bridge? It may make sense, design-wise, but it looks retro and out-of-place in my mind’s eye, like seat belts on the chairs or visqueen separating the compartments in a shuttlecraft. In fact, I’m surprised Abrams didn’t go for it. :-)

102. dmduncan - June 30, 2011

Ladders — just like they had elsewhere on the 1701 for climbing between decks, so it would actually be consistent with the TOS design esthetic Red ladders, if memory serves me. You need an emergency route on and off that bridge. I would place them perpendicular so that they wouldn’t be obvious in straight shots of the viewscreen, so it wouldn’t look much different. That’s the only real dead space on the bridge to play with.

103. TrekMadeMeWonder - July 1, 2011

A floor plate that opens to the lower decks would be a more logical solution. Perhaps an access point was aways there, “We” just never see it onscreen.

104. Alex Rosenzweig - July 1, 2011

#85 – “If you look at Church’s preliminary sketch in the Making of Trek 2009 book (yeah, I own the thing) it’s fairly reminiscient of the look of the TMP version, and would probably have worked pretty well. Then J.J. Abrams comes along with his red pen, and the rest is fictional future history. What makes a producer/director, however talented, think he knows anything about redesigning spaceships, particularly for a franchise he never cared for all that much in the first place?”

I’m pretty certain, based on pretty much the same info you have, that the TMP version of the ship was the basis for their efforts. For a while, I really hoped, that they’d sort of reverse-engineer the refit-1701 into a movie-level-detailed version of the original, and indeed the teaser trailer made me think they were doing just that. And then it was gradually revealed that they…umm…weren’t. ;)

I think it’s my own aesthetics talking, but to this day, I think the TMP ship has much more of a “hot rod” look than is the 2009 version.

#87 – “Wait…checking…and…nope, I still don’t share your enthusiasm for the Probert E. It’s not bad, but the flat pencil nacelles don’t work for me.”

I can understand that, though I admit to not sharing that particular issue. I did miss the glowing bussard collectors, though.

“Probert obviously followed some design cues from Matt Jefferies’ own redesign sketches for the aft portion of the nacelles and the torpedo bays, which is cool,”

I’m pretty sure that Probert, along with Joe Jennings and Mike Minor, were all being very loyal to Jefferies.

“The design itself — not the comparative production values of each ship — says “different for the sake of being different,” and that is usually a bad reason to me to change what is already working so perfectly.”

Some of that is probably based on the patenting problems that Paramount had back in the ’70s. (There’s a reason that all those old video games had, for spaceships, an arrow head and the Enterprise…because they *could*! ;) ). So I think there’s some truth to the idea that in some cases, they changed things for the purpose of making a design they could properly patent this time.

#88 – “Also, watching the teaser for ST.09 we see the round nacelles again and we also see what look like turbines spinning in the wind, reminding us of the swirling pattern of light on the nacelles we saw in TOS. That was really cool.”

One thing, talked about in the ST09 art book, was the idea that the “domes” were energy fields, not physical domes, and I liked that idea quite a bit. I think, though, that they lost a great kinetic visual feature by making the domes a sort of soft blue, instead of the fiery red-orange suggesting some real heavy-duty energy going on. Abrams et al. (not sure if Bob Orci’s reading this) talked a lot about wanting things on the ship to move, and then they lost the chance to show some heavy-duty movement.

“Unfortunately they also added those weird bulbous cowlings to the nacelles in ST.09 which look pointless. I don’t like pointless features on the Enterprise. Every thing on it should look like it’s a feature whose function is definable.”

Totally agreed. One problem that ST09 suffers from, in contrast to other Trek films, is that whereas folks like Probert, Rick Sternbach, Herman Zimmerman, etc. sat down and figured out what was where and how it might work all over the ships for which they were responsible, it seems like Church didn’t..or perhaps he did and Abrams didn’t care. In other ships, form and fucntion seem to go hand-in-hand. In the newest Enterprise, not so much.

(BTW, to give Church some extra props, one of his preproduction art pieces shows big parts of a warp nacelle actually glowing from inside, as if the energy is flowing through it like a sort of tube. This reminded me a whole lot of Franz Joseph’s old theory about how warp drive worked. I don’t know if there was a deliberate link there or not, but props to Ryan C. anyway. ;) )

105. Alex Rosenzweig - July 1, 2011

Splitting posts to avoid one message of completely insane length. ;)

#96 – “Few things prove the point about how solid the original 1701 design was than to look at the model work of DS9’s “Trials and Tribble-ations” and the CG of ENT’s “In a Mirror, Darkly.” [Corrected – AR :) ] Both EFX disciplines sold the 1701 as a “real,” massive ship as much as any “E” to follow on TV or the movies.”

