Differences Between 1701 Refit and 1701 A

The Keeper

Active Member
I am wondering what are the major differences between the 2 ships. This is in regards to the Poloar Lights 350th ship, I would like to make a TWOK Battle Damaged version.

Thanks
 
To my knowledge, the only "major" difference is the paint job. If you are modeling the ship in TWOK, it is still the refit as the 1701 A did not appear until the end of Star Trek IV. ILM did tone down the sheen of the original paint job following the original motion picture; but how this was accomplished I am not sure. I have read that it was repainted, but also that it was accomplished using clear matte finish. Someone from ILM might know for sure. :thumbsup
 

Vidar 710

Active Member
The Pearlecent paint job was toned down due to filming issues, but the noticable feature that was repainted was the engineering sections on top of the secondary hull and around the main deflector dish. 1701 had Engineering Green paneling where 1701-A had a new Blue-Gray paneling with a different pattern. This also includes the panels running up the nacel struts and the dorsal/neck. There was also a Blue-Gray color added to both the leading and trailing edge of the dorsal/neck.

This re-painting was done to fix the damage on the studio model used in Wrath of Khan.

Round 2 has decals available for both versions, and you can buy products from fans like AcreationModels, PNT Models, Federation Models, JT Graphics, and so on.

Tracy
 

The Keeper

Active Member
Awesome info guys, thanks!

So we are concluding that the only difference is paint schemes? If so that is awesome!

Thanks again!
 

GeorgeC

Well-Known Member
Same hero model (8-footer) was used for all the TOS films... The huge differences were between the pre-ILM era (Star Trek I) and POST-ILM (Star Trek II and beyond).

The different camera process ILM used was why the paint job was dulled in the first place. They did one fewer camera pass on the model than Doug Trumbull's company did in Star Trek I and I think they also encountered lighting issues with the original paint job, too. Funny how Trumbull's company didn't seem to have all the issues that ILM did. It's arguable also that the Enterprise never looked as good after ST:TMP. I certainly saw some differences in the lighting set-up and cinematography. It never had that copper/pewter look it did in some of the stills and footage from ST:TMP nor was the ship's lighting the same. I also noticed from STII onward (in new footage, not reused ST:TMP stock) that the main deflector was always blue from then on. There were moments in ST:TMP when the ship was "powered down" that the main deflector dish had an amber glow.

I think half of ILM's problems with the ST:TMP model was the fact that it wasn't "their model." They were using a hand-me down from another company and it was, of course, not built "to their standards!" :rolleyes
 

robn1

Master Member
...The different camera process ILM used was why the paint job was dulled in the first place. They did one fewer camera pass on the model than Doug Trumbull's company did in Star Trek I and I think they also encountered lighting issues with the original paint job, too. Funny how Trumbull's company didn't seem to have all the issues that ILM did...I think half of ILM's problems with the ST:TMP model was the fact that it wasn't "their model." They were using a hand-me down from another company and it was, of course, not built "to their standards!" :rolleyes
The difference is that Trumbull used a front light/back light two pass matting technique, and ILM used blue screen. The reflective paint scheme wasn't a problem for Trumbull's method, but caused blue spill for ILM. Instead of changing their matting technique, they dulled down the paint finish.
 

JoslinFX

Member
Another major diference worth noting: It took model painter Paul Olsen over 6 months to paint the original refit miniature Enterprise for ST TMP, noted as one of most complex multi layered [layer1 Violet, L2 Gold, L3 Red, L4Blue, L5 Silver] irridecent pearl paint job ever commited to a movie miniature, 2hrs to anhilate that with a translucent milk matt spray for ST TWOK, and 2 weeks for ILM to repaint it for ST IV Voyage Home.

The diferences are blatent, and the diferences speak for themselves.

The only thing that really anoiys me, other than my spelling, is why everyone always refers to the kirks movie enterprise as Enterprise -A. Isnt that an insult to orginal model, orginal ship Premis, and the 5 years voyage.

when i got my polar lights 1/350 enterprise, i made sure it had no frigin A,
 
Last edited:

phase pistol

Master Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
The original concept in TMP was that the Refit Enterprise was "self illluminating"... in deep space far from any sun, there would be no key light, so the ship would have lights shining on itself in order to be visible against the deep black of interstellar space







new footage shot for Wrath of Khan is far less dramatic. The seashell-like irridiscence of the paint is gone, and the ship is more brightly lit overall so you can always see the shape



By the time of Star Trek VI the self-lighting concept is nearly completely gone, and the miniature is lit all-over almost like back in the TV series!



for comparison, typical footage of the original 11-foot miniature, from "Immunity Syndrome"
 
Last edited:

Treadwell

Master Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
ILM used matte spray but I'm not sure it was milky.
The big change happened between IV and V, when this piece of crap was being produced for an attraction at Universal.

A couple of new shots of the Enterprise was needed, so Paramount shipped the model to the video production folks doing the attraction, and they had their own problems chroma-keying the model against bluescreen (in the video realm, mind you!).

So they PAINTED AN ENTIRE SIDE MATTE WHITE.

That is when the original paintjob was truly eradicated. On one side, anyway. Ferrin and Associates had not anticipated the model being in this state when it was sent to them for ST V, and it was an unwelcome waste of time and money repainting it.

To what extent ILM re-re-painted it for VI I don't recall reading much about.


As for the different technique used by Trumbull, one can still see the effects of blue spill on at least one shot in TMP. In drydock, the edge of the saucer is fizzled away.
 

phase pistol

Master Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
They wrecked the original miniature of the Refit for THAT abomination?! :angry







I mean, show biz and all, but dayum. :darnkids

They could have used the AMT model kit for cryin out loud.



That kit was good enough to be filmed for effects shots in STAR TREK III. :unsure

k
 

Commander Max

Sr Member
I can't believe I waited in line to be in that show.
I got into the bridge crew, I sat opposite the helmsman.

It was goofy fun, whenever they did the camera side move(when the ship was hit) I went the opposite way of everybody else. I wish I still had that recording, the tape degraded.
 

ILMwannabe

Active Member
. . . and now that 8 foot model is in private hands, we may never see it again. (Has anyone seen recent pictures of Red Leader's X-Wing or Gold Leader's Y-Wing lately?)

What a shame. I like all Science Fiction and it's hard to pick favorites. But I've always thought that the refit Enterprise, as built for STTMP, was one of the most detailed, cleanest and best studio models ever built.

It was only one model, yet completely finished and carefully designed to be filmed from almost all angles (unlike the 11-footer), with multiple mounting points, and extremely sophisticated electronics.

Not only did it have a myriad lights, but unlike may other models, it had many different types of lighting, including a strobe light (this was in late 1979 before "white" LED's were available to simulate Xenon Flash Tubes)

I had the privlege of viewing it several times when it traveled in shows, and to study it in pictures, and even in extreme close-ups the detail used to hold up really, really well.

I think the people who designed, built, and painted the Star Trek refit Enterprise for STTMP deserve an award for "Best Studio Model" to date.

Yes, what a terrible shame that the paint job was trashed several times.

It looked good in all the movies but it never looked bigger than it did in the footage shot for the first Star Trek movie - hats off to Douglas Trumbull!
 
Last edited:

PHArchivist

Master Member
Are we absolutely positive they DIDN'T use the off the shelf model?

We all know that kit all too well, and in those effects shots the ship looks a LOT like the kit.

They wrecked the original miniature of the Refit for THAT abomination?! :angry







I mean, show biz and all, but dayum. :darnkids

They could have used the AMT model kit for cryin out loud.



That kit was good enough to be filmed for effects shots in STAR TREK III. :unsure

k
 
Top