quote:Originally posted by Wes: And for everyone complaining -- here is a novel idea, just keep the non-remastered DVDs! They are better quality than the original airing and paramount isn't making out give them back. There yours forever. No one is 'ruining' anything.
Actually...I was planning on doing that around Christmas, if I have time. I'm making my list and checking it twice- gonna find out who's got non-updated TOS Trek and take their shit.
No, it doesnt ryme. Call it a sign of the times.
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
I'm actually glad they're gonna recomposite rather than CGI it all, because if they CGI'ed it all they'd probably do it in-house like they did with TOS.
Sure, some of that worked out well, but some of it also sucked, looking much too cartoonish for what was supposed to be the promise of CGI glory. Like literally, some of the Clone Wars CGI show (that's actually intended to be a cartoony CGI show) looks better in some comparison shots.
I imagine most of us remember the far more awesome test reels from Daren Dochterman or whatever that company name is that starts with an I that was trying to get the gig.
So if they can recomposite rather than do cheap CGI, I'm all for it.
-------------------- . . . ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.
posted
I wonder what'll happen when they come to episodes that had CG aliens, such as the Crystaline Entity or the Galaxy's Child aliens (I think the latter were CG, but if not, there must be other examples). I suppose those will have to be recreated from scratch if they're to match the rest of the crisp film images. Come to think of it, Encounter at Farpoint has Q's wall of CG tictacs, though that shouldn't be too much hassle to recreate.
I'm glad they're using the original footage, though. It's a pity we won't see the Enterprise rendevous with the USS Previously Unseen Ship, or whatever, but it should still reveal some interesting details and look less jarring than cheap CG would. And the use of so much existing footage means that when they do need to create new effects they'll have the time to do them properly.
posted
I'm pretty sure that they will recretaed the CGI scenes in order to match the quality of the rest of the series. There were only few occassions throughout the series where CGI was used (I remember the use of hologramms in two episodes of the first season).
But on the other hand I wonder what they will do with the matte paintings? I don't have any idea if they will live up when it comes to picture quality. To be honest, I didn't liked most of the matte paintings they used. Maybe this is a good opportunity to replace them, as they did for TOS. And speaking of matte paintings, are the planets (outer space) not also matte paintings?
Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
Meh, I don't care. I completely lost interest once I found out that the space/model fx shots weren't going to change. I mean, the last thing I want to see in Star Trek: The Next Generation-HD is Star Trek: The Next Generation.
-------------------- "A film made in 2008 isn't going to look like a TV series from 1966 if it wants to make any money. As long as the characters act the same way, and the spirit of the story remains the same then it's "real" Star Trek. Everything else is window dressing." -StCoop
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
Indeed, I haven't been this uninterested in Star Trek merchandise since the pizza cutter shaped like the USS Enterprise.
Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
posted
Still don't understand why someone would want to watch a show from the 80s (let alone the 60s!!) with 2011 CGI all over the place. It just wouldn't match. You'd be constantly aware that it's switching back and forth between the production values of very different eras. I would find it very, very distracting.
Of course, it also seems sensible to ask: why does anyone need to see a show that was at all phases of its production intended to be exhibited at 480i in anything other than 480i? To me it's along the same lines as "why does anyone need to see It's A Wonderful Life in color?"
-------------------- The flaws we find most objectionable in others are often those we recognize in ourselves.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
Having watched several episodes of TOS-R on regular television broadcast, I didn't find the interposing of CGI and original footage to be that jarring. It may be different on Blu-ray... :shrug:
-------------------- I haul cardboard and cardboard accessories
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
My fiancee and I are currently watching TOS-R on Netflix, on a beautiful 47" HDTV, and it isn't distracting to either one of us. As a matter of fact, she doesn't even know that TOS had been given updated effects for HD. She's never made any comment that something looks funny or different. And no, she's not an idiot.
And as for TNG, I'd much rather see new CGI instead of recycled stock footage of Spacedock, Regula One, K't'ingas, Birds-of-Prey, and the five million outdated Excelsiors.
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
I rather would like to see a complete new TV series with CGI instaed of an old one with updated special effects.
Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
All of this is really geared to prologing the franchise. Every Trek TV series before ENT / TOS-R is not up to any sort of HD standard. Paramount wants to be able to make money on DVDs as well as syndication, and to have HD material to do it.
Within our lifetimes, we'll have ONLY hi-def signals transmitted on our hi-def screens through digital means. That means that reruns of Golden Girls, Babylon 5, and Knight Rider will forever ONLY be viewable as fuzzy, blurred images. Paramount is ensuring that Trek will be watchable to new and old audiences for years to come, ensuring what they hope will be a small but worthwhile income stream while maintaining material that will in turn help new additions to the franchise. TNG is historically the best-rated of the Trek shows for its context, and it's the natural choice after TOS to preserve. I don't think Voyager or DS9 will get the same treatment for some time, and probably not untilt he cost for redoing everything comes down significantly.
Still, I'm sure whoever pitched TNG-R made a similar value proposition and the execs bit into it. It's money over enjoyment, though ten years from now I'd be very happy to enjoy Encounter At Farpoint in 1080p on a crappy old HDTV and NOT have to complain about the lousy effects and blurry picture.
quote:Originally posted by o2: I rather would like to see a complete new TV series with CGI instaed of an old one with updated special effects.
So would I, but that's not going to happen. So I was content to rewatch TNG-R with its updated VFX of new ships, but that's not going to happen either, so I lost interest.
-------------------- "A film made in 2008 isn't going to look like a TV series from 1966 if it wants to make any money. As long as the characters act the same way, and the spirit of the story remains the same then it's "real" Star Trek. Everything else is window dressing." -StCoop
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
In some time there will be a new series, we have to be patient. In the meantime, I will enjoy TNG in the best possible picture quality.
One reason why I was no friend of B5 is the poor quality of the special effects. If they bring this series to HD I think it makes sense to update the special effects as well. But I'm afraid that the relativly small B5 fan base will not justify for such an endeavour.
Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
^It's not just the size of B5's fanbase that preventing them from upgrading to HD. It's the sheer volume of shots that'd have to be recreated. B5 seriously pushed the envelope in CG effects, not just the limits of what the technology could do at the time but the number of new shots each show could deliver...by several orders of magnitude. While B5 was churning out HUNDREDS of shots a season, TNG was lucky if it got half a dozen new effect shots a year and, I might add, done for twice the budget B5 had.
Then there's the matter of aspect ratio. While all the live action was shot in widescreen, some behind the scenes penny pinching on the part of a certain executive producer (not JMS) meant that the FI folks could only render the effects shots in 4:3. While they did have the foresight to compose shots so they could be cropped for widescreen, this rather drastically lowers the quality and of course any live action composite shot it looks even worse because you're looking a widescreen footage that has been cropped to 4:3, transferred to video then cropped down again for widescreen. To illustrate, this is what happens every time there's a visual effect (like any time a PPG is fired.)
It's basically like pushing the zoom button on you DVD player...only at VHS quality.
On top of that they'd basically be starting from scratch in terms of assets. WB went and lost not only the meshes, but all the damn scenes files too. That means that they can't just build new high-res meshes, load them into the old animation setups and hit 'render.' It'd be a square one remake.
All that plus some very odd internal business politics between the various division of WB are the real reason why we won't be seeing B5 on Bluray any time soon. A shame really because all the actual live action footage was shot on film and would have upscaled nicely.
As for Trek...I think as fans we were lucky to get two shows out of it, never mind *FIVE* of the sodding things. I'm not in any hurry to see another. I have my DS9 DVDs, so I'm happy.
Printer-friendly view of this topic