RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 135,843
Posts: 5,220,473
Members: 24,229
Currently online: 718
Newest member: lagrangecalv

TrekToday headlines

Kurtzman And Orci Go Solo
By: T'Bonz on Apr 22

Star Trek #32 Preview
By: T'Bonz on Apr 22

Voyager Bridge Via The Oculus Rift
By: T'Bonz on Apr 21

Miles Away Glyph Award Nominations
By: T'Bonz on Apr 21

Q Meets NuTrek Crew
By: T'Bonz on Apr 18

Pine In Talks For Drama
By: T'Bonz on Apr 18

New X-Men: Days of Future Past Trailer
By: T'Bonz on Apr 17

Nimoy to Receive Award
By: T'Bonz on Apr 17

Star Trek Special: Flesh and Stone Comic
By: T'Bonz on Apr 16

These Are The Voyages TOS Season Two Book Review
By: T'Bonz on Apr 16


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.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old September 20 2011, 03:26 AM   #196
milo bloom
Fleet Captain
 
milo bloom's Avatar
 
Location: The varied and beautiful Chicagoland suburbs.
Re: The OFFICIAL STNG-R discussion thread!

I like things that have an establishing boundary to stay the same. I don't want to see re-edits of old Star Trek episodes to fit newer data. I don't want the James R. Kirk tombstone changed. I don't want the aspect ratio changed.

I want the new imaginative things in the new JJ Abrams movie, the new comics based on the new movie, and the animated series that really needs to come out of the new Abrams movie.
__________________
'Tis a lie! Thy backside is whole and ungobbled, thou ungrateful whelp!
milo bloom is offline  
Old September 20 2011, 04:47 AM   #197
mswood
Rear Admiral
 
mswood's Avatar
 
Location: 9th level of Hell
Re: The OFFICIAL STNG-R discussion thread!

RAMA wrote: View Post
It occurs to me...on second thought I DON'T want a fan vote on the aspect ratio!! SF fans in general and ST fans specifically are not that imaginative and pretty much like things to stay the same ALL the time.

RAMA
Thats terrifyingly offensive. Trek fans are extremely imaginative, in fact I have rarely seen any tv fandom as imaginative as Trek fans.

I mean one of the great, great things about a hit and miss project like the TOS remaster was that, they did create a 4:3 and a 16:9 to suit the audience.

They merchandised home market materials with both respect for people who wanted no real changes (original effects) and those like me that wanted updated and new effects.

I have no problems giving props for success (the rich transfer,the matte paintings, and some effects) and have no problem letting them know where they failed, the large number of under rendered and poorly designed shots.

And since we all thought that both were being done (based on what occurred with TOS), I would have no problem if they released two sets domestically.

I also would love it if they did one of each at least on the sampler, so that we could see how a full episode looks.

After all I have no problem with change if the change is an improvement. But changer can also make something worse.

Again I would much rather have them work without cropping (using the early film that would have the wider aspect ration, but I don't know if that can be used).

And it isn't because I am a purists, but because so far, every show that I have seen that was cropped looked worse.

If all the cropped jobs I had scene were better then I wouldn't have a real problem with it.
__________________
My fandom will SALT and BURN your fandom!

Last edited by mswood; September 20 2011 at 04:49 AM. Reason: AARGGH I Hate posting form my phone.
mswood is offline  
Old September 20 2011, 09:32 AM   #198
Start Wreck
Fleet Captain
 
Start Wreck's Avatar
 
Re: The OFFICIAL STNG-R discussion thread!

Flake wrote: View Post
I realize they framed the shots with 4:3 in mind but I believe we can enjoy the show just as much in 16:9 and I hope they do it. We have watched in 4:3 for 25 years and we still have the DVDs to refer back to, I think widescreen and HD will make it feel like a brand new show we can enjoy all over again. Make it so!
It will be the same show with 30% of the picture missing. Tell me why you want that?

Jon1701 wrote: View Post
Start Wreck wrote: View Post
Well, that is the problem. It's impossible to frame the whole show properly if it's cropped from how it was originally framed.
Are they remastering the shows from the original negative or just processing the old shows?

I remember seeing some b-roll footage from behind the scenes of TNG. A shot pointed at the monitor showed the shots with a 4:3 box superimposed over the top. A lot of existed on each side, above and below the original shot.

