RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 139,658
Posts: 5,428,966
Members: 24,813
Currently online: 432
Newest member: SB118_Pavlova


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, 03:34 PM   #211
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!

JarodRussell wrote: View Post
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?
That is a style...not a standard, of a minority of directors...JJ being one of them.

HD is the standard. A few years from now there won't be any SD available on TV in the United States. HD set market penetration (giggity) was 65% 16 months ago. I wouldn't be shocked if it was over 70 now. You can't buy SD sets now. Network shows aren't offered in SD. When HD penetration (giggity) reaches 80-85%, I'm sure that shows and on screen graphics will switch to being primarily 16:9 rather than the current 16:9 with a 4:3 title safe.

In a couple of years the teenagers (the ones who determine what is and what isn't "hip" or "with it") will no of nothing BUT high definition. SD programming will seem as archaic as black and white is to Generation Xers.

JarodRussell wrote: View Post
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?
You might have both. Hell if I know. Speilberg said that next time he releases E.T he'll put in both the original theatrical release and his familyfied update from a couple of years ago on the same disc.

As for what the original intent was, I'm sure it was to get as many eyeballs as possible on the show, in whatever format was popular at the time. If that was VHS, DVD, Bluray or whatever's next...I'm sure that's what the writers, producers, directors, actors, and most importantly the suits at Paramount/CBS want.
__________________
ENOUGH OF THIS TURGID BASH WANKERY!
Squiggy is offline  
Old September 20 2011, 03:44 PM   #212
Start Wreck
Fleet Captain
 
Start Wreck's Avatar
 
Re: The OFFICIAL STNG-R discussion thread!

RAMA wrote: View Post
See Star Wreck...lots more interesting stuff on the horizontal..
I'm sure you're aware that this example is a photoshopped picture, not a capture of the original negative. For all we know, the original negative of this frame has a boom mic next to Tasha's head, or a member of the film crew standing by the turbolift, making it unusable.

I'm not saying every shot does have that, but the point of the safe zone is that it isn't intended to be used because it might do. And if you can't guarantee that every shot is safe to extend horizontally, then it means spending time (and money) looking for the mistakes and trying to correct them on a case-by-case basis.

And, I will just add, that even if the area outside of the safe zones is usable for every single shot in every single episode, that the above example still has cropping that diminishes the framing of the shot. There is an unpleasant lack of headroom above Yar, which is not as aesthetically pleasing as the original composition.

You may not mind it. You may think it looks "good enough". In my view, it just isn't worth it.


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?
Umm... to have them in HD.

I'm not a purist by any stretch! I love the new effects in TOS-R, and I'm eager to see more in TNG-R. But I don't want to lose a load of the picture and ruin the framing of the shots just for the sake of it.

That's not an improvement, that's making it worse.
__________________
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, 03:56 PM   #213
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!

Start Wreck wrote: View Post
I'm not a purist by any stretch! I love the new effects in TOS-R, and I'm eager to see more in TNG-R. But I don't want to lose a load of the picture and ruin the framing of the shots just for the sake of it.
So you'd rather have this:


for sake of losing this?
__________________
ENOUGH OF THIS TURGID BASH WANKERY!
Squiggy is offline  
Old September 20 2011, 03:59 PM   #214
Start Wreck
Fleet Captain
 
Start Wreck's Avatar
 
Re: The OFFICIAL STNG-R discussion thread!

Squiggy wrote: View Post
So you'd rather have this:

for sake of losing this?
Yes, most definitely.
__________________
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, 04:05 PM   #215
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!

Start Wreck wrote: View Post
Squiggy wrote: View Post
So you'd rather have this:

for sake of losing this?
Yes, most definitely.
It's a matter of personal taste, but since you'd be losing nothing to the story I just don't see it and disagree.
__________________
ENOUGH OF THIS TURGID BASH WANKERY!
Squiggy is offline  
Old September 20 2011, 04:12 PM   #216
Start Wreck
Fleet Captain
 
Start Wreck's Avatar
 
Re: The OFFICIAL STNG-R discussion thread!

Squiggy wrote: View Post
Start Wreck wrote: View Post
Squiggy wrote: View Post
So you'd rather have this:

for sake of losing this?
Yes, most definitely.
It's a matter of personal taste, but since you'd be losing nothing to the story I just don't see it and disagree.
It's not just about the "story" though, is it? By that logic, you could remove the picture entirely and turn it into a radio drama.

The point of this project should be to take the existing elements and make a better version of the show. Increasing the resolution is better. Increasing the quality, detail and variety of special effects shots is better. Removing the top and bottom of every shot isn't better, it's vandalism.

They did it right with TOS; I hope they don't mess this one up.
__________________
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, 04:22 PM   #217
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!

