Star Trek TNG Remastered?

[jefferiestubes8]

Mr. B wrote:

---

I would get a jump on future technology and do everything in 4K. The scanning process would be more time consuming and storage intensive but a larger, downsampled source would look better on blu-ray and you would have the source material on hand for future re-release down the road when 4K cinema resolution is common in the home.

TNG was created for a 525-line interlaced resolution master. All departments knew the limits of the resolution at the time of production and could hide visual problems due to this.
TOS was retelecined to HD at 1080/24p . TNG episodes are NOT going to be telecined at 4K. Only A-list feature films are given the 4K full treatment since 2004's Spiderman 2 which was the first all-4K pipeline Hollywood feature release. Scanning a TV series at 4K and downsampling to 2K for a Blu-ray release is really not worth the additional cost for a 22-year old TV show. It is not going to be projected on a 80-foot screen for 99 percent of the audience to see additional detail. I find it highly unlikely that 1960s-2005 Star Trek TV series would be sold higher than 1080 resolution in any future consumer video format.
If a new TV series in 2012 were shot on a 4K digital camera that is a different story for future releases of TV series. At that resolution it gets very difficult to hide makeup edges of appliances/layers for live-action aliens.


Hober Mallow wrote:

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.

This is key. I think they will dip their toe in the water to test customer response not with Season 1 (which was a weak season in terms of fan favorites, plots, visual effects) as Trek fans most likely would not want to double dip (DVD/Blu-ray) on a remastered season 1 TNG as their first remastered TNG series Blu-ray. Sure it would look MUCH better than season 7 visually but as far as Paramount/CBS marketing a season 1 Blu-ray of TNG it is a harder sell than a fan collective of TNG.

[Mr. B]

jefferiestubes8 wrote:

---

TNG episodes are NOT going to be telecined at 4K. Only A-list feature films are given the 4K full treatment since 2004's Spiderman 2 which was the first all-4K pipeline Hollywood feature release.

I know it's little more than a pipe dream, especially since they only bothered to scan the new Star Trek film at 2K for the IMAX digital intermediate.

It would be pretty awesome if a studio was that forward thinking. They would get a sharper blu-ray now and have source material for a future format release. Of course it will probably be 20 years before there is significant market penetration of 4K home video or something similar.

[Jefferies]

jefferiestubes8 wrote:

---

TNG was created for a 525-line interlaced resolution master. All departments knew the limits of the resolution at the time of production and could hide visual problems due to this.
TOS was retelecined to HD at 1080/24p . TNG episodes are NOT going to be telecined at 4K. Only A-list feature films are given the 4K full treatment since 2004's Spiderman 2 which was the first all-4K pipeline Hollywood feature release. Scanning a TV series at 4K and downsampling to 2K for a Blu-ray release is really not worth the additional cost for a 22-year old TV show. It is not going to be projected on a 80-foot screen for 99 percent of the audience to see additional detail. I find it highly unlikely that 1960s-2005 Star Trek TV series would be sold higher than 1080 resolution in any future consumer video format.
If a new TV series in 2012 were shot on a 4K digital camera that is a different story for future releases of TV series. At that resolution it gets very difficult to hide makeup edges of appliances/layers for live-action aliens.

But the resolutions of screens increase all the time. Smaller screens today have much larger resolutions than bigger ones just a few years ago. Also I could quite easily see projectors and larger screens for home media systems becoming fashonable once they get cheap enough. So I guess there is quite a bit of potential for a home market beyond 1080p. It most certainly wont stop there. Technology will continue to improve. In 10 years people will look down on that format as we to today on DVD, which 10 years ago everybody was dazzeld by.

[Warped9]

Jiraiya wrote:

---

While the FX technology was lightyears ahead of the shoestring-budget FX seen in the original TOS 2 decades before, the FX technology seen in the first few seasons of TNG were kind of klunky when compared to even the remastered TOS FX.

TOS f/x budget was not shoestring. The real problems were the resources available at the time. What TOS needed was a feature film's budget and resources and even then there were limits with what could be done.

