View Single Post
Old October 15 2010, 06:51 PM   #678
jefferiestubes8
Commodore
 
Location: New York City
35mm film preview

A comparison and a "preview" of TNG Remastered

The widening of the TNG footage in ENT: "These Are The Voyages" amounts to nearly 6%. Although it went unnoticed until now, this is a sizable distortion that should be avoided when remastering complete TNG episodes.
http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/in...ent_vs_tng.htm


Also regarding CGI of the ENT-D in TNG:
David Stipes and, at a later time to a lesser degree, Mitch Suskin, Dan Curry and Ronald B. Moore were the foremost advocates of applying CGI, Stipes already overseeing some of its earliest applications, during the sixth season of TNG. Stipes already lobbied in vain for a CGI version of the USS Enterprise-D during that season, "On 'The Chase' we were all over the galaxy -warp here and warp there- and I have basically the one or two jumps to warp that we had in stock. When TNG was started, the first bits of material were shot at ILM and they shot the original jump to warp with slit scan and streak photography. That served us very well for seven years, but it was very difficult to do and expensive. I had been pushing to build a CGI Enterprise, but no one wanted to incur the expense at that point so I lived with the stock shots." (Cinefantastique, Vol. 27, No. 4/5, page 79
#620 The Chase is obviously an episode that would benefit from a CGI ENT-D.

Now this is rather important to know:
Durability of CGI Models
Advances in software and ineptitude at the studios in handling their property (amongst others in the situation described above in Foundation's case), have to this day caused CGI models to be of a far more fleeting nature than physical models. Lebowitz explains:

"When a CGI company is hired to do FX for a production, in theory all the assets they create are property of the studio. A smart studio should probably ask for regular backups of data for a variety of reasons, most important of which would be safety backups and potentially the need to re-create the work elsewhere. However, this rarely happens, most probably because it's just not anyone's assigned job. Who asks for the data? Who checks it? Where do they store it? Who keeps the records? All this would need to be answered and a process implemented and in most cases, either no one has thought it through or wanted to spearhead a new headache. Even if the data was backed up, if someone wanted to load up a spaceship model ten years later, success would be hard to come by. Do they have the right software? Since no two companies ever name their hard drives with the same letters or use the same directory structure, will the new user know where to find the files when their computer tells them, 'can't find G:/spaceship/wingtip/test/nogood/deleteme/finalimages/nosecone.png?' Even if all the ducks are in a row, often times the CG company, knowing full well the data they provide might be used to cut them out of the picture, will purposely not make it easy for the studio. Sure, they'll provide the models as asked, but not the setup/assembly files (hey, setup files are technically NOT the model). All this means is that the more time passes, the less likely it will be to re-create CG scenes. If all the data and the directory structure on a company's hard drive remains untouched, it's fine, but the moment you start to back stuff up and clear it off the server, your chances of success begin to dwindle.
ILM turned over their ship models, made for "Star Trek: First Contact" for use in DS9. For some companies it is then more expedient to newly construct a CGI model from the ground up. "ILM actually released their Enterprise database to us, which was very nice of them. It was very helpful in the beginning, because we had all these animatics to create. However, their Enterprise was a fairly low-resolution model, and while we originally thought, 'Maybe we can just add to this database', that process became more trouble than it was worth, so we had Viewpoint Datalabs come down and actually redigitize the Enterprise using the original miniature.", Santa Barbara Studio's effects supervisor John Grower said in preparation of "Star Trek: Insurrection". (American Cinematographer, January 1999, page 41)
The ENT-D was also rebuilt
However, as supervisor Bruce Branit of Digital Muse explained, referring to DS9: "Sacrifice of Angels"
We brought the digital models in and converted them to LightWave, which is our rendering package of choice. The Enterprise-D had been done before, but in something else, so we were able to bring the geometry in, and bring some of the maps in, but we had to rebuild it. We had all the ingredients, so we could put it together much more quickly than building it from scratch.
http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/database/cgi.htm

Surely any work in ENT by Eden FX showing the Ent-D would be the newest models to use.

Last edited by jefferiestubes8; October 15 2010 at 07:30 PM.
jefferiestubes8 is offline   Reply With Quote