I suppose it depends what information still exists from editing the original shows. I haven't done editing since university (and going back quite a few years), but with the power of computers these days I would think it would be possible to let them do all the hard work and manually correct whatever shots need reframing.
They're remastering from the original negatives, which were framed for 4:3. There's a little bit of extra film either side in the "unsafe zone", but even that isn't enough to make it 16:9 without losing the top and bottom of the frame.

http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/in...on-formats.jpg

I'm not sure what "the power of computers" has to do with anything. The fact of the matter is, if you want to watch this show in widescreen, you're going to be losing quite a hefty chunk of the original picture, and ruining the framing of the shots in the process. Why would anyone want that?
__________________
Fallen Star - My home-made sci-fi TV show
Start Wreck - My Star Trek spoof web comic
Doctor Who From The Start - A n00b does a blog
Start Wreck is offline  
Old September 20 2011, 09:51 AM   #199
Start Wreck
Fleet Captain
 
Start Wreck's Avatar
 
Re: The OFFICIAL STNG-R discussion thread!

RAMA wrote: View Post
Burnett has tweeted several more times including THIS:

CBS should put their excellent TNG 1:33 vs 16:9 demo online and let the fanbase vote. (16:9 would win by a landslide...).
http://twitter.com/#!/BurnettRM
The fact that there needs to be a "versus" test means the winner is not clear-cut, otherwise they'd just use 16:9 without question. This suggests the compromise in cropping/re-framing is a matter of dispute at CBS. This is not particularly promising news, although I'd be... intrigued to see how they've done it.

However (if you'll forgive the ad hominem), I can't take seriously the opinion of a man who argues against 4:3 on the basis that it's "boring".
(Nor one who thinks Avatar is "a masterpiece in storytelling". I mean, wow! )
__________________
Fallen Star - My home-made sci-fi TV show
Start Wreck - My Star Trek spoof web comic
Doctor Who From The Start - A n00b does a blog
Start Wreck is offline  
Old September 20 2011, 10:22 AM   #200
RAMA
Vice Admiral
 
RAMA's Avatar
 
Location: NJ, USA
Re: The OFFICIAL STNG-R discussion thread!

Start Wreck wrote: View Post
RAMA wrote: View Post
Burnett has tweeted several more times including THIS:

CBS should put their excellent TNG 1:33 vs 16:9 demo online and let the fanbase vote. (16:9 would win by a landslide...).
http://twitter.com/#!/BurnettRM
The fact that there needs to be a "versus" test means the winner is not clear-cut, otherwise they'd just use 16:9 without question. This suggests the compromise in cropping/re-framing is a matter of dispute at CBS. This is not particularly promising news, although I'd be... intrigued to see how they've done it.

However (if you'll forgive the ad hominem), I can't take seriously the opinion of a man who argues against 4:3 on the basis that it's "boring".
(Nor one who thinks Avatar is "a masterpiece in storytelling". I mean, wow! )
The fact they even DID a test is positive in my book.

Well say what you want about Avatar, but the industry loved the technical side as well as story and was nominated for lots of awards accordingly. It did have a new WAY of telling a story.

He didn't say 4:3 was boring, he said STNG was photographed in boring fashion..which is more than just aspect ratio (way to go in twisting his words). By making it larger and wider it gives the impression of being more cinematic...and combined with the new clarity of the picture should give it a new feel.
__________________
It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring. Carl Sagan
RAMA is offline  
Old September 20 2011, 10:43 AM   #201
RAMA
Vice Admiral
 
RAMA's Avatar
 
Location: NJ, USA
Re: The OFFICIAL STNG-R discussion thread!

mswood wrote: View Post
RAMA wrote: View Post
It occurs to me...on second thought I DON'T want a fan vote on the aspect ratio!! SF fans in general and ST fans specifically are not that imaginative and pretty much like things to stay the same ALL the time.

RAMA
Thats terrifyingly offensive. Trek fans are extremely imaginative, in fact I have rarely seen any tv fandom as imaginative as Trek fans.

I mean one of the great, great things about a hit and miss project like the TOS remaster was that, they did create a 4:3 and a 16:9 to suit the audience.

They merchandised home market materials with both respect for people who wanted no real changes (original effects) and those like me that wanted updated and new effects.

I have no problems giving props for success (the rich transfer,the matte paintings, and some effects) and have no problem letting them know where they failed, the large number of under rendered and poorly designed shots.

And since we all thought that both were being done (based on what occurred with TOS), I would have no problem if they released two sets domestically.

I also would love it if they did one of each at least on the sampler, so that we could see how a full episode looks.

After all I have no problem with change if the change is an improvement. But changer can also make something worse.