Start Wreck wrote: View Post
Squiggy wrote: View Post
Start Wreck wrote: View Post
Yes, most definitely.
It's a matter of personal taste, but since you'd be losing nothing to the story I just don't see it and disagree.
It's not just about the "story" though, is it? By that logic, you could remove the picture entirely and turn it into a radio drama.
No. You'd have to add a hell-of-a lot of dialogue to describe what it is they're looking at.

Start Wreck wrote: View Post
The point of this project should be to take the existing elements and make a better version of the show. Increasing the resolution is better. Increasing the quality, detail and variety of special effects shots is better. Removing the top and bottom of every shot isn't better, it's vandalism.
I disagree. If done well you wouldn't even notice.

Start Wreck wrote: View Post
They did it right with TOS; I hope they don't mess this one up.
Some people think they messed up TOS by changing it to the level that they did. Again, it's a matter of personal preference. Some people think they Trek died in 1979, Others in 1987. Others in 2005. Some people think it shouldn't be touched at all. If it is touched or modified, it isn't vandalized...it's changed.

Times change.

If you want TNG to get any sort of airplay past it's current run on BBC and open it up to a new audience then you shouldn't restrict yourself to an outdated visual standard. Color television didn't vandalize television anymore than sound vandalized the motion picture.
__________________
ENOUGH OF THIS TURGID BASH WANKERY!
Squiggy is offline  
Old September 20 2011, 04:29 PM   #218
AviTrek
Fleet Captain
 
Re: The OFFICIAL STNG-R discussion thread!

RAMA wrote: View Post
Squiggy wrote: View Post
bobd wrote: View Post
Does it have to all or nothing? I mean must it only either be 4x3 or 16x9? Surely there is some exposed area of the film that wasn't used for the original 4x3 transfer to tape.

Couldn't they open it up a little, so there are some black bars on each side, just not a thick as they'd be with a straight 4x3 version?

If memory serves, Hogan's Heroes in HD looked like that. Not quite full 16x9, but more than 4x3.
I've never heard of that. The only two ratios are 4:3 and 16:9.

He prob means the formatting the bluray player or tv allows...mine allows 16:9, 16:10 for example. I thought he also meant that extra picture allowed (and seen in TATV) with a 1:37 aspect ratio as opposed to 1:33 as it was originally shot with.

RAMA
I think what he means is 16:9 with smaller black bars. If you watch TNG on BBCA you can get a vague sense of this. They stretch the image slightly. It doesn't fill the entire 16:9 frame, but it does reduce the size of the black bars on the top/bottom. So in this case, he's suggesting expanding the frame a little if possible, and doing a smaller crop of the top/bottom if necessary. You lose less material and get closer to a full 16:9 image.
AviTrek is offline  
Old September 20 2011, 04:39 PM   #219
Scotty
Rear Admiral
 
Scotty's Avatar
 
Location: The Netherlands, Les Pays Bas, Holland
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? I want to see TNG in HD for the added clarity, level of detail and definition but in the aspect ratio as it was originally intended. I'm even abivalent about the CGI. I would much rather have them use the original filmed elements of the models and incorporate them anew, instead of all out CGI.

As for all the great photoshopping that has been done, I'm not convinced. People have been mostly using wide shots. Cropping the image during action scenes and close ups is a lot harder and it will affect the composition.

I may be a purist, but I hope that the point of the remastering process is preserving the show, not revamping it to make it cooler for new viewers. In the case of TOS, CBS got it right. I hope they will (and really expect them to) take the same approach for TNG.
__________________
"No bla bla bla!" - Captain James T. Kirk
Scotty is offline  
Old September 20 2011, 04:42 PM   #220
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
See Star Wreck...lots more interesting stuff on the horizontal..
I'm sure you're aware that this example is a photoshopped picture, not a capture of the original negative. For all we know, the original negative of this frame has a boom mic next to Tasha's head, or a member of the film crew standing by the turbolift, making it unusable.

I'm not saying every shot does have that, but the point of the safe zone is that it isn't intended to be used because it might do. And if you can't guarantee that every shot is safe to extend horizontally, then it means spending time (and money) looking for the mistakes and trying to correct them on a case-by-case basis.

And, I will just add, that even if the area outside of the safe zones is usable for every single shot in every single episode, that the above example still has cropping that diminishes the framing of the shot. There is an unpleasant lack of headroom above Yar, which is not as aesthetically pleasing as the original composition.

You may not mind it. You may think it looks "good enough". In my view, it just isn't worth it.


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?
Umm... to have them in HD.

I'm not a purist by any stretch! I love the new effects in TOS-R, and I'm eager to see more in TNG-R. But I don't want to lose a load of the picture and ruin the framing of the shots just for the sake of it.

That's not an improvement, that's making it worse.

