posted
So you would rather have had CBS devote years on end and crazy amounts of money to remaster a 20-year-old show instead of them spending that money to produce a new show?
-------------------- "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
For clarification, CBS doesn't currently have an ad-free tier, but the CEO said they're considering that option.
I don't begrudge CBS putting it on their streaming service. I think streaming is the future of entertainment programming. We're right on track for TNG's prediction that television would die out by 2037! (Referring to television in its broadcast/cable format, not the video format.) But it's frustrating to have to pay for an entire service when you only want to watch one show. (Well, maybe two; I'd watch Colbert.)
-------------------- “Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.” — Isaac Asimov Star Trek Minutiae | Memory Alpha
Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Dukhat: So you would rather have had CBS devote years on end and crazy amounts of money to remaster a 20-year-old show instead of them spending that money to produce a new show?
I would love to see DS9 in HD on blu ray - simply because its a great (Star Trek) show and the HD-transfer for TNG was marvelous. Therfore I would expect nothing less for DS9 (in regards of the HD-transfer).
Is the age really an issue here? I don't think so. And simply the fact that we will get a new show does not mean that we will get a good show (though nothing is set to stone, yet, and of course I'm hoping for the best - fingers crossed).
Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by o2: I would love to see DS9 in HD on blu ray - simply because its a great (Star Trek) show and the HD-transfer for TNG was marvelous. Therfore I would expect nothing less for DS9 (in regards of the HD-transfer).
Then apparently you're unaware of some things. It was extremely costly of CBS to remaster TOS and TNG, especially since the returns (i.e. us buying the blurays) did not meet their expectations. Then add to that the added expense of redoing EVERY SINGLE CGI effect in DS9 (which had wayyyyy more CGI than TNG did.) It's not simply a matter of upconverting like what was done with TNG. That's also why Babylon 5 will never be in HD. The amount of money (not to mention time) needed to remaster DS9 and Voyager would be so cost-prohibitive as to be absurd.
Enjoy DS9 on DVD and Netflix. I agree that it's a great show, but that's all you're going to get out of it. I myself prefer CBS to spend their money on Star Trek 2017.
-------------------- "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
quote:Originally posted by Dukhat: [QUOTE]Then apparently you're unaware of some things.
On which ground do you make this assumption? In the above post we have talked about what we would like to see: DS9 or Series 6. I uttered my wish for seeing rather DS9 in HD instead of a new series. That is my opiniom, and there is nothing wrong with ist. I totally respect you wish for a new series.
The question if it is realistic that we see DS9 in HD soon or ever is on a different level. I can ensure you that I'm aware of the unfavorable busines case at this time due to a) high project costs for named reasons and b) less potential viewers/buyers for such a show.
quote:It's not simply a matter of upconverting like what was done with TNG..
To my knowledge TNG was not upconverted from a 480p/576p source to HD like it was done e.g for Farscape. The original 35mm film was scanned in HD resultion, which means that the original source resultion was indeed downconverted (assuming that 35mm is comparable to a 4k resultion). In some cases shots were completely re-created from scratch with CGI.
Now let's look ahead for what the future might bring...
Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by o2: On which ground do you make this assumption? In the above post we have talked about what we would like to see: DS9 or Series 6. I uttered my wish for seeing rather DS9 in HD instead of a new series. That is my opinion, and there is nothing wrong with it. I totally respect you wish for a new series.
The grounds for the assumption was your statement that "you would expect nothing less for DS9 (in regards of the HD-transfer)," as if you thought remastering DS9 would be super easy. I was making it clear that remastering DS9 would be absolutely nothing like remastering TNG, for the reasons I gave.
I said nothing in deference to your opinion that you'd personally rather have DS9 remastered than get a new series. If that's your opinion, fine. I simply questioned why CBS would ever do such a thing considering both the costs involved and consumer apathy toward such a thing.
quote:To my knowledge TNG was not upconverted from a 480p/576p source to HD like it was done e.g for Farscape. The original 35mm film was scanned in HD resultion, which means that the original source resultion was indeed downconverted (assuming that 35mm is comparable to a 4k resultion). In some cases shots were completely re-created from scratch with CGI.
My point wasn't how they did it. My point was that there were very little actual changes needed for any scenes, unlike, say, TOS in which every ship, planet and background shot needed to be replaced. TNG-R had extremely few instances where something needed to be replaced with CGI. For DS9 however, (especially in the later seasons when CGI work was predominant in almost every episode), remastering would be a nightmare.
-------------------- "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
quote:Originally posted by Dukhat: The grounds for the assumption was your statement that "you would expect nothing less for DS9 (in regards of the HD-transfer)," as if you thought remastering DS9 would be super easy.
No, this statement was only regarding the picture quality of the transfer to HD for DS9: If they can do it for TNG and for TOS, the result for DS9 should be on the same high level. Watching TNG in HD was such a great experience for me, almost like watching it for the first time (of course I have seen all episodes before in SD).
Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
I'd looove to see DS9 in HD- just watching it on my big flatscreen was a great experience! I think I watched all the battles on "step"- one frame at a time in slow-motion.
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
Then again, this article also mentions that there is no new series on the horizon and is a bit out of date (March 2015), so anything can happen if CBS thinks they can make a buck off it.
Registered: Sep 2013
| IP: Logged
posted
That's the thing: It's more likely that CBS will lose money if they remaster DS9. Unless of course, they just upconvert it to make the VFX CGI even more horrible-looking, and then balk when customers return the blurays because their DVDs look better.
-------------------- "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
I always found getting any Star Trek series on video an expensive proposition. I recall the DVDs for whole seasons always being ridiculously priced before being discounted sharply. I mean TNG Remastered had more to it than the DVDs, but it was still way too pricey. Then I saw the steep price drops on Amazon once again. In addition, I found the quality of the remastering to go down. Season 2 had a lot of quality control issues, and the effects shots of later seasons seemed too dark to appreciate the details of the Enterprise and other ships. That pretty much put me off the whole thing.
Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