Again I would much rather have them work without cropping (using the early film that would have the wider aspect ration, but I don't know if that can be used).

And it isn't because I am a purists, but because so far, every show that I have seen that was cropped looked worse.

If all the cropped jobs I had scene were better then I wouldn't have a real problem with it.
I used to think the reverse, but time and again fandom has shown that they prefer to stand pat and think in the box. This has been true since Nimoy got death threats for having the gall to "kill" Spock to people who can't stand the idea of IMPROVING the technical merits of the shows just because it doesn't tally with their personal memories of them. There's more to the show than just nostalgia. It unfortunately demonstrates the fandom's penchant for wanting what's comfortable rather than what breaks new ground.

They didn't fail on the renders at all...they weren't meant to look like state of the art FX, they were meant to be idealized...in STNG-R that should not be an issue. If TOS-R were not idealized, you'd be complaining even MORE that they looked like Enterprise era FX. In other words, they couldn't win no matter what they did.

RAMA
__________________
It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring. Carl Sagan
RAMA is offline  
Old September 20 2011, 10:56 AM   #202
Maxwell Everett
Fleet Captain
 
Maxwell Everett's Avatar
 
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Re: The OFFICIAL STNG-R discussion thread!

Here's an example I mocked up in Photoshop using a frame from "Encounter at Farpoint":



1.33:1 - Just a straightforward presentation of the intended 4:3 framing.




1.66:1 - Combining the added picture info from the camera negative but maintaining the intended vertical framing.





1.78:1 - Cropping the vertical height to almost the TV Action Safe area to bring the composition to 16:9.

Here are the images I used if you were wondering:
http://tng.trekcore.com/gallery/albu...point1_070.jpg
http://tng.trekcore.com/gallery/albu...point1_071.jpg
__________________
"Shake off all the fears & servile prejudices, under which weak minds are servilely crouched. Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call to her tribunal every fact, every opinion." -Thomas Jefferson
Maxwell Everett is offline  
Old September 20 2011, 12:24 PM   #203
Start Wreck
Fleet Captain
 
Start Wreck's Avatar
 
Re: The OFFICIAL STNG-R discussion thread!

RAMA wrote: View Post
He didn't say 4:3 was boring, he said STNG was photographed in boring fashion..which is more than just aspect ratio (way to go in twisting his words).
I meant, he argues against TNG being in 4:3 on the basis that it is boring. He may mean it was filmed "boringly" for other reasons (not its aspect ratio) but he argues 16:9 would help it, so I've hardly twisted anything.

RAMA wrote: View Post
By making it larger and wider it gives the impression of being more cinematic...and combined with the new clarity of the picture should give it a new feel.
I'm in favour of adding new things, new ships, new effects, CGI and all that jazz... I'm just not in favour of removing a large part of the picture in order to do it, which is what making it 16:9 would involve.

Also, if you actually wanted it to be "more cinematic", then it could be even wider than 16:9, you know, like movies at the cinema. Of course, you'd lose even more of the picture. Would you be in favour of that? Where would you draw the line?

Making it "larger and wider" is impossible. It's large and narrow, or small and wide. You cannot have both. It's a compromise.

---

Maxwell, that is some epic photoshoppery, so well done.
The problem is using a safe zone is, by definition, not safe. It's also still cropped, however slight. Same as the Enterprise TATV example.

Admittedly, that picture looks fine, as did the TATV footage (for the purposes of a stock shot), but that's a long way from making sure an entire seven-season series works well enough in widescreen.
__________________
Fallen Star - My home-made sci-fi TV show
Start Wreck - My Star Trek spoof web comic
Doctor Who From The Start - A n00b does a blog
Start Wreck is offline  
Old September 20 2011, 02:23 PM   #204
LitmusDragon
Commodore
 
LitmusDragon's Avatar
 
Location: The Barmuda Triangle
Re: The OFFICIAL STNG-R discussion thread!

I'm pretty neutral on the 16 x 9 thing. On the one hand I've seen it done before on another show I love (Seinfeld) and it mostly worked very well. On the other hand I wouldn't mind them being purists about it.

If they do make an official announcement on the 28th I hope they include some of this test footage they've been showing people. Or at least a screenshot!
__________________
I made an 8-bit style RPG, here it is
I'm getting married on July 19, 2014.
LitmusDragon is offline  
Old September 20 2011, 02:34 PM   #205
RAMA
Vice Admiral
 
RAMA's Avatar
 
Location: NJ, USA
Re: The OFFICIAL STNG-R discussion thread!

