RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 138,245
Posts: 5,348,458
Members: 24,612
Currently online: 640
Newest member: NeckbeardKnight

TrekToday headlines

Insight Editions Announces Three Trek Books For 2015
By: T'Bonz on Jul 24

To Be Takei Review by Spencer Blohm
By: T'Bonz on Jul 24

Mulgrew: Playing Red
By: T'Bonz on Jul 24

Hallmark 2015 Trek Ornaments
By: T'Bonz on Jul 24

Funko Mini Spock
By: T'Bonz on Jul 23

IDW Publishing Comic Preview
By: T'Bonz on Jul 23

A Baby For Saldana
By: T'Bonz on Jul 23

Klingon Beer Arrives In The US
By: T'Bonz on Jul 22

Star Trek: Prelude To Axanar
By: T'Bonz on Jul 22

Abrams Announces Star Wars: Force For Change Sweepstakes
By: T'Bonz on Jul 22


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.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old October 17 2008, 12:03 AM   #16
SoM
Commander
 
SoM's Avatar
 
Re: So... Is that it for hopes of remastered TNG?

Is there anything new there?

It's been known since TOS-R started that to do the same for TNG would require essentially all of the editing (which was also done on 480i video, not film) and visual post-production work to be redone, from the space effects to the phaser blasts to the science station screens (and the sound post-production too, if they wanted a 5.1 mix).

Given this huge amount of work, far greater than TOS-R (where they used edited prints and just spliced in/overlaid the new effects) AND the far greater number of episodes (176 vs. 80), it would cost a LOT more to do the same for TNG, and it's arguable whether they'd make the cash back in the length of time that "suits" tend to think in.

FalTorPan wrote: View Post
I hated the four-foot filming miniature of the Enterprise-D. Every shot featuring that bulked-up, over-textured model screams, "Toy!"

I think it would be fun to see the ship shots renovated to use something that more closely resembled the six-footer.
If whoever did it had it available to them, they'd almost certainly use the CGI model created for These Were The Voyages... for cost reasons.

And wasn't one of the problems with the 6ft model that it left no place for Ten Forward (which is meant to be the furthest forward point on the ship, at the very front of the saucer; and wasn't invented until S2)?
SoM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 17 2008, 04:44 AM   #17
FalTorPan
Vice Admiral
 
FalTorPan's Avatar
 
Location: Out there... thataway.
Re: So... Is that it for hopes of remastered TNG?

SoM wrote: View Post
FalTorPan wrote: View Post
I hated the four-foot filming miniature of the Enterprise-D. Every shot featuring that bulked-up, over-textured model screams, "Toy!"

I think it would be fun to see the ship shots renovated to use something that more closely resembled the six-footer.
If whoever did it had it available to them, they'd almost certainly use the CGI model created for These Were The Voyages... for cost reasons.

And wasn't one of the problems with the 6ft model that it left no place for Ten Forward (which is meant to be the furthest forward point on the ship, at the very front of the saucer; and wasn't invented until S2)?
Nah. The six-footer had windows at that location. The pattern just didn't match the windows of the set.

The Ten Forward set had windows like this:

narrow wide narrow (port)
gap
narrow wide narrow (center)
gap
narrow wide narrow (starboard)

(I'm ignoring the extra windows visible beyond the set's side walls.)

Contrast that with the six-footer's window arrangement, shown in detail in the first image of this page.
__________________
Watch ASTRONUTS! Visit Trekplace! Check out my personal website!
FalTorPan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 17 2008, 05:05 AM   #18
SoM
Commander
 
SoM's Avatar
 
Re: So... Is that it for hopes of remastered TNG?

FalTorPan wrote: View Post
SoM wrote: View Post
And wasn't one of the problems with the 6ft model that it left no place for Ten Forward (which is meant to be the furthest forward point on the ship, at the very front of the saucer; and wasn't invented until S2)?
Nah. The six-footer had windows at that location. The pattern just didn't match the windows of the set.

The Ten Forward set had windows like this:

narrow wide narrow (port)
gap
narrow wide narrow (center)
gap
narrow wide narrow (starboard)

(I'm ignoring the extra windows visible beyond the set's side walls.)

Contrast that with the six-footer's window arrangement, shown in detail in the first image of this page.
I'm not so much talking about the horizontal arrangement (although that's a factor), but about the fact that the rim is too narrow - it was designed to be one deck high in the 6ft model (see this post by Andrew Probert, the designer, with a scale sketch of how he wanted the rim to be). The 4ft model has a much thicker rim to more closely match the two-deck rim layout the set requires.

This article at Ex Astris Scientia has the comparison pictures of the models, focusing on the rim.
SoM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 17 2008, 04:59 PM   #19
JayTheTrekkie
Captain
 
JayTheTrekkie's Avatar
 
Location: Nova Scotia, Canada
Send a message via Yahoo to JayTheTrekkie
Re: So... Is that it for hopes of remastered TNG?

