The Enterprise Restoration Project

Sometimes shots were sped up or slowed down via step printing, so that would account for at least some obervances of different flash rates...

Warm white LEDs are supposed to match incandescent lights already aren't they? The big problem with LEDs is that they blink with an instant on-off, instead of the fade in-out of an incandescent. A control board could be made to provide the fade effect.

Steve Neill has already performed a perfect lighting rig with his 6' scratch build.

John Cooley said:

Steve Neill has already performed a perfect lighting rig with his 6' scratch build.

Click to expand...

His bussard lighting is about the best I've seen. From what I've seen of the light kit for the new 350 it's a big disappointment. About the only thing I'll use out of that kit is the motors. He did make a couple mistakes on the kit though. He put the rear strobe in the wrong place. On the "B" deck, if that's correct, has four windows on the starboard side and two on the port. His part has four on each side. It actually looks more correct with that symmetry. I've finally gotten around to spending a good amount of time on the project.

I would actually prefer to see a restoration that was upgraded. The original wasn't lit on the port side and it would look better if both sides were done. This shouldn't take away from the originality. Otherwise, to make it original, there should be outside wiring on that side. Since it was filmed on only one side the person would imagine both sides the same. Furthermore, since the one episode had the film reversed to simulate both sides lit there should be no objections to lighting both sides.

I would say the one thing to keep in mind with a project like this if (or should I perhaps say "when") it gets to work is to make sure there is an appointed project head who has the final say on certain decisions (or has the authority to appoint a specific job to somebody and not be overruled necessarily). Reason being is although a lot of the people being mentioned as candidates for working on this model are considered the best in their field, they may have widely differing opinions as to what the ship might have looked like on its "final day of shooting" and well intentioned passions could get in the way if one isn't careful. We've got some pretty good research as to what the ship likely looked like late in its effects shooting. But there are always still going to be areas open to debate.

A prime example is that very front top saucer light cover. It looks like it was a light in season one, but by season 2, it appears to pretty much have been covered over and opaqued as you don't see it anymore in top saucer shots. Do you put it back in as a light even though it might not have looked that way by the "final day of shooting"? I can sense a few arguements cropping up over seemingly small items like that very easily. Somebody ultimately has to make the decision and the rest fall in line.

At the same time too, that project lead has to have the steel trousers to resist other things. If a restoration is carried out and does what it sets out to do, 98 to 99% of the fans will be most appreciative. BUT, there is ALWAYS going to be a minority (and a potentially very VOCAL minority on top of that) who is going to not be happy with what was done and they are going to raise a big stink over it, possibly even during restoration work itself if images leak out. Just look at the pages and pages of wasted bandwidth on model forums that were dedicated to the grid/no grid debate regarding the 1/350 PL Enterprise... and THAT was only among modelers. There are A LOT more Trek fans out there who aren't modelers, but who are convinced that "they are right" and have to let others know that they are "wrong".

Anyway, just some thoughts on the matter. Personally, I would LOVE to be involved in this project even though the best I could provide might be to act as historian on the project during the day to day work. But I don't love in DC, NYC or Los Angeles, so the commute times would be a bit long.

Well, while "it's my party, my charter", And Steve will most likely be physical model team leader, with research and documentation by Doug Drexler (with additional input from the Okudas). My feel at this point is that Doug, will determine her appearance (as far as the Smithsonian will allow us to go with their model). In the specific instance you just presented, I would say that we would clean, and restore the "port" or light in question, and then as we continue to restore the ship, cover it up as it was on the last day it was photographed; which I believe was actually mid second season.

John

And to think this spectacular model has been wiped from the current DVD TOS releases and replaced with cg.

It's on the DVDs, but was replaced with,. a digital model for the high definition edition of the series on Bluray. Actually one nice feature of the Bluray release is that you can choose to watch either the altered episodes with new special effects, or if you if you like the original special effects.

It's on the old dvds, not the new remastered ones, where every single model shot has been replaced with cg. I know - I had to send mine back! But at least the option is there on bluray, yes.

JMChladek said:

A prime example is that very front top saucer light cover. It looks like it was a light in season one, but by season 2, it appears to pretty much have been covered over and opaqued as you don't see it anymore in top saucer shots. Do you put it back in as a light even though it might not have looked that way by the "final day of shooting"?

Click to expand...

