Rumor: TNG-HD is a-coming

[Oso Blanco]

RAMA wrote:

---

STNG well never look HD and never be ready for Bluray without a remastering.

So what?

[RAMA]

Oso Blanco wrote:

---

So what?

Nevermind

[Kadratis]

CBS just wants to milk the cow again.

[Jefferies]

Kadratis wrote:

---

CBS just wants to milk the cow again.

Let them I say! We all stand to profit from it. Its a win-win-scenario. And for the die-hard purists they can always refer back to the old DVDs if they so please. There they can revel in garish blurr preserved for eternal posterity.

[evilnate]

Oso Blanco wrote:

---

So what?

I can sort of see what you are getting at. You wouldn't want to mess with things like aspect ratio or shot framing, since that's not how it was originally presented. TNG, like all the Treks except ENT was originally presented in 480i. That was the director's intent, right?

However, something to consider is that all the live action footage was filmed on 35mm film, a format which gives you far greater resolution than even 1080p. TOS-R is amazing at that resolution. It's truly amazing that a TV series produced almost 50 years ago can look that good when presented in a format that the filmed material can support.

I know that I've been critical of TOS-R and skeptical of what TNG-R will end up looking like. However, that doesn't mean that I'm not excited by the prospect of seeing TNG at something closer to how it's actually filmed. That and the idea that someone presented over in the TOS-R thread that they could re-composite the filmed model elements has me excited over what this could actually bring. I hope we hear, as well as see, something soon.

[JarodRussell]

You can remaster TNG without messing with anything. EVERYTHING has been shot on film. The matte paintings were filmed, the VFX were filmed, etc... . It "only" needs to be rescanned at higher resolution and recomposited (assuming they actually stored everything, but then again they probably didn't). The very few computer graphics they used in 1987 can be replaced with higher resolution versions, too.

It gets more complicated with DS9 and VOY, as there is way more CGI. All of it would have to be re-rendered. The massive battle scenes, Odo's transformations, etc...

[evilnate]

JarodRussell wrote:

---

You can remaster TNG without messing with anything. EVERYTHING has been shot on film. The matte paintings were filmed, the VFX were filmed, etc... . It "only" needs to be rescanned at higher resolution and recomposited (assuming they actually stored everything, but then again they probably didn't). The very few computer graphics they used in 1987 can be replaced with higher resolution versions, too.

It gets more complicated with DS9 and VOY, as there is way more CGI. All of it would have to be re-rendered. The massive battle scenes, Odo's transformations, etc...

I highly doubt that it's as simple as you make it sound. We know that most of the effects (phasers, torpedoes, transporters, various phenomenon) only exist in 480i...film was never involved. It gets a little murky when dealing with shots of various models. As I mentioned, all of the ILM done shots of the six-footer was done on film, as were most of the other stock shots done with that version. However, I'm not sure about other stuff and the reason I feel this is two-fold. One, my own eyes. Much of the per-episode work they did has a stronger video "look" to it than others. Compare the stock shots of the Klingon BOP from TSFS and TVH they used to the new stuff they did in "Yesterday's Enterprise" for example. The other reason that I suspect that is that from a production standpoint, it makes sense. Starting on video means one less production step, one less generation in production, less time and less money - all things that would have been important to the original production. I'm still looking for a definitive reference that details what was done on film and what was done on video though.

[Dac]

When will people learn....To my knowledge, as it stands it is currently impossible to upscale the TNG masters as they are to HD. They currently exist only on video - VHS and have 720×576 pixels of resolution. For FULL HD you need 1920x1080 pixels, and you cant magically make 1704 pixels out of thin air to make up for the loss. It's like taking a postage stamp and enlarging it in a photocopier to billboard size print. Its going to look fuzzy, blurred and have no more detail than the original postage stamp had.

Now, the live action footage was filmed on..film, so it has a digital equivalent of around 4000 pixels - more than enough for HD, but the FX only exist at video resolution, the aforementioned 720×576.

This is why they didn't release TNG on Blu Ray right after TOS, because it is technically impossible without major work being done to it.

[Doug Otte]

Oso Blanco wrote:

---

And even they are not HD, then they are not ... where is the problem? People are still watching old black and white movies, so why shouldn't they watch Trek in SD? Personally I'd rather watch it super low resolution than ruined with new fx.

I won't dispute your main point, because others have already done so. I just want to nitpick the statement above.

Old B&W films are on 35mm film, and are higher resolution than SD video. Once you've seen a movie like Psycho in a theatre or on BD, you'll never want to watch it in SD video again.

Doug

[Bonzo the Fifth]

Doug Otte wrote:

---

I won't dispute your main point, because others have already done so. I just want to nitpick the statement above.

Old B&W films are on 35mm film, and are higher resolution than SD video. Once you've seen a movie like Psycho in a theatre or on BD, you'll never want to watch it in SD video again.

Doug

Exactly..

Honestly, if there were a way to simply take what we already have, clean it up and just rescan it at 1080p, and leave everything the same-sound, FX, etc.- nobody would complain, just as no one would have complained has the same been possible for TOS (a 'simple' remaster, if you will). Unfortunately, that can't happen, for a legion of reasons that have been repeatedly gone over in this and other threads.

So we're left with this option, of which we have two equally valid schools of thought, where we can simply painstakingly duplicate what was done before, or exercise a modicum of creativity in the recomposition... both have their appeal, and the general (vocal minority notwithstanding) opinion about TOS-R is that they did it mostly right, though they did, in the end try too hard to have it both ways, ultimately frustrating both sides.

I imagine, ultimately, TNG-R is going to end up much the same way... frankly, I don't see how it can go any other... the potential audience on both sides is significant, but not big enough that the producers can afford to alienate anyone, so we're going to get something that's going to try and cater to all, with mixed results.

[fugazi]

Hi folks. I'm new here and you have no reason to believe me. But...

TNG-R is definitely coming. Confirmed. May be able to dig up some details for you in the coming weeks.

[BlobVanDam]

fugazi wrote:

---

Hi folks. I'm new here and you have no reason to believe me. But...

TNG-R is definitely coming. Confirmed. May be able to dig up some details for you in the coming weeks.

You're right that we have no reason to believe you, but heck, I'm still going to believe you anyway just because I want it to be true.

Hopefully we do hear more soon.

[Gep Malakai]

Yay. Are you in any position to answer questions?

[fugazi]

That's all I know right now, but I have a good contact and will share whatever I can find out.

Everyone already knew this, but it's definitely going to be expensive for CBS.

[Art Vandelay]

Kadratis wrote:

---

CBS just wants to milk the cow again.

And it's a good thing, too. My udder is ready to burst!

fugazi wrote:

---

Hi folks. I'm new here and you have no reason to believe me. But...

TNG-R is definitely coming. Confirmed. May be able to dig up some details for you in the coming weeks.

If I weren't a cow, I'd have freshly shat pants right now due to the flash of excitement you just gave me.