MrsPicard wrote: View Post
I hope they will keep their hands off 'my' TNG. If not, I'll turn into a . *lol*

I mean TNG is fine the way it is. No need for unnecessary re-mastering. *shakes fist* Leave it alone, I say!

Got that right Mrs. P

I love TNG the way it is...there is no need for re-mastering.
JayTheTrekkie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 17 2008, 05:03 PM   #20
ST-One
Vice Admiral
 
Location: Germany - with UHC since the early 1900s
Re: So... Is that it for hopes of remastered TNG?

JayTheTrekkie wrote: View Post
MrsPicard wrote: View Post
I hope they will keep their hands off 'my' TNG. If not, I'll turn into a . *lol*

I mean TNG is fine the way it is. No need for unnecessary re-mastering. *shakes fist* Leave it alone, I say!

Got that right Mrs. P

I love TNG the way it is...there is no need for re-mastering.
Even if the VFX wouldn't need to be replaced, there would be need for remastering.
ST-One is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 18 2008, 06:29 AM   #21
Harvey
Admiral
 
Harvey's Avatar
 
Re: So... Is that it for hopes of remastered TNG?

SoM wrote: View Post
*SNIP*(and the sound post-production too, if they wanted a 5.1 mix)*SNIP*
Why would they have to do anything with the sound mix? A 5.1 track was already created for the DVDs we have, no?
__________________
"This begs explanation." - de Forest Research on Star Trek

My blog: Star Trek Fact Check.
Harvey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 18 2008, 02:32 PM   #22
FalTorPan
Vice Admiral
 
FalTorPan's Avatar
 
Location: Out there... thataway.
Re: So... Is that it for hopes of remastered TNG?

SoM wrote: View Post
FalTorPan wrote: View Post
SoM wrote: View Post
And wasn't one of the problems with the 6ft model that it left no place for Ten Forward (which is meant to be the furthest forward point on the ship, at the very front of the saucer; and wasn't invented until S2)?
Nah. The six-footer had windows at that location. The pattern just didn't match the windows of the set.

The Ten Forward set had windows like this:

narrow wide narrow (port)
gap
narrow wide narrow (center)
gap
narrow wide narrow (starboard)

(I'm ignoring the extra windows visible beyond the set's side walls.)

Contrast that with the six-footer's window arrangement, shown in detail in the first image of this page.
I'm not so much talking about the horizontal arrangement (although that's a factor), but about the fact that the rim is too narrow - it was designed to be one deck high in the 6ft model (see this post by Andrew Probert, the designer, with a scale sketch of how he wanted the rim to be). The 4ft model has a much thicker rim to more closely match the two-deck rim layout the set requires.

This article at Ex Astris Scientia has the comparison pictures of the models, focusing on the rim.
I'm very aware of that fact; however, I'm not at all convinced that a key reason for building the four-foot miniature was to beef up the saucer rim in order to make it more capable of containing the Ten Forward set. Models cost a lot of money to build, and this is an extremely trivial detail.
__________________
Watch ASTRONUTS! Visit Trekplace! Check out my personal website!
FalTorPan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 19 2008, 11:30 AM   #23
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: In the 23rd Century...
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: So... Is that it for hopes of remastered TNG?

ST-One wrote: View Post
FalTorPan wrote: View Post
I hated the four-foot filming miniature of the Enterprise-D. Every shot featuring that bulked-up, over-textured model screams, "Toy!"

I think it would be fun to see the ship shots renovated to use something that more closely resembled the six-footer.


Praetor_Shinzon wrote: View Post
there are a few shots, certain scenes where i think new effects could help. but overall TNG is fine as is.
It is fine alright.
Just not presentable in HD.
You know... I just don't get this attitude that these shows are not viewable at HD resolutions. I own a 720p set and both an HD-DVD player (HD-A3) and the Sony Playstation 3. These shows look fine when upscaled to the 720p resolution over HDMI. There are some matte shots that don't quite work (Picard standing in front of the main viewscreen during 'Lonely Among Us'.), but these are definitely the exception.

I honestly don't think that I would shell out the cash for another twenty-one seasons of 24th century Trek for a few updated effects shots. As a matter of fact I think my Trek buying list for HD would be rather short:


1. Star Trek Season 1 on Blu-Ray
2. Star Trek Season 2 on Blu-Ray
3. Star Trek Season 3 on Blu-Ray
4. The Motion Picture on Blu-Ray
5. Star Trek (2009) on Blu-Ray

Plus II, III, VI and Star Trek: Enterprise as the prices come down.


The only reason I didn't get ST Season 1 on HD-DVD was it was already dying format by the time the set was released.
__________________
"I had no idea you were so... formidable. " - Anan 7 to James T. Kirk, A Taste of Armageddon

Last edited by BillJ; October 19 2008 at 12:14 PM.
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 19 2008, 12:28 PM   #24
The Caretaker
Lieutenant
 
Location: NW UK
Re: So... Is that it for hopes of remastered TNG?