That controversial flat, round upper porthole was a big surprise to many of us when first "discovered" - I had never seen it on the film footage so naturally I thought that it was originally painted over. The porthole is shown in the Matt Jeffries three-view drawings which appeared circa 1966-1967 (the same drawings which showed the gridlines on top of the saucer only). It's location seems to imply that it was meant to be a third, upper, white "navigation light", complementing the red and green, plus and minus 90 degrees from each of them. Actually, it did not seem to exist on the model until the 3rd major modification. The only thing previously in that area where some line markings. There was a flashing white light nearby, but it extended from the very front edge of the saucer during the 2nd major modification (Pilot Episode).

I have carefully studied the look and location of that porthole from available photographs dated before and after all restorations and I reluctantly conclude that it did originally exist on the model during filming in 1966-1967, but the key point is that it was never lit. Once you memorize its location on the front upper saucer (use the weathering marks as a reference), if you look very, very carefully at a good video image, I swear you can actually see it in some of the footage! Especially when they show the saucer from the top ("The Tholian Web") and in some third season episodes. Granted, it's very, very hard to see - since it is not lit, the clear porthole blends in to the surrounding color like a chameleon, but I would include it in any restoration (as long as it is unlit, and with clear plastic fill). It can be seen in some photos before the model was restored, but it cannot be seen in a photo taken when it was on display at a college campus in the early 70's.

But don't even try looking for it when viewing on YouTube! Watch only a high resolution version, on a good monitor.

I suspect that the porthole was backed with a light color (maybe even silver) before being filled in with plexiglas (or whatever Datin use for the lit portholes) which is why it is so hard to see unlit.

By the way, I did a full about face on this - when I first heard about that forward upper porthole, I thought for sure that it was never on the model when at the studio. But it's amazing what you can find after being alerted visually - images that you've been looking at your whole life, and yet details you never realized were there. And there is also personal bias - I did not like that porthole - I was hoping that it was not there!

Now if we can only figure out what the tiny little red "laser turret" looked like on the lower saucer sensor dome . . . (another relatively new discovery - my first knowledge of it came from the Polar Lights 1/350 kit and instructions)

Has anyone spoken recently to Dr. Weitekamp about any potential restoration plans or any recent concern about the visable deterioration?

Perhaps the Galileo restoration and donation will get a little envy going there in DC.

Perhaps the best way to get the ball rolling is having a senator or congressman make an “inquiry” to NASM –
government employees go into warp drive when a phone call comes from the hill.

I'm in Washington DC, let me know if you need any close air support from here.

Greg Viggiano

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=2886747745203&l=2dbe70c05e

It does sound like Cooley has things well in hand, so let us wait and see what he's got to say when he is ready. Not trying to give this a political slant, but I don't necessarily know if I would want ANYONE from Congress getting involved with this on any level. I've worked with museums before and while a little bit of outside channel influence can work well, too much can just end up in a mess if it isn't applied right.

Interesting revelations about the front saucer light. As for the "laser turret" I did come across images of it on the web from the original model, presumably when it was disassembled for its last restoration. It WAS on the 11 footer. I would provide a link to the images (if I can find it again that is), but I don't know if they are from the original photographer, or even if they are authorized to be online.

New smithsonian article-
http://blog.nasm.si.edu/behind-the-scenes/starship_restoration/

Good article. Thanks.

Tiberius Kirk said:

Good article. Thanks.

Click to expand...

Seconded.

New? That article is dated 2009.

JMChladek said:

It does sound like Cooley has things well in hand, so let us wait and see what he's got to say when he is ready. Not trying to give this a political slant, but I don't necessarily know if I would want ANYONE from Congress getting involved with this on any level. I've worked with museums before and while a little bit of outside channel influence can work well, too much can just end up in a mess if it isn't applied right.

Interesting revelations about the front saucer light. As for the "laser turret" I did come across images of it on the web from the original model, presumably when it was disassembled for its last restoration. It WAS on the 11 footer. I would provide a link to the images (if I can find it again that is), but I don't know if they are from the original photographer, or even if they are authorized to be online.

Click to expand...

Here is the aforementioned lower sensor dome emitter from the original 11 ft. miniature:

Maurice said:

New? That article is dated 2009.

Click to expand...

Weird. It was tweeted by the smithsonian like it was new.

Any updates on this project?