I didn't mean to suggest that, as technology for upgrades improves, CBS would NEVER upgrade DS9 or VOY. If it could be done using a complex AI program cheaply, I expect they would do it. That is beyond the current level of technology. Could it get that cheap in 10 years? Seems possible, but it's also possible it wouldn't.
Not anymore, maybe, but it was a big selling point of the crowdfunding campaign, and probably a big reason why a lot of people donated.
Was Russ ever the one plugging that idea? I don't recall. I know others were (and still are on the Facebook page).
Yes - so nobody should shake their fist at the sky and shout I KNEW IT WAS YOU TIM RUSS! when this doesn't happen.
AI = Artificial Intelligence. I could imagine an AI program which could go through the way TOS and TNG were upgraded, and 'learn' how it is done, then do it to VOY or DS9, but that technology is still in the future. AI programs are becoming more advanced (e.g., Watson) but they are not there yet. At least, to my knowledge, not cheaply and not for upgrading video.
I don't get this "upgrade" thing. As in, "work from the DV video and smartly interpolate a high-def image"?
Yes, but more than that. A really good AI program could fill in the far sides and fill out the 'missing' areas of the new screen shape, even filling in missing crew members who would be sitting or working consoles there, create more detailed planetary surfaces with weather patterns, and the like. Merely 'up detailing' to high-def pictures is a tiny part of what was done for TOS and TNG. It would be animation at a level above what is now possible, with the computer self-directing. A human artist could review it and demand adjustments as needed. However, the computer would do 95% or more of the work done by artists in the upgrades to TOS and TNG. If what I've been told is true, there's more work to be done for DS9 and VOY because they were videotaped in standard definition, while TOS and TNG were filmed.
They will just feed the old scripts into the AI program and it will make the episodes from scratch using advanced CGI.
Looking into the future, the line between games (real-time FX and interactivity) and movies/TV (pre-rendered FX and linear storytelling) is getting increasingly blurry. I really don't know at this point with people cutting cords and physical media itself probably dying out what the future of "television" as a concept will even be. It could be that Star Trek's official future by virtue of CBS will be something that requires VR goggles to give you more of a holodeck-like experience.
DS9 and Voyager were shot on film the same as TNG. The potential complication is the use of CG on those shows, which was SD and would need to be recreated unlike the practical effects of TNG. But all the live elements are on film.
Having seen the trouble they had digitally repairing the found footage from Metropolis a few years ago (the programs used to repair damage to the frames tended to erase blurred objects, etc.), and how much manual intervention that would have required, the feasibility and cost of doing what Barb suggests even semi-autonomously is a ways off yet.
Sorry to burst that bubble, but technology like Barb suggested is decades if not centuries ahead. Let alone, one of the big works in TNG was to find the original reels, scan them in and edit them as the original was. Only then the work on "enhancing" it in terms of color grading, vfx and sound can be started. Which would be even more work as in TNG, as back then they have everything on film, but in DS9 they started doing more and more vfx work with CG - and those files are probably long gone or can´t be used anymore because of software changes and have to be completely recreated. But back to topic....
I did study computer science, but I did not major in it. The professor in charge of the department pulled me aside and made it clear he would look for any opportunity to lower my grades or fail me because girl's didn't belong in tech. (He taught one of my classes. I had the third highest grade in a class of over 40, and he gave over 20 A's, but give me a B, because "you just don't deserve an A." The next highest grade of a girl was the second highest B). I am the daughter of an electrical engineer, and the ex-wife and ex-daughter-in-law of two leading computer scientists. My nephew works in silicon valley. I read the news about computer developments. I am not a filmmaker. Decades is pretty flexible, it's more than 20 years, and could easily indicate 80 years. Centuries is more than 200 years. In 1815 (200 years ago) the Eire Canal was becoming the last major public works project done with pick, shovel, mules, and no machinery. Steamboats were starting to be used for short runs, like ferries between New York and Brooklyn, but couldn't handle long trips, which still relied on sails. Railroads were still in the future. 200 years is a very long time in technology. The only way this will take 200 years or more is if there is a collapse of our civilization. Which I grant, is not impossible. So yes, all bets are off if there is a complete collapse of civilization. Given that so much of TOS tech is already quaintly obsolete, I think the expression of dubiousness to advancing tech in this forum curious and bizarre. It shows how very 'art-centered' this forum is, rather than science-geeky.