Hear, hear!

and regarding the bridge access discussion:

“A floor plate that opens to the lower decks would be a more logical solution. Perhaps an access point was aways there, “We” just never see it onscreen.”

Shane Johnson did exactly that in his drawings of the TMP (amd ST4, too, IIRC) bridge in _Mr. Scott’s Guide to the Enterprise_.

106. dmduncan - July 1, 2011

You could also have the wall on either side of the viewscreen be slightly curved with a pill shaped hatchway that is sealed. Turn a recessed handle or wheel and push the whole hatch in and then slide it to the side on its own roller system to access the ladder down. It would definitely be for emergencies, and it wouldn’t look that much different.

Actually, wasn’t the need for extra bridge access AND the ladder tubes both featured in the same episode? Naked Time. Kirk is stuck on the bridge waiting for the turbolift. Sulu chases crewmen with his sword and then climbs up a ladder tube to another deck. Right?

107. dmduncan - July 1, 2011

A hatch in the floor makes the bridge seem like an attic.

108. Michael Hall - July 1, 2011

@ Alex Rosenzweig #105–

Thanks for the slightly-less-than-completely-insane + 1 posting. :-)

The issue of ‘functionality’ is a little abstract, of course, when we,re talking about the appearance of fictional spaceships. Roddenberry often mentioned that it really didn’t make much sense to have the ship’s bride at the top of the saucer where it wouls be most vulnerae, but it looked cooler that way. We never knew if those rounded triangular insignia on the bottom of the TOS Enterprise’s primary hull did anything useful, but they definitely added style. OTOH those engine cowlings on the Enterprise-JJ may indeed have served some theoretically useful technobabble-ish purpose, but I didn’t like them, because they were fugly.

I’ll say that the preview trailer turned out to be the peak of my potential love affair with Trek ’09, and leave it at that.

109. Michael Hall - July 1, 2011

Sorry for ‘bride’ rather than ‘bridge’ and other gaffes; my iPod is evil.

110. TrekMadeMeWonder - July 1, 2011

That’s cause they NEVER showed the bridge ceiling, dmduncan.

Which I thought was supposed to be “transparent to SPACE!”
Now that should be a primary Bridge feature in any ST movie. Imagine
the view lookiing out through the dome of the ‘ol con. class Enterprise as it crosses the sunrise of a new world.!

Sorry, but I Always wondered about that.

111. dmduncan - July 1, 2011

ST.09. Spock resigns and he’s walking down a hall while Kirk is making the announcement. Spock passes by a niche with a LADDER in it and a redshirt is on it climbing down!

112. Alex Rosenzweig - July 2, 2011

#108 – “The issue of ‘functionality’ is a little abstract, of course, when we,re talking about the appearance of fictional spaceships.”

True ’nuff. And, of course, it was much easier to think in those terms from TMP onward, once big chunks of the “how it works” in Trek had been settled upon, as opposed to the beginning of TOS, when they were still very much making things up.

“Roddenberry often mentioned that it really didn’t make much sense to have the ship’s bride at the top of the saucer where it wouls be most vulnerae, but it looked cooler that way.”

He also said that it was up there to reflect the high point the bridge (or, at least, command deck) usually occupied on sailing vessels. And that made sense in context, considering how influenced Star Trek was by portrayals of naval ops in the Age of Sail. ‘Course, if a ship’s shields went down, it wouldn’t really matter so much, since enemy weapons could cut right through the hull.

“We never knew if those rounded triangular insignia on the bottom of the TOS Enterprise’s primary hull did anything useful, but they definitely added style. OTOH those engine cowlings on the Enterprise-JJ may indeed have served some theoretically useful technobabble-ish purpose, but I didn’t like them, because they were fugly.”

Well, aesthetics are a whole other beast. ;) A number of aesthetic elements of the ST2009 ship were ones I disagreed with, but they’d be more easily forgiveable in my mind if I thought the design of the ship had been well worked out. ‘Course, I also think the Enterprise-D is seriously fugly, but I know that folks like Andy Probert, Gene Roddenberry, Rick Sternbach, and others spent a vast amount of time working out the concepts of how that ship worked and how its interiors related to the exterior, all well before the show aired. So far, at least, I have seen no evidence that such thought went into the design of the ST2009 version of the ship.