[Captrek]

Warped9 wrote:

---

STAR TREK: 1964-1979

I’m not sure what that’s supposed to mean. Are you saying that TMP “killed” Trek, or that it was the last work that deserves to be considered part of Trek?

Lets get back to space adventure, strange new worlds and the final frontier... Contemporary Trek has failed.

It’s worth noting that besides #1, there’s one other movie that really took that approach: #5. (For purposes of this discussion, let’s agree that 1986 San Francisco is not a strange new world.) Both #1 and #5 are utterly despised by most fans.

[Warped9]

^^ All the sig really means is that after '79 I stopped liking Trek on a consistent basis. The franchise gradually changed/evolved into something different. Some of it I liked and much of it I didn't. There are parts of the movies I liked and many parts I didn't. There are TNG and early DS9 episodes I liked and much more I didn't. Goes without saying I didn't like anything about VOY, ENT, the TNG era films or the recent Trek XI. If you really want to get picky there were even some parts of TOS and TAS I wish had been done differently, but such is life.

Presently I'm catching some TNG and DS9 episodes being rerun on SPACE here in Canada after I get off work. Some is a little better than I remember and some not.

[trevanian]

captrek wrote:

---

Both #1 and #5 are utterly despised by most fans.

So to you, is this some kind of contest? I don't base my preferences on other people's opinions, d'you?

1,2,&5 are the only films I really like and rewatch endlessly, in spite of their flaws (and each has tons wrong with them, though for me, not nearly as many flaws as the Nimoy-directed features.)

[jefferiestubes8]

trevanian wrote:

---

So to you, is this some kind of contest?

There is another thread you can contribute to on that.
Rating all the films....
http://www.trekbbs.com/showthread.php?t=93138

Gentlemen, captrek wrote about Warped9's signature.
My settings have Visible Post Elements Signatures hidden. You may wish to also use this option under Thread Display Options.
If you are not contributing to this thread's topic then take it to PM.

[Butters]

J Archer wrote:

---

For the love of god, NO!

Well I'm glad your type of reasoning didn't prevail when fire and the wheel made their debuts.

Captain Euphoria wrote:

---

How about just leave it alone as is? TNG was presented in standard definition video. That's how it's SUPPOSED to look. That's how it DOES look. Why not just release full seasons on single Blu-Ray discs and let the Blu-Ray players do the upconverting? I know it's not the same as full HD (believe me, I'm a stickler for this) but that's how the show looks. That's how I remember it looking. Why re-do it? Would you want to re-do the special effects for 2001 simply because you can? What about the old Muppet Show? That was recorded and edited on video tape and it looks exactly like it should -- like it was MADE. Why spend the money?

Its not supposed to look like that, it just does, for now. The very best thing about TNGr is that it would have to go through post production again in its entirity. Every special effect devised from scratch. New angles, different timings, different emphasis, different score. Each episode really could feel brand new. Some errors and inconsistencies could be removed. Greater detail on the outside of the side, no more repetitive stock footage. Every missed opportunity could be taken. Why the objection? Why the fear?

Yes, I would re-do the shots of 2001 because some of them were shit. The inside of the space station for example. Part excellent, part odd set. I would augment the original piece with extended interiors and 'realistic' windows. If I was feeling flush I'd also edit out the habitat furniture too and replace it with Ikea.

Spending money is a key component of making money. Re-editing and upgrading TNG would be expensive, but it would only involve the post production element. No scripting, directing, filming, acting, set building, production crew etc to pay for. Just the raw film ready for the editor. I'd watch it. Might even buy it if they did to my flavour.

But as time goes on, and the diehard fans actually croak, the powers that be will have to decide between a Remastering or a wake, but as it stands, inlight of the new stuff coming along, TNG looks about as interesting as a big box marked 'Empty'. Personally, I'd love to watch it all again, as if it were new, not knowing everyline, every scene and musical note. A scene for scene remake would be boring and a wasted opportunity.

[FalTorPan]

Butters wrote:

---

Spending money is a key component of making money. Re-editing and upgrading TNG would be expensive, but it would only involve the post production element. No scripting, directing, filming, acting, set building, production crew etc to pay for. Just the raw film ready for the editor. I'd watch it. Might even buy it if they did to my flavour.