I really wouldn't want the effects replaced, they are part of the charm of the show. The only thing I would like would be for Season 5 to be sharpened up a bit, it bugs me that the early seasons are crystal clear, just towards the middle of the run it's like watching the show on a blurred TV. I realise that was the fashion for all shows at the time, but it really dates it.
The Caretaker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 19 2008, 01:26 PM   #25
Dale
Vice Admiral
 
Dale's Avatar
 
Location: Mt. Baldy, CA
Re: So... Is that it for hopes of remastered TNG?

The TNG effects will remain tolerable, to my way of thinking, for some time to come. They only redid TOS after nearly 40 years because the SFX had improved by leaps and bounds during that time and the show had become unviable to a new generation of potential viewers.
__________________
For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. - 2 Timothy 4:3
Dale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 19 2008, 02:13 PM   #26
ST-One
Vice Admiral
 
Location: Germany - with UHC since the early 1900s
Re: So... Is that it for hopes of remastered TNG?

Dale wrote: View Post
The TNG effects will remain tolerable, to my way of thinking, for some time to come. They only redid TOS after nearly 40 years because the SFX had improved by leaps and bounds during that time and the show had become unviable to a new generation of potential viewers.
That wasn't the reason (at least not the sole reason) for the 'remastering' of TOS.
ST-One is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 19 2008, 02:40 PM   #27
ChristopherPike
Rear Admiral
 
ChristopherPike's Avatar
 
Re: So... Is that it for hopes of remastered TNG?

TNG's FX are pretty consistant on the whole and don't really need the overhaul TOS got. Looking at the various shots of orbiting starships across TOS-R, TNG, DS9 & VOY, they're quite uniform and compliment each other.

Not having a HD TV myself yet, does TNG really look that bad when upscaled from Standard Definition? There must be many shows from the late 80's/90's, when everything was done on videotape, which can't be improved on because the film rushes were not kept (to say nothing of studio based sitcoms done entirely on VT). For those, we're really looking for a time when technology can artificially create extra lines of picture information.
__________________
STAR TREK: ENTERPRISE Season 5 on Netflix Facebook page
ChristopherPike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 19 2008, 03:24 PM   #28
CaptainStoner
Knuckle-dragging TNZ Denizen
 
CaptainStoner's Avatar
 
Location: Hill dweller
Re: So... Is that it for hopes of remastered TNG?

I've watched some TNG at my Mom's, who has a big plasma 1080p. It didn't look nearly as bad as some of the currently broadcast low-def shows like Friends and the like -
TNG could use a bunch of new incidental ship shots, but I would be aghast to see CGI remakes of the custom ones they did, like in Where No One Has Gone Before. Those are ingenius pinnacles of that art form, whereas with TOS, that form was much less mature (and IMO much easier to stomach replacing).

One worry I have with high def TNG - Data and Worf. Especially Data. In the films, closeups of Spiner looked pretty bad. It's definetly a can of worms. Like others are saying, it may come down to some kind of yet uninvented upconversion, and (hopefully) a larger palette of ship exteriors.

That being said, it doesn't look bad on a highdef TV. Other shows look a lot worse to me. Maybe because the lighting of TNG is often so dramatic.
CaptainStoner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 19 2008, 07:02 PM   #29
Harvey
Admiral
 
Harvey's Avatar
 
Re: So... Is that it for hopes of remastered TNG?

CaptainStoner wrote: View Post
I've watched some TNG at my Mom's, who has a big plasma 1080p. It didn't look nearly as bad as some of the currently broadcast low-def shows like Friends and the like...
Wasn't Friends shot on video, though? Even though TNG was mastered on video, it was originally filmed in 35mm (outside of the effects in seasons 1 & 2).
__________________
"This begs explanation." - de Forest Research on Star Trek

My blog: Star Trek Fact Check.
Harvey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 20 2008, 08:04 AM   #30
Mr. Laser Beam
Fleet Admiral
 
Mr. Laser Beam's Avatar
 
Location: The visitor's bullpen
View Mr. Laser Beam's Twitter Profile
Re: So... Is that it for hopes of remastered TNG?

BillJ wrote: View Post
You know... I just don't get this attitude that these shows are not viewable at HD resolutions. I own a 720p set and both an HD-DVD player (HD-A3) and the Sony Playstation 3. These shows look fine when upscaled to the 720p resolution over HDMI.
But that's the thing: When you watch TNG (or DS9 or Voyager) like that, you aren't actually viewing the show *in native HD*. Just upconverted standard-def programming. There is a difference. Upconversion does not mean HD.

Take your 720p set, for example, and watch a TV channel that is standard def, i.e. not HD. You are still watching something that's upconverted (if it wasn't, it'd be in a little box in the middle of the screen surrounded by black).

This is why 'upconverting DVD players' are a bullshit marketing gimmick. ALL HDTVs upconvert (for exactly the reason I just gave). And most of them have upscalers that are better than any upconverting DVD player could hope to have.
__________________
In labor news: Longshoremen walked off the piers today. Rescue operations are continuing.
Mr. Laser Beam is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
remastered

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 06:31 PM.

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