RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 141,570
Posts: 5,514,359
Members: 25,150
Currently online: 500
Newest member: kingkane

TrekToday headlines

Two New Starships Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Dec 26

Captain Kirk’s Boldest Missions
By: T'Bonz on Dec 25

Trek Paper Clips
By: T'Bonz on Dec 24

Sargent Passes
By: T'Bonz on Dec 23

QMx Trek Insignia Badges
By: T'Bonz on Dec 23

And The New Director Of Star Trek 3 Is…
By: T'Bonz on Dec 23

TV Alert: Pine On Tonight Show
By: T'Bonz on Dec 22

Retro Review: The Emperor’s New Cloak
By: Michelle on Dec 20

Star Trek Opera
By: T'Bonz on Dec 19

New Abrams Project
By: T'Bonz on Dec 18


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Star Trek TV Series > The Next Generation

The Next Generation All Good Things come to an end...but not here.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old May 25 2009, 04:20 PM   #76
jefferiestubes8
Commodore
 
Location: New York City
Star Trek TNG Remastered & resolutions

Mr. B wrote: View Post
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.
jefferiestubes8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 25 2009, 09:48 PM   #77
Mr. B
Vice Admiral
 
Mr. B's Avatar
 
Location: New Orleans
Send a message via ICQ to Mr. B Send a message via AIM to Mr. B Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to Mr. B Send a message via Yahoo to Mr. B
Re: Star Trek TNG Remastered & resolutions

jefferiestubes8 wrote: View Post
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.
__________________
“Ridicule is the tribute paid to the genius by the mediocrities.”
-Oscar Wilde
Mr. B is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 26 2009, 10:09 PM   #78
Jefferies
Captain
 
Jefferies's Avatar
 
Re: Star Trek TNG Remastered & resolutions

jefferiestubes8 wrote: View Post
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.
Jefferies is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27 2009, 01:53 PM   #79
Warped9
Admiral
 
Warped9's Avatar
 
Location: Brockville, Ontario, Canada
Re: Star Trek TNG Remastered?

Jiraiya wrote: View Post
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.
__________________
STAR TREK: 1964-1991, 2013-?
Warped9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 28 2009, 01:11 AM   #80
Captrek
Rear Admiral
 
Captrek's Avatar
 
Location: second star to the right
Re: Star Trek TNG Remastered?

Warped9 wrote: View Post
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.
Captrek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 28 2009, 11:39 AM   #81
Warped9
Admiral
 
Warped9's Avatar
 
Location: Brockville, Ontario, Canada
Re: Star Trek TNG Remastered?

^^ 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.
__________________
STAR TREK: 1964-1991, 2013-?
Warped9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 28 2009, 01:10 PM   #82
trevanian
Rear Admiral
 
Re: Star Trek TNG Remastered?

captrek wrote: View Post
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.)
trevanian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 28 2009, 02:36 PM   #83
jefferiestubes8
Commodore
 
Location: New York City
thread title

trevanian wrote: View Post
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.
jefferiestubes8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 29 2009, 12:29 AM   #84
Butters
Captain
 
Butters's Avatar
 
Location: The Summerland
Re: Star Trek TNG Remastered?

J Archer wrote: View Post
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: View Post
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.
Butters is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 29 2009, 12:40 AM   #85
FalTorPan
Vice Admiral
 
FalTorPan's Avatar
 
Location: Out there... thataway.
Re: Star Trek TNG Remastered?

Butters wrote: View Post
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.
__________________
Watch ASTRONUTS! Visit Trekplace! Check out my personal website!
FalTorPan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 29 2009, 01:05 AM   #86
jefferiestubes8
Commodore
 
Location: New York City
Re: Star Trek TNG Remastered?

Butters wrote: View Post
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.
jefferiestubes8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 29 2009, 01:11 AM   #87
Butters
Captain
 
Butters's Avatar
 
Location: The Summerland
Re: Star Trek TNG Remastered?

FalTorPan wrote: View Post
Butters wrote: View Post
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.
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: View Post
Butters wrote: View 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.
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.

Last edited by Butters; May 29 2009 at 01:22 AM.
Butters is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 29 2009, 01:19 AM   #88
trevanian
Rear Admiral
 
Re: Star Trek TNG Remastered?

Butters wrote: View Post
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.
trevanian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 29 2009, 03:15 AM   #89
Hober Mallow
Commodore
 
Location: The planet Terminus, site of the Encyclopedia Foundation on the periphery of the galaxy
Re: Star Trek TNG Remastered?

Warped9 wrote: View Post
^^ 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.
__________________
"Beep... beep!" --Captain Pike
Hober Mallow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 29 2009, 03:29 AM   #90
FalTorPan
Vice Admiral
 
FalTorPan's Avatar
 
Location: Out there... thataway.
Re: Star Trek TNG Remastered?

trevanian wrote: View Post
Butters wrote: View Post
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.
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.
__________________
Watch ASTRONUTS! Visit Trekplace! Check out my personal website!
FalTorPan is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
remastered

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:57 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.