Of course...but it simulates the same effect seen in the TATV footage. I doubt one person complained about the STNG stuff used in TATV. 98% of fans probably won't notice a change in the 16:9 HD if used either.

So you don't want to change the format cause there MAY be a boom mike in .05% of the shots on the negatives?? They can easily photoshop that small percentage away.

It's not "good enough", it looks better to me.

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, 04:45 PM   #221
22 Stars
Commodore
 
Re: The OFFICIAL STNG-R discussion thread!

Scotty, sorry to say that the point of remastering the show is to make it more profitable in syndication and in subsequent bluray and digital releases. People won't pay for SD Trek anymore and this is the next logical step.

I would be ok with a 16x9 cropped (not stretched in any way) version.
22 Stars is offline  
Old September 20 2011, 04:45 PM   #222
RAMA
Vice Admiral
 
RAMA's Avatar
 
Location: NJ, USA
Re: The OFFICIAL STNG-R discussion thread!

Scotty wrote: View Post

The point? I want to see TNG in HD for the added clarity, level of detail and definition but in the aspect ratio as it was originally intended. I'm even abivalent about the CGI. I would much rather have them use the original filmed elements of the models and incorporate them anew, instead of all out CGI.

.

I have a sneaky suspicion they will use more of the original FX from the film negatives (the ones that were mastered on video) than we think, and less %-age of CGI than we think. If they do this I hope it's just the ILM shots.

22 Stars wrote: View Post
Scotty, sorry to say that the point of remastering the show is to make it more profitable in syndication and in subsequent bluray and digital releases. People won't pay for SD Trek anymore and this is the next logical step.

I would be ok with a 16x9 cropped (not stretched in any way) version.
No mention of syndication yet, just Epix, Netflix, and bluray so far.

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, 04:47 PM   #223
Scotty
Rear Admiral
 
Scotty's Avatar
 
Location: The Netherlands, Les Pays Bas, Holland
Re: The OFFICIAL STNG-R discussion thread!

Squiggy wrote: View Post

Times change.

If you want TNG to get any sort of airplay past it's current run on BBC and open it up to a new audience then you shouldn't restrict yourself to an outdated visual standard. Color television didn't vandalize television anymore than sound vandalized the motion picture.
It's not a visual standard, it's a framing style. And in no way is it outdated. Dozens of older shows are still being aired in 4:3 and even some recent movies have been filmed in 1.33.1, like Meek's Cutoff from last year.
__________________
"No bla bla bla!" - Captain James T. Kirk
Scotty is offline  
Old September 20 2011, 04:51 PM   #224
22 Stars
Commodore
 
Re: The OFFICIAL STNG-R discussion thread!

I was at CBS during TOS-R, I'm sure these will be sold into syndication once there are enough of them. It's a great revenue stream and easy to upload the files digitally to the syndicated stations now.

I just hope stations that buy the package find a time closer to Midnight, rather than 3am to air them (at least in my neck of the woods here in NY).
22 Stars is offline  
Old September 20 2011, 04:57 PM   #225
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!

Scotty wrote: View Post
Squiggy wrote: View Post

Times change.

If you want TNG to get any sort of airplay past it's current run on BBC and open it up to a new audience then you shouldn't restrict yourself to an outdated visual standard. Color television didn't vandalize television anymore than sound vandalized the motion picture.
It's not a visual standard, it's a framing style.
Fine. It's a framing style that's used by 100% of current television productions in the United States unless they can't afford to buy the necessary equipment. No one is opting-in to 4:3.

Scotty wrote: View Post
And in no way is it outdated.
Yes, it is. It's not currently being done. It's by definition outdated, like music on AM.

Scotty wrote: View Post
Dozens of older shows are still being aired in 4:3
Not really refuting the outdated claim here. Dozens of older shows are indeed being aired in HD, but they're not generating very many new fans of whatever show, nor will they be airing much longer. As newer 16:9 HD shows are put into syndication they'll replace 4:3 SD shows.

Scotty wrote: View Post
and even some recent movies have been filmed in 1.33.1, like Meek's Cutoff from last year.
A movie no one has heard of from last year isn't really the best defense.

22 Stars wrote: View Post
I was at CBS during TOS-R, I'm sure these will be sold into syndication once there are enough of them. It's a great revenue stream and easy to upload the files digitally to the syndicated stations now.

I just hope stations that buy the package find a time closer to Midnight, rather than 3am to air them (at least in my neck of the woods here in NY).
The entire series has been in the can for quite some time and was put into syndication in 2006 as the series progressed. There aren't too many affiliates who are willing to give an hour a day or week to a show that is viewed as "niche"...at least not an hour that matters, hence the throw away overnight slots.
__________________
ENOUGH OF THIS TURGID BASH WANKERY!
Squiggy 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 01:50 AM.

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