Maxwell Everett wrote: View Post
Here's an example I mocked up in Photoshop using a frame from "Encounter at Farpoint":



1.33:1 - Just a straightforward presentation of the intended 4:3 framing.




1.66:1 - Combining the added picture info from the camera negative but maintaining the intended vertical framing.





1.78:1 - Cropping the vertical height to almost the TV Action Safe area to bring the composition to 16:9.

Here are the images I used if you were wondering:
http://tng.trekcore.com/gallery/albu...point1_070.jpg
http://tng.trekcore.com/gallery/albu...point1_071.jpg

Terrific, see it can be done.

I do have a feeling the odds are about 60-40 they will go with 4:3. Simply to be "purist" about it even if 16:9 looks better.

See Star Wreck...lots more interesting stuff on the horizontal..
__________________
It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring. Carl Sagan

Last edited by RAMA; September 20 2011 at 02:47 PM.
RAMA is offline  
Old September 20 2011, 02:47 PM   #206
Squiggy
LORD SHIT SUPREME
 
Squiggy's Avatar
 
Location: Not on your life, my Hindu friend.
View Squiggy's Twitter Profile Send a message via ICQ to Squiggy
Re: The OFFICIAL STNG-R discussion thread!

milo bloom wrote: View Post
I don't want the James R. Kirk tombstone changed.
May I ask why? It isn't his name (what "is" and "isn't" being the last established mention of something in the canon). So, are you thinking that during that episode his name actually is James R. Kirk instead of Tiberius?

Say if in Encounter there was a graphic that had Picard born in England instead of France...should that be left in? We all know he wasn't (won't be?). Or the mistake with Data's rank in AGT? He never was a LtJG on the show. Why leave it in?


I'm not a fan of Lucasifying the series (I'll make an exception for BoBW or some of the "evasive maneuvers" where the ship remains motionless). I don't want the powers that be to stick in an Arex in the background like Lucas did on Tatooine. But I am in favor for correcting continuity mistakes early on in a series run. I think most people are for updating some of the sfx to including something more than the same 6 or 7 shots of Enterprise warping by or entering orbit or doing the same entering orbit move just without a planet there.

The show can and did get stuff wrong in the show. They should correct it. Maybe it'll silence some of the more nerdy Trekkie questions like "In episode S2xE14 you said that Riker did_____but in episode S1xE6 we clearly see him _____". Maybe cut that stuff or correct it.

The series can defiantly improved upon without being negatively altered.
__________________
ENOUGH OF THIS TURGID BASH WANKERY!
Squiggy is offline  
Old September 20 2011, 02:57 PM   #207
Tomalak
Vice Admiral
 
Tomalak's Avatar
 
Location: Liverpool
View Tomalak's Twitter Profile
Re: The OFFICIAL STNG-R discussion thread!

For what it's worth, I'd be in favour of a 16x9, CGI-laden TNG-HD.

TNG was inherently a series intended for small, 1980s, 4x3 CRT screens. It looked fine there for it's time, and is preserved in glorious DVD for future generations. Even on my rather large HD LCD television, the upscaled DVDs are still very watchable.

But to make a Blu-ray release value for money, and actually just of a worthy standard for the High Definition format, I would see this as a new edition of the same series. The stories will be the same, the characters, the dialogue, but the visuals will be enhanced to match up.

If it really bothers me, I can still grab the DVDs and watch BoBW how it's always been, but I'd also love to see a more cinematic, rebuilt version for the 21st century.

*Actually I will add that it does rather depend on how much material there is in the original negs. I hate it when a film series (such as TOS or The World At War) is overzealously chopped up, because the original framing is totally lost. If it turns out there's not enough to do it sensitively, and you'd end up with a horrible looking product, then it's a no-brainer to leave it in the original 4x3.
__________________
She bought her first new car and you hit her with a drunk driver. What, is that supposed to be funny?
Tomalak is offline  
Old September 20 2011, 03:08 PM   #208
Squiggy
LORD SHIT SUPREME
 
Squiggy's Avatar
 
Location: Not on your life, my Hindu friend.
View Squiggy's Twitter Profile Send a message via ICQ to Squiggy
Re: The OFFICIAL STNG-R discussion thread!

Agreed. The purists who don't want to see any sort of changes...what's the point of doing it at all? If all you're having is the identical 4:3 shots for 178 hours, then why even do the project? To have a better contrast ratio?

