Star Trek TNG Remastered?

[Hober Mallow]

If Paramount can find a way to do entire seasons, they'll sell entire seasons. It's just finding a way to make it practical and cost effective. They're not going to want to do all the post-production for the entire series all over again from the start the conventional way.

[LitmusDragon]

I think for any kind of hi-def treatment they are going to need to source from the original film negatives. It doesn't seem like editing the original film elements back together should be all that difficult. It's the fact that they'd have to replace every single transporter and phaser effect that would make this really time consuming. TOS at least could use the existing transporter and phaser effects and save their budget for the background and space exteriors. All this stuff on TNG was done on video tape.

[Mr. Laser Beam]

LitmusDragon wrote:

---

It's the fact that they'd have to replace every single transporter and phaser effect that would make this really time consuming.

Really? I didn't know they'd have to go that far.

That being said: This is their chance to make phaser effects that make sense. As we all know, when we saw a phaser fired on that show, the beam actually took a visible amount of time to reach its target. This should not happen. These are beams of light, after all. They should be instant. The only time I ever remember this actually being done right, was in Voyager's "Future's End" when somebody fires a 29th century phaser. It *immediately* took out its target. The beam appeared between the phaser and the target without any sense of taking any time to reach it. It was near instantaneous. As all phaser beams should be.

[trevanian]

Nebusj
Rear Admiral
Quote:
Also, look at how the show was having to go into reruns every 7 or 8 weeks, because they were so far behind. That is with not having the TOS optical backload situation, so the show could have easily been in an ever-increasing hole (like taking 2 years to get 25 episodes out) if they had been doing it all in a traditional finish process.
But that also reflects changes in how TV schedules worked. In the 1960s and 70s, you had TV shows run, basically, a new episode every week for 26 (or even more) weeks in a row, then go into the rerun (or preemption) cycle. By the 1980s, the rising importance of sweeps months meant there was motivation to put in reruns on weeks nobody was watching (like, between Christmas and New Year's) and save brand-new episodes for February and, particularly, May. It wasn't just Next Generation going into reruns for a month at a time; it was everything.

ME:
I don't recall ANY other show (except MOONLIGHTING, which missed most of its airdates) going on that cycle till the 90s.

If you start in late September, throw up reruns in the holiday weeks and figure maybe one or two pre-emptions, then you still have new programming into the first part of May if you're doing 22 (later if you do 26, which was getting less common in network, but was common for syndication at that point I think.)

[trevanian]

Babaganoosh wrote:

---

That being said: This is their chance to make phaser effects that make sense. As we all know, when we saw a phaser fired on that show, the beam actually took a visible amount of time to reach its target. This should not happen. These are beams of light, after all. They should be instant. The only time I ever remember this actually being done right, was in Voyager's "Future's End" when somebody fires a 29th century phaser. It *immediately* took out its target. The beam appeared between the phaser and the target without any sense of taking any time to reach it. It was near instantaneous. As all phaser beams should be.

That's making a science-minded assumption about the beam, which is a pretty big leap considering how unscientific trek is becoming (especially recently.)

By way of comparison, I remember getting in an argument with somebody about the guys in SW being able to block laser beams with a light saber, saying it doesn't matter how force-ful his parrying is, he doesn't move at lightspeed. The counterargument (the main one, there were many, including the notion that Luke can use the force to see into the future to know where to stick his sword) was that the beams weren't traveling at lightspeed. HUH? They're BEAMS! They canna travel any slower.

If that's the level of science that informs most SW, and by extension, most current TREK, then the beams will probably be able to bend around corners by the next sequel.

The slow beams DO bother me as well (esp in CONSPIRACY), but there are so many other things that seem like bigger deals (the many early TNG planets that look like out of focus blobs, the no-blur of ship movement in many early shows, esp with the 2 fter model), that the phaser speed seems miniscule by comparison. If I had a huge caveat, it would be the fireballs in space that showed up from FARPOINT onward. Fireballs in space just don't track, that is serious SW territory (and another example of how moderntrek is getting the science worse ... for the director's edition of TMP they added a fireball to the rock blowing up at the end of the wormhole.)

[Mr. Laser Beam]

trevanian wrote:

---

By way of comparison, I remember getting in an argument with somebody about the guys in SW being able to block laser beams with a light saber, saying it doesn't matter how force-ful his parrying is, he doesn't move at lightspeed.

Ah, but he doesn't need to. All a Jedi has to do is *put his lightsaber in front of where the beam would be*. That doesn't require moving at lightspeed. The beam is going to get from whoever's firing, to the Jedi, regardless. All that matters is having something *blocking* said Jedi from being hit.

