The OFFICIAL STNG Next Level Bluray watch and review thread

[BillJ]

J. Allen wrote:

---

I rather liked Season 1 and 2 of TNG, so for me, this is all a welcome treat.

This.

[Kelso]

We watched SOTF last night and it looks phenomenal!

davejames wrote:

---

Yeah I wasn't crazy about that either. Now there's one starfield in the inner ring, and another starfield in the outer ring, going in opposite directions.

It just makes the whole thing look even odder than before.

That has bothered me since I was a little kid.

[DostoyevskyClone]

trekfan_1 wrote:

---

I've had to tinker with my TV's settings as it actually looks too bright.

I thought this when watching early scenes from "Sins of the Father." I wondered if I had just become accustomed to the different lighting of EaF...

[Borjis]

GNDN wrote:

---

CBS may figure that US Trek fans who are willing to buy the sampler don't require the added incentive to purchase S1 (even though S1 seems to be the most maligned of TNG)

cuz brits are bigger penny pinchers?

[davejames]

Kelso wrote:

---

That has bothered me since I was a little kid.

Yeah but before you could just pretend that the scene was shifting to another section of space. Now that there are two different starfields within the same rings, I'm not sure how to interpret it.

[RAMA]

Flake wrote:

---

I much prefer the old way of doing things (Matte Paintings, Models) to CGI everything of today, its all held up so well in the transition to HD whereas CGI done 10 years later will stay SD forever and look worse.

CGI from 10 years ago would look about the same in non-HD, from 15 years, ago not too bad. Jurassic Park still holds up at almost 19 years, and Voyager's first CGI had 6 times the detail of those dinosaurs in 1995, just two years later. Also, it wouldn't be SD forever, since they could re-do it. In particular, CGI mattes are usually way above the quality of most 2D matte paintings.

Once CGI reaches a certain level or rez that matches what we watch today and what it was designed for, it'll look no different than models. We're practically there now anyway...Hobbit and Avatar 2 will be shot in 4k and 64fps, you'll never have to tinker with the FX. Look at low or medium budget physical model work from the 90s and 80s, they look pretty bad too, they could use makeovers...George Lucas even realized this with his work. So this idea that models and paintings are inherently superior is silly.

DostoyevskyClone wrote:

---

I thought this when watching early scenes from "Sins of the Father." I wondered if I had just become accustomed to the different lighting of EaF...

It is bright, but I've always had a preference for a dark and contrasty picture...always adjusted tint so the old SD STNG looked like red unis rather than the pink...I was just so used to it I forgot they didn't look red! Its pretty easy to adjust with a few button pushes.

RAMA

[davejames]

DostoyevskyClone wrote:

---

This new release of EaF has got me rethinking my position on the first season (which I thought was painfully mediocre at times) - it definitely has a new look and feel now with this remaster. The story obviously hasn't changed (and I just watched EaF a couple of weeks ago in fact), but I found myself enjoying the pilot so much more watching it in Blu-ray. I wonder how much of it is novelty factor? Will we all still feel as impressed on the 16th, 17th, and 18th episodes of season one?

By the time we get to the later seasons, I imagine it won't have the same kind of impact (except perhaps for some of the more iconic episodes like BOBW).

But the first two seasons have always looked SO drab and dated to me-- what with those ugly uniforms and that ugly red tint the show often had-- that the remastering should make every episode feel dramatically new and different from before.

Personally, I can't wait to see every one.

[JarodRussell]

I can't wait to see these in HD:

http://tng.trekcore.com/gallery/albu...1/child004.jpg
http://tng.trekcore.com/gallery/albu...lution000a.jpg
http://tng.trekcore.com/gallery/albu...olution030.jpg
http://tng.trekcore.com/gallery/albu...olution038.jpg

[Hober Mallow]

davejames wrote:

---

To be fair, I think the problem in Farpoint is more that Crosby and Sirtis were both directed to be WAAAY more intense and over the top than they needed to be.

Sirtis spends most of the episode looking like she's about to burst into tears at any moment.

[Flake]

RAMA wrote:

---

CGI from 10 years ago would look about the same in non-HD, from 15 years, ago not too bad. Jurassic Park still holds up at almost 19 years, and Voyager's first CGI had 6 times the detail of those dinosaurs in 1995, just two years later. Also, it wouldn't be SD forever, since they could re-do it. In particular, CGI mattes are usually way above the quality of most 2D matte paintings.

Once CGI reaches a certain level or rez that matches what we watch today and what it was designed for, it'll look no different than models. We're practically there now anyway...Hobbit and Avatar 2 will be shot in 4k and 64fps, you'll never have to tinker with the FX. Look at low or medium budget physical model work from the 90s and 80s, they look pretty bad too, they could use makeovers...George Lucas even realized this with his work. So this idea that models and paintings are inherently superior is silly.

Well imho anything but the very top level of CGI (which includes the spectacular 1993 JP effort) suffer from uncanny valley - they are blatantly computer generated and fake looking because they can't quite get it right. Models never have this issue because they are real, and highly detailed models look real and give a sense of scale that CGI does not.

Not all CGI is guilty of this, there are lots of examples of CGI that does not suffer from looking blatantly computer generated and 'fake' but this does not include any CGI from Star Trek TV shows imho. It is a shame they could not have used models all the way until the end of Enterprise... but nvm! all imho.

Its also great to go behind the scenes and see how they made the practical effects back in the day and actually see all the physical models and paintings, whereas now its just a bunch of folks sitting at a computer manipulating polygons Those models and paintings still exist somewhere but all those old CGI files and textures are long gone. Could you imagine TMP spacedock sequences being replaced with CGI? No way!