The point of this is to make TNG watchable to a generation of viewers who's standard is HD. It might suck for you but the "kids these days" weren't even alive when the show aired. It seems like ancient history. It would look like ancient history if it wasn't tweaked and there would be almost zero chance of having it connect again.

But if you beleive what I beleive and that the best part of Trek is the story and not the visuals, then the best part of Trek and the reason we all fell in love with it will remain. TOS-R didn't cease being Star Trek because of a couple of shoddy effects shots. The stories and the characters and the messages were all there, but now it's not painful to watch on a 70 inch plasma. The same holds true to TNG.

If you don't like change then you can keep your current unaltered TNG DVDs. No one will take those away. That's their original intent and how they originally aired.
__________________
ENOUGH OF THIS TURGID BASH WANKERY!
Squiggy is offline  
Old September 20 2011, 03:12 PM   #209
JarodRussell
Vice Admiral
 
JarodRussell's Avatar
 
Re: The OFFICIAL STNG-R discussion thread!

Squiggy wrote: View Post
Agreed. The purists who don't want to see any sort of changes...what's the point of doing it at all? If all you're having is the identical 4:3 shots for 178 hours, then why even do the project? To have a better contrast ratio?

The point of this is to make TNG watchable to a generation of viewers who's standard is HD. It might suck for you but the "kids these days" weren't even alive when the show aired. It seems like ancient history. It would look like ancient history if it wasn't tweaked and there would be almost zero chance of having it connect again.

But if you beleive what I beleive and that the best part of Trek is the story and not the visuals, then the best part of Trek and the reason we all fell in love with it will remain. TOS-R didn't cease being Star Trek because of a couple of shoddy effects shots. The stories and the characters and the messages were all there, but now it's not painful to watch on a 70 inch plasma. The same holds true to TNG.

If you don't like change then you can keep your current unaltered TNG DVDs. No one will take those away. That's their original intent and how they originally aired.
Hm... shall we also recut the episodes for faster pace and add lens flares and shaky cam because that's the current style of this generation?

Why can't I just have the original, but only in High Def? We also got the unaltered TOS on blu ray, far beyond the original intention, didn't we?
__________________
lol
l
/\
JarodRussell is offline  
Old September 20 2011, 03:24 PM   #210
RAMA
Vice Admiral
 
RAMA's Avatar
 
Location: NJ, USA
Re: The OFFICIAL STNG-R discussion thread!

JarodRussell wrote: View Post
Squiggy wrote: View Post
Agreed. The purists who don't want to see any sort of changes...what's the point of doing it at all? If all you're having is the identical 4:3 shots for 178 hours, then why even do the project? To have a better contrast ratio?

The point of this is to make TNG watchable to a generation of viewers who's standard is HD. It might suck for you but the "kids these days" weren't even alive when the show aired. It seems like ancient history. It would look like ancient history if it wasn't tweaked and there would be almost zero chance of having it connect again.

But if you beleive what I beleive and that the best part of Trek is the story and not the visuals, then the best part of Trek and the reason we all fell in love with it will remain. TOS-R didn't cease being Star Trek because of a couple of shoddy effects shots. The stories and the characters and the messages were all there, but now it's not painful to watch on a 70 inch plasma. The same holds true to TNG.

If you don't like change then you can keep your current unaltered TNG DVDs. No one will take those away. That's their original intent and how they originally aired.
Hm... shall we also recut the episodes for faster pace and add lens flares and shaky cam because that's the current style of this generation?

Why can't I just have the original, but only in High Def? We also got the unaltered TOS on blu ray, far beyond the original intention, didn't we?

It's not just aesthetics if it fits the the current format (not style) better with minimal alteration.

Squiggy wrote: View Post


I'm not a fan of Lucasifying the series (I'll make an exception for BoBW or some of the "evasive maneuvers" where the ship remains motionless). I don't want the powers that be to stick in an Arex in the background like Lucas did on Tatooine. But I am in favor for correcting continuity mistakes early on in a series run. I think most people are for updating some of the sfx to including something more than the same 6 or 7 shots of Enterprise warping by or entering orbit or doing the same entering orbit move just without a planet there.

There is also concept art for shots and FX that could not be produced at the time on budget or at the pace the shows were shot at. Much of that work exists...Like Armus and the Jarada examples I gave on the last thread...there is even a spot for alien Jarada to be inserted where a planet was used instead. I'm in favor of adding these in also.
__________________
It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring. Carl Sagan

Last edited by RAMA; September 20 2011 at 04:36 PM.
RAMA is offline  
Closed Thread

Bookmarks

Tags
tng-r

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 04:57 PM.

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