[nickfrye]

did you know that start trek is on bluray?

gives us a chance especially young ones to watch over the original film..

you can have star trek from its hit series to the original movies..

[FalTorPan]

Babaganoosh wrote:

---

Ah, but he doesn't need to. All a Jedi has to do is *put his lightsaber in front of where the beam would be*. That doesn't require moving at lightspeed. The beam is going to get from whoever's firing, to the Jedi, regardless. All that matters is having something *blocking* said Jedi from being hit.

You're right. The Jedi doesn't have to move at lightspeed to parry a laser bolt. Let's estimate how fast he would need to be.

Assume the shooter and the Jedi were standing ten feet apart. Light travels at exactly 299,792,458 meters per second. Ten feet is exactly 3.048 meters, which means that the laser bolt would travel from the blaster barrel to the Jedi's location in approximately 0.0000000102 seconds.

Assume the Jedi has to move his lightsaber a mere three feet in order to parry the laser bolt. Three feet is exactly 0.9144 meters, and the Jedi has an entire 0.0000000102 seconds to move the lightsaber. 0.9144 meters per 0.0000000102 seconds is about 89,600,000 meters per second, or only about 0.3 times the speed of light.

In summary, the Jedi would have time to take a nap and play a game of sabacc before moving the lightsaber.

[trevanian]

Babaganoosh wrote:

---

Ah, but he doesn't need to. All a Jedi has to do is *put his lightsaber in front of where the beam would be*. That doesn't require moving at lightspeed. The beam is going to get from whoever's firing, to the Jedi, regardless. All that matters is having something *blocking* said Jedi from being hit.

Maybe I'm just being extraordinarily dense or not getting the joke (if you're making one), but in those movies, especially the parts of the prequels I've seen, they are blocking multiple shots in rapid succession. ANY variation in how the shooter fires -- a flinch, a jostling, a nervous wiggle of the gunhand -- will result in a slightly different shot, and a resulting different position hit on the soon to be victim, necessitating a move on the part of the soon to be victim to head off that next beam hit.

I also don't understand how in the prequels they can jump out of air cars and free fall onto other cars successfully, but I'm hoping the explanation for that isn't as headache inducing as this one seems to be. On second thought, I bet it is, so I just don't want to know (or see those level of rationalizations in what is in theory a trek thread.)

Sorry for the detour.

[Tomalak]

trevanian wrote:

---

If I had a huge caveat, it would be the fireballs in space that showed up from FARPOINT onward. Fireballs in space just don't track, that is serious SW territory

But it wasn't a "fireball", it was Q. He can do whatever he likes.

[trevanian]

Tomalak wrote:

---

But it wasn't a "fireball", it was Q. He can do whatever he likes.

I'm talking about the Enterprise torpedoes detonating, not anything Q is doing.

[jefferiestubes8]

Hober Mallow wrote:

---

They're not going to want to do all the post-production for the entire series all over again from the start the conventional way.

Hober Mallow CBS DVD/Paramount Home Entertainment may not want to spend the money to re-conform the show to HD and that IS what it is called 'reconforming to HD'. They would be reconforming the original film to the standard definition edit, and re-rendering the visual effects in HD.
Please see these two posts for details on the actual work needed.
http://www.trekbbs.com/showpost.php?...5&postcount=27
http://www.trekbbs.com/showpost.php?...6&postcount=28
The edit decisions have already been made starting in 1987. Whether they can access the edit decisions that correspond to the actual film negative is another matter (film keycode#s to pull negative to re-telecine original camera negative 'select takes' in to use for HD editing). Without an EDL [Edit Decision List] and film keycode every cut would have to be matched by eye which is a lot of work and NOT conventional.

When it comes to the visual effects and the live-action model work of Enterprise D most likely they would go with all CGI. see this post for why.

[Squiggy]

Wasn't TNG recently re-released to broadcast syndication?

[jefferiestubes8]

Squiggyfm wrote:

---

Wasn't TNG recently re-released to broadcast syndication?

"Although TNG is currently in reruns on cable, it has not been available for broadcast syndication in eight years.

...most of the country [USA] for the Fall 2009 season"

TNG Headed Back To Broadcast Syndication
January 27, 2009
http://trekmovie.com/2009/01/27/tng-...t-syndication/

http://www.hometheaterforum.com/htf/...ndication.html

[Falcor5]

I wonder if it would be easier for Paramount to justify the costs to convert TNG to HD if they got a channel like the Sci-Fi network or Spike to agree to air the episodes in HD as they were made. I mean I think that would be a pretty good draw if a channel had Exclusive rights to the first showing of a TNG episode in HD. And then after each season is aired they could release that season on Blu-ray. I know I would watch!!