DS9 should get Remastered

[J. Allen]

I would love to see a DS9 remastering, but I want to see a TNG remastering first.


J.

[Dream]

J. Allen wrote:

---

I would love to see a DS9 remastering, but I want to see a TNG remastering first. J.

If they remaster any of the Trek shows after TOS they'll definately start with TNG first. I'd imagine they see how well TNG remastered sells before starting the other shows.

[J. Allen]

Dream wrote:

---

If they remaster any of the Trek shows after TOS they'll definately start with TNG first. I'd imagine they see how well TNG remastered sells before starting the other shows.

Good. I love TNG almost as much as DS9, and TNG's video quality is severely lacking. I don't know how they'd do it, but I'd be curious about it. Then they could move on to DS9 and all it's glorious awesomeness.

J.

[Mr. B]

This is why I need to be a multi-millionaire... to finance pet projects like this.

[J. Allen]

I wonder how much it would actually cost.


J.

[Skywalker]

I'd like to see all three of the non-HD viable series (TNG, DS9, VOY) remastered so they can be seen properly in HD. SD will not be around forever, and eventually the DVDs we currently have won't be "good enough."

[J. Allen]

If they are, I'll get them when they come down to $30 each.


J.

[Tachyon]

Me has five seasons of DS9 on DVDs and no remastering them could make me buy them again, I'm afraid.

[Destructor]

I was never convinced on this until I saw TOS in HD- then I became and instant convert. Look, if you love TNG and DS9, you should be dying to see your favourite characters in HD. It looks AWESOME. I know it'll never happen, but you really should wish that it would, because it just looks so damned good.

[J. Allen]

Well, the DVDs of TNG are okay on my HD set, but the DS9 episodes from the compilation DVDs I have look excellent, so yeah. TNG I will probably rebuy eventually, but DS9 looks stellar.

J.

[Captain Fine]

I don't think anyone can seriously suggest that we shouldn't go back and rescan or whatever they do to the film so that we can get these episodes in HD. Clearly this must be done by Paramount/CBS to prevent these properties from degrading into oblivion. I think for TNG/DS9/VOY it's not so much that they need to be remastered (which they do), but it's that they have to be completely re-edited as well (since all the editing was done on video). I would think that would be the real time-consuming (and expensive) part of the process. Remastering TOS seemed to me to be done on a shoe-string budget, but they did a remarkable job. Remastering TNG will be much more involved. And I don't think there's any way around the fact that the SFX will have to be redone. We could choose to recreate the shots EXACTLY as they were, and that's all well and dandy. But at the bare minimum, GLARING mistakes should be corrected.

Defiant-2's registry should be NCC-75633. Riker's line about Yamato's registry being "1305-E" should be redone as NCC-71807 (while he's still alive!). "Brittain" should be fixed to "Brattain". "Melbourne" should be a Nebula-class ship as it was originally. Etc. Etc.

[M]

happydave wrote:

---

Actually it shouldn't. This is how we end up with stagnating development as well as an entire messy situation. Being a software developer, I've seen first hand trying to develop new projects with an existing system in place and to actually merge the old system into the new while making the new one as good as it can be is impossible. It's how we get left with terrible operating systems which 'need' backwards compatability.

In the end we get poor technology whose limitation was only left in due to an older system. Imagine if CDs were all the same size and as fragile as records. Which means we'd have DVDs which were the same, and the audio quality could never increase due to physical limitations of the gramophone.

The logical step is to infact scrap the entire system each time you're going to overhaul it. It makes more financial sense on the part of the company, and you're free to make the best piece of technology you can AND you don't have the limitations of the existing software.

To put in 3-4 generations of old technology in one system generally leads to more bugs and faults and a much harder to use piece of technology.

Actually that's not at all what I meant. And here I thought my example with the gramophone recording was pretty plausible. Having CDs (and later DVDs) the size of vinyl records is stupid. And of course I'm not arguing that. But the CD would be a rather redundant storing device if everything that was recorded well before its invention would have to be re-recorded in order to be playable with it.

But that's exactly what some people are suggesting here: That the effects of Deep Space Nine must be re-done or else it can't be released on future formats. And I find that to be a rather flawed logic. Again, I'm all for the perfection of picture and sound quality, but not to the point where the source material actually has to be replaced.

GodBen wrote:

---

But as far as I'm concerned there's no problem with remastering DS9, why should there be? I already have the whole show on DVD as it originally aired (except for the R2 cuts in To The Death) so it doesn't effect me if somebody wants to buy a HD version of the show with recreated effects. The stories will be the same, the characters will be the same, and if the special effects really don't matter to enjoy the show then why should it matter if they're updated to full HD?

I guess my problem with re-doing the effects of television shows is rather philosphical in nature. I do recognize that Deep Space Nine is merely a piece of entertainment. So, all it really has to do is entertain. And if some people think new effects would advance the level of entertainment, well, more power to them.