[Dac]

So guys, I got a Blu Ray Drive today....how the f**k do I take screenshots? Hollywood says that's illegal, but thats bullshit. Surely someone found a way around this rediculous "feature"?

[Trekker4747]

JarodRussell wrote:

---

I can't wait to see these in HD:

http://tng.trekcore.com/gallery/albu...1/child004.jpg
http://tng.trekcore.com/gallery/albu...lution000a.jpg
http://tng.trekcore.com/gallery/albu...olution030.jpg
http://tng.trekcore.com/gallery/albu...olution038.jpg

That second one is one of my more favorite shots of the ship.

I wonder if they'll fix a slight continuity issue in that episode with the exterior shots of the Enterprise? In the episode the shuttlebay door is open when the ship first experiences a stabilization problem (it happens just before they prepare to launch "the egg" to study the phenomenon) but when the action switches fro the shuttlebay set to the outside of the ship we see the shuttlebay doors are closed, obviously because they don't open on the model.

[trekker670]

I know there's software that "unlocks" DVDs, I would assume it works the same with bluray. I used to use slysoft, for example.

[Beatnik]

Flake wrote:

---

Well imho anything but the very top level of CGI (which includes the spectacular 1993 JP effort) suffer from uncanny valley - they are blatantly computer generated and fake looking because they can't quite get it right. Models never have this issue because they are real, and highly detailed models look real and give a sense of scale that CGI does not.

Not all CGI is guilty of this, there are lots of examples of CGI that does not suffer from looking blatantly computer generated and 'fake' but this does not include any CGI from Star Trek TV shows imho. It is a shame they could not have used models all the way until the end of Enterprise... but nvm! all imho.

Its also great to go behind the scenes and see how they made the practical effects back in the day and actually see all the physical models and paintings, whereas now its just a bunch of folks sitting at a computer manipulating polygons Those models and paintings still exist somewhere but all those old CGI files and textures are long gone. Could you imagine TMP spacedock sequences being replaced with CGI? No way!

BSG used CG quite convincingly for its ships. I don't know if it was the modelling, lighting, or what, but it's well within the grasp of a TV budget now.

[DostoyevskyClone]

GalaxyX wrote:

---

The coloured starfield looks way too fake. I would have kept the stars as white streaks like they had in EaF, they looked 10 times better.

I totally, 100% agree. Ideally, consistency would be great, so hopefully they decide to go with white streaks throughout.

davejames wrote:

---

Unfortunately the great picture and sound also made it a LOT more apparent that the actors were walking around on nothing but a bunch of wooden soundstages

I kept my eye on the ‘sky’ as Riker walks to the end of the mall for transport in EaF. I thought the ‘sky’ effects from the first couple of seasons were so plain and so clearly a soundstage. I realize toying with the sky to make it look more like a sky would be going outside their rules, but it’s not straying too far to me if you consider they technically toyed with the town in “The Inner Light.”

Tosk wrote:

---

If the two ships are frozen in place with a sideways-moving starfield, then yes...it's always been like that. (Actually, in the original the Klingon ship drifts ever so slightly compared to the Enterprise.)

Yeah, I stand corrected. It looks about as bad in the original.

Tosk wrote:

---

Why do I foresee a lot of "Why did they ruin it?!" threads that are actually about shots that stayed basically the same?

Good point. With regards to the reuse of the EaF Enterprise shot in SofF though, there seemed to be something off with that shot itself (I knew it was a reuse). I’m not sure what it was; I almost want to say the ship seemed to skew unnaturally for a split second. I haven’t seen a comment on this so I guess it was a 2 AM hallucination?

Jefferies wrote:

---

In conclusion, I stand in awe of what CBS has accomplished here. If EaF is anything to go by Seasons One and Two might be looking at a re-invention. The remastering might even rescue them from the pits of fandom scorn and disdain in which they have lingered for so long.

Agreed.

davejames wrote:

---

"Shit" I think is going a bit far. The ships are definitely a bit too static, but they still look like real ships. And it's such a brief shot that it's hard for me to get all THAT worked up over it.

Yeah, that probably sounded like I was getting worked up, but I was just reusing the language of a previous poster. It was a disappointment, but in retrospect, it was one of the few effect shots where I knew ahead of time that something might be off, so it’s probably not fair of me to bash it that much.

roliver wrote:

---

The ships are fine, it's the bizarre moving starfield that makes no sense and results in a very strange shot that pulls you out of the episode.

Which brings up the obvious question...will they do further tweaks to the episodes on the sampler (for the season sets) based on fan reaction, or are these ones it?

Not that they should simply submit to fan demands, but with this sampler, they actually have a rare chance to get *broad* feedback before a finished product goes out. I mean, if 95% of people have an issue with something, then would it hurt to take it into consideration?

Other thoughts:

The Enterprise delivering the energy beam: I thought this was a big improvement on the original. I agree with those who said the angle was a terrible choice, but if they are determined to stay with what was originally there, then they did about as good as I think they can do with that. The shot (before remaster) looked quite bad: like a painting of the Enterprise with a beam coming out of it.

Transporter effects: I thought they looked great. Different people have different priorities, but reflections on the floor (or lack thereof) weren’t a big deal for me.

A plot point I never noticed before during “The Inner Light”: does anyone else find it hilarious that both Picard’s wife and best friend just let him walk off into the hills after having a fever and asking such questions as, “WHAT PLANET AM I ON?” Are you kidding me?!