Spending money is only "a key component of making money" if the money that is later received represents a reasonable profit margin over what is spent. Completely overhauling 180 episodes of a television series is not likely to yield a sufficient rate of return to justify the expense -- or, more importantly, to justify spending the money on that project versus a project which would yield a higher rate of return.

[jefferiestubes8]

Butters wrote:

---

it would have to go through post production again in its entirity.

Correct .
Please see this post.

Every special effect devised from scratch. New angles, different timings, different emphasis, different score.

Wrong. Same angles, same timingsbut only done in CG and rendered in High Definition 1080p. Music would stay the same.

[Butters]

FalTorPan wrote:

---

Spending money is only "a key component of making money" if the money that is later received represents a reasonable profit margin over what is spent. Completely overhauling 180 episodes of a television series is not likely to yield a sufficient rate of return to justify the expense -- or, more importantly, to justify spending the money on that project versus a project which would yield a higher rate of return.

I'm not in the industry so I can't do the numbers, but it is solely the numbers that will decide whether the project goes ahead. No other factor will be accounted. On DVD sales alone, I can't see a profit, but TNG is on TV everyday of the year, the stations would buy it. Whether that is enough I cannot say, but I was primarilly challenging the medieval objections based on some loyalty to VHS, decrying any heretic that might enjoy their TNG differently.

jefferiestubes8 wrote:

---

Wrong. Same angles, same timingsbut only done in CG and rendered in High Definition 1080p. Music would stay the same.

But why keep the same shots? The same timings? Battle sequences could have more action. Engineering could be buzzing with energy. The outside shots reflecting what the story wants us to believe. 'External' shots filmed in the studio could have real depth. Data's cat could be one sex and species throughout. The NX01 could take its place on the riefing room wall. The whole thing could look like it was filmed yesterday, or tomorrow. Why do scene for scene when some of those scenes were compromises anyway? Treat it like a brand new show and get a brand new audience.

[trevanian]

Butters wrote:

---

I would re-do the shots of 2001 because some of them were shit. The inside of the space station for example. Part excellent, part odd set. I would augment the original piece with extended interiors and 'realistic' windows. If I was feeling flush I'd also edit out the habitat furniture too and replace it with Ikea.

Gee-zus. 'some of them were shit'

With all the people I've really disliked here down (LOTS!) through the years, I don't think I've ever bothered putting anyone on the IGNORE list before. But those five sentences are off-the-charts enough for me to set a precedent.

You get to go on the IGNORE list.

[Hober Mallow]

Warped9 wrote:

---

^^ All the sig really means is that after '79 I stopped liking Trek on a consistent basis. The franchise gradually changed/evolved into something different. Some of it I liked and much of it I didn't. There are parts of the movies I liked and many parts I didn't. There are TNG and early DS9 episodes I liked and much more I didn't. Goes without saying I didn't like anything about VOY, ENT, the TNG era films or the recent Trek XI. If you really want to get picky there were even some parts of TOS and TAS I wish had been done differently, but such is life.

Presently I'm catching some TNG and DS9 episodes being rerun on SPACE here in Canada after I get off work. Some is a little better than I remember and some not.

Dude, are you my clone? I feel exactly the same way. I'd buy a remastered TNG, probably wouldn't buy DS9, and definitely wouldn't buy Voyager or Enterprise no matter how good the resolution is.

As it is, I haven't bothered to buy the movies on blu-ray, and don't plan on doing so for some time.

[FalTorPan]

trevanian wrote:

---

Gee-zus. 'some of them were shit'

With all the people I've really disliked here down (LOTS!) through the years, I don't think I've ever bothered putting anyone on the IGNORE list before. But those five sentences are off-the-charts enough for me to set a precedent.

You get to go on the IGNORE list.

The monoliths need to be enhanced in order to add the same density of greeblies which exist on the Discovery. In addition HAL's voice should be changed to one with the most statistically average accent, based on the distribution of accents around the globe.

And the Pan Am space plane should be changed into a Southwest or Jet Blue space plane. Duh!!!

Yes, I'm being sarcastic.