It's just that I have trouble getting behind that kind of mentality. The effects originally created for Deep Space Nine are indeed very good ones (well, in my opinion at least). And they are very much a part of the series. They are also a product of its time, which is something I appreciate.

I mean, where does this all lead us? What if at some point in the future yet another standard for picture quality comes around? What if the perception of what constitues a good special effect changes yet again in the future? I guess my point is, that an entertainment product shouldn't be changed just to adapt to the latest notion of what people consider visually pleasing.

So, while I can accept that this will eventually happen (if not necessarily to Deep Space Nine) and that it's okay, since it's really just a television show, I still don't understand why anyone would want the show to change in order to look better to eyes accustomed to high definition images.

Captain Fine wrote:

---

But at the bare minimum, GLARING mistakes should be corrected.

Defiant-2's registry should be NCC-75633. Riker's line about Yamato's registry being "1305-E" should be redone as NCC-71807 (while he's still alive!). "Brittain" should be fixed to "Brattain". "Melbourne" should be a Nebula-class ship as it was originally. Etc. Etc.

No offense, Captain Fine, but that perfectly illustrates the mentality I fail to understand. None of these are 'GLARING mistakes' in my opinion. They don't distract from the viewing experience at all. In fact I love these kind of oddities, since they enable another level of enjoyment for those engaging in the details of the shows.

[Butters]

NCC-1701 wrote:

---

So, while I can accept that this will eventually happen (if not necessarily to Deep Space Nine) and that it's okay, since it's really just a television show, I still don't understand why anyone would want the show to change in order to look better to eyes accustomed to high definition images.

See, I'm the opposite. I can't understand why anyone wouldn't.

I'm fully in favour of a full update with new better effects. The effects of the time were acceptable at best. They were never excellent, good for TV at the time maybe, but never anything special.

Take, for example, The Way of the Warrior, with its epic space battle. Even in SD this looks bad. A mere upgrading of the original material might be ok for internal live action shots, but the kitbashed plastic models exploding on strings would take even the most imaginative of us out of the action. To prove my point, I refer to the damaged K'Tinga class Klingon cruiser with the bright orange flame burning up the side, if anyone can get a screencap of this would appreciated.

A straight upgrade to HD just won't cut it and the every last effect shot need be upgraded. At the distances we see the passing ships and stations, today's audiences are accustomed to seeing interiors, and I'd fully expect that with any HD release.

As for trying to understand the differing mentalities:

If the effects and visuals are not important to the story or your enjoyment of the show, then a full upgrade will detract nothing.

If you object to a full upgrade on the grounds that you prefer it the way that it is, well, you already have it the way that it is. I'd consider that quite an immature attitude to take in all honesty. The effects are good enough to serve the needs of the story, but they're neither convincing nor immersive, and in some cases distractively bad.

Correcting the errors is important too. While I couldn't give a 4X about the Defiant's registry, it shouldn't be wrong either. One thing I could stand to lose is the aeronautic flight behaviour of starships in space. Every new series/film that adopts a more realistic approach to zero-G renders the star trek/wars approach ever more archaic. Was it Unification Part 1 that showed us the Enterprise doing a three point turn in space? I mean?

Doesn't have to be a full lucasification, no (not many) dinosaurs on the promenade, but any shot that doesn't look real, or could sell the scene better, must receive the enhancement it deserves.

[jefferiestubes8]

I'm all for remastering TV shows shot on 35mm to HD 1080p. With tv series that edited and mastered on video it makes it harder to retelecine to HD. The thread on remastering TNG really details the needs of TNG, DS9 and VOY if they were to be remastered to HD like TOS-R.
http://www.trekbbs.com/showthread.php?t=91561

[TheGodBen]

Alignment X wrote:

---

I have to say, as someone who got their first BD player recently, if you own a large enough screen TV and don't mind paying the premium for buying a film on Blu-ray Disc rather than DVD, it is worth it. There's a much bigger increase in picture quality between DVD and Blu-ray than there was when we replaced our VHS with DVD players. Honest.

I know, I play Xbox at 1080i and some games look absolutely incredible, I wouldn't be able to play on an SDTV again. But when it comes to blu-ray I think of it as more of a movie format than a TV show type of thing, and I'm not much of a film-buff, most of my DVDs are series box-sets.

NCC-1701 wrote:

---

I mean, where does this all lead us? What if at some point in the future yet another standard for picture quality comes around? What if the perception of what constitues a good special effect changes yet again in the future? I guess my point is, that an entertainment product shouldn't be changed just to adapt to the latest notion of what people consider visually pleasing.

But that's the way entertainment has worked for hundreds of years. Just look at Shakespeare's plays, back when they were first performed they didn't have electric lighting and all the female roles had to be played by men in straw wigs. We don't conform to the way things were done in the 17th century just because that's the way the plays were originally produced, a modern production keeps the script and characters but we use modern technologies like spotlights and women. (Because women are a technology invented in 1734. By a Scotsman, I believe.)

So long as the characters and stories are the same then I have no problem with updating the effects and fixing goof's like the Defiant-A's registry number.