“I’ll say that the preview trailer turned out to be the peak of my potential love affair with Trek ‘09, and leave it at that.”

FWIW, that’s about where I was with it, too. ;)

113. Michael Hall - July 2, 2011

” ‘Course, I also think the Enterprise-D is seriously fugly, but I know that folks like Andy Probert, Gene Roddenberry, Rick Sternbach, and others spent a vast amount of time working out the concepts of how that ship worked and how its interiors related to the exterior, all well before the show aired.”

Definitely agreed there. I remember getting my first glance at a profile drawing of the ship at some convention (could that possibly be a quarter-century ago?) and my heart just sinking with disappointment–an unpleasant experience that I wish hadn’t been repeated when I caught sight of the Enterprise-JJ.

(Of course, my dislike of the exterior design didn’t interfere with my enjoyment of the show once TNG fell into its storytelling groove. In the end the ship is just a platform for drama, after all. And I always did like Herman Zimmerman’s designs for the interior, which I thought just kept getting better as the series progressed. And I found John Eaves’ return to sleekness very welcome for the E-E, though it also doesn’t work from nearly as many angles as the original.)

“So far, at least, I have seen no evidence that such thought went into the design of the ST2009 version of the ship.”

Hell, none of the principals involved even seem to be able to say with certainty just how big the damn thing is supposed to be. From what I gather they just kept scaling it up until they were happy with how it looked in the footage, but that’s a hell of a way to do things when the features that do establish scale (windows, docking ports, etc.) have already been established.

114. dmduncan - July 2, 2011

“Hell, none of the principals involved even seem to be able to say with certainty just how big the damn thing is supposed to be.”

I actually calculated that once using the height of the bridge window/viewscreen on the model I have as a rough metric and, as I recall, it was roughly the same size as the original E and maybe a little bit smaller, regardless of the numbers they were giving us about how much bigger it was.

115. Michael Hall - July 2, 2011

“I actually calculated that once using the height of the bridge window/viewscreen on the model I have as a rough metric and, as I recall, it was roughly the same size as the original E and maybe a little bit smaller, regardless of the numbers they were giving us about how much bigger it was.”

Man, we are an obsessive lot, aren’t we? :-)

There’s an interesting (for us total nerds, that is) article about the size issue at the ad-astra scientia website. The bottom line is the visual FX inconsistency between various parts of the ship, with some shot measurements like yours confirming a size roughly that or slightly larger than the original, while others (the 2-tiered shuttlebay, budgineering) requiring a ship around 725 meters long–larger than a Galaxy Class. That seems pretty sloppy on ILM’s part, but in their defense this sort of cheating in the interest of visual impact has a long history, and not just in Star Trek (e.g. the non-remastered shuttle flying into the Doomsday Machine). Remember how the mothership in CLOSE ENCOUNTERS went from the size of Devil’s Tower to a football field, depending how it was composited in the shot?

Apparently Ryan Church’s initial size estimate for the Enterprise-JJ was around 366 meters, or 1200 feet. That seems reasonable to me, given what we saw in the film.

116. dmduncan - July 2, 2011

115: “Man, we are an obsessive lot, aren’t we? :-)”

Yes. If I was directing any Star Trek movie I would be as obsessive about details like that as Stanley Kubrick. Every visual would have to match blueprinted parameters. That’s just 101 level stuff. Maintaining consistency creates verisimilitude. Every designer would have to conform to the same standards and dimensions, and that would determine the final look of the ship and it’s internals vs. the standard practice of designing it however just to look cool.

One of the things I loved about Serenity was the very long steadicam shot that follows Mal practically throughout his whole ship at the beginning which creates the powerful impression that this thing really exists just the way you see it on screen.

117. dmduncan - July 2, 2011

I’d love to see that in Star Trek. A steadicam shot that follows Kirk making an emergency run all the way to engineering where the path is totally constructed all the way there. One shot. No cuts. What an awesome load of wow that would buy. I’d love it.

118. TrekMadeMeWonder - July 4, 2011

116. dmduncan

Yes. If I was directing any Star Trek movie…

You and me both, dmduncan.

119. Stefan - January 2, 2012

The 2012 Star Trek: Ships of the Line calendar can’t be hanged on the wall, as the calendar is horisontally… :-(

120. lou - January 2, 2012

yeah, what genius changed the drill hole from last year?

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