View Single Post
Old December 24 2009, 01:03 PM   #587
Rear Admiral
Re: Star Trek TNG Remastered?

Harvey wrote: View Post
trevanian wrote: View Post
Hober Mallow wrote: View Post
It would still be ridiculous to let the film continue to deteriorate.
There's a common misconception here. Film is THE long-duration storage medium when done properly. Digital storage is a short to medium term solution at best, and requires commuting every few years to avoid degradation, something everybody from Kodak to wholly digital facilities are aware of. Film LASTS.
Film lasts if it is stored in proper conditions. Film studios are notorious for throwing out old film negatives all the time, or leaving them in less than suitable storage conditions. At the moment, the negatives to Star Trek the Next Generation are in good shape, but who knows what will happen to them in the future.
Since the coming of homevid formats that were higher quality than VHS, studios have been taking tender loving care of every element, now that they know they can squeeze buck after buck out of the film.

If Paramount had realized homevid was going to continue to build back in early 1980, do you think they'd've said 'we don't want 'em' to the vfx companies on TMP who asked 'where do you want the film elements we shot?' after the movie came out? (Trumbull's company kept theirs for a couple years, then THREW THEM OUT due to space issues, and probably also because Paramount stupidly didn't rehire them for TWOK.)

film preservation is no longer a niche concern like the environment has usually been; now it is a market issue. That's why they've done these studies on photochem vs digital storage, to know they're spending on a methodology that guarantees a future for their core elements.
trevanian is offline   Reply With Quote