I wouldn't jump to that conclusion.
Star Trek: Renegades
- Thread starter Danlav05
- Start date
I wouldn't jump to that conclusion.
Indeed. If anything, the technical prowess demonstrated by the Johnson Brothers, and later Maurice in making Starship Exeter is well documented. Other fan film groups - Hidden Frontier, Intrepid, Continues, New Voyages, and even Potemkin have regularly discussed and detailed how they've accomplished their magic on screen.
Maurice especially has taken great care to explain the technical side of production and post-production in his Fan Filmmaker Primer thread (which honestly seems to get little love around here, and that's a goddamn shame), and also more specifically the Making of Exeter thread detailing how he and the team put together Exeter's final act and final cut.
Maurice especially has taken great care to explain the technical side of production and post-production in his Fan Filmmaker Primer thread (which honestly seems to get little love around here, and that's a goddamn shame), and also more specifically the Making of Exeter thread detailing how he and the team put together Exeter's final act and final cut.
As I understand it, The live action for TNG, DS9, VOY was indeed shot on film; BUT the shots were then transferred to Betacam SP (a professional broadcast tape format back in the day these shows were in production); and ALL the editing (including SFX which were transferred/rendered directly to Betacam tape too); was done on tape and thus the final 'masters' ONLY existed on tape.
That why redoing these shows for Blu-Ray (HD) is such a bear as they had to go and find the original film shots (which hopefully would still exist as film vault storage is costly and isn't infinite); and re-scan, clean up, and then re-edit as frame accurately as possible all the live action (probably using the betacam masters as reference.) They'd of course also want to re-do all the SFX visual shots and render them out at HD resolution.
In that way TOS was easier to do as the original masters existed on film, so at least they didn't need to re-edit the live footage, just scan, clean up and re-do the SFX visuals (and as we all know TOS was very sparse on visual effects shots, which reduced the cost/time needed as well.)
Professional post-production practices and protocols include the use of something called an EDL (Editior's Decision Log) which tracks where cuts and edits are made.
Today, editors cut footage that has been digitally transferred from HD and the EDL records and tracks these edits so that once the final edit is decided upon, the EDL and all the other post-production material can go to the vendor of choice (Technicolor, Deluxe, whoever) who will then reassemble the exact same edit using the HD footage itself based on the EDL, and make all the changes in picture and sound, add the music, visual effects, sound effects, titles, and color correction for what's called "final playback" or final mix."
This is a large part of the work that has to be done on these Star Trek Blu-Rays, and assuming the original EDLs have been kept on file (they usually are, and archived by the studio) they would need to be dug up as well, but even more the real work has been, as you noted, the search and finding of the original film elements, which as we saw with the TNG preview disc (that one second bit from "Sins of the Father") weren't all found in time.
Today, editors cut footage that has been digitally transferred from HD and the EDL records and tracks these edits so that once the final edit is decided upon, the EDL and all the other post-production material can go to the vendor of choice (Technicolor, Deluxe, whoever) who will then reassemble the exact same edit using the HD footage itself based on the EDL, and make all the changes in picture and sound, add the music, visual effects, sound effects, titles, and color correction for what's called "final playback" or final mix."
This is a large part of the work that has to be done on these Star Trek Blu-Rays, and assuming the original EDLs have been kept on file (they usually are, and archived by the studio) they would need to be dug up as well, but even more the real work has been, as you noted, the search and finding of the original film elements, which as we saw with the TNG preview disc (that one second bit from "Sins of the Father") weren't all found in time.
I know. I was responding to the suggestion that DS9 and Voyager were shot on video. I'm aware of the process.
Scientists and Engineers develop platforms on which packages are created for end users. You are end users.
The first use of microwave communications was on D-Day in WWII. The Nazis were able to cut or create static for the telephone, radio, and every previously KNOWN tech that day. The Army Corp of Engineers kept the troops in touch with their commanders with the first ever use of microwave communications equipment. The people who operated the equipment were good and courageous communications officers, like my sister's late father-in-law, who landed on Omaha beach. Her father-in-law was a good end user, and doubtless helped drive back the Nazis and kept the troops on track. But it was my father who designed the equipment and field tested and corrected it. My father, the engineer. My father, the geek.
After the military, my father invented many other base technologies which lead to such developments as satellite TV, cell phone towers, (both are microwave communications equipment) and the first anti-missile system. He was listed as 'inventor' on the first patent developed for production for the fax machine.
My sister's father-in-law went into sales and made more than three times as much money.
I am not questioning the usefulness, skill, or value of end-users, but that's not where the tech development lies. As Star Trek fans, I find your incredulous response to the idea that we are in the midst of rapidly advancing technology to be... illogical.
RIGHT NOW, scientists at select universities, IBM, Intel, Cray, and other high-end computer manufacturers are trying to jump the problem that you can't make processors smaller than atoms, by creating a whole new technology of computing, quantum computing. It potentially has massive potential for the idea called, 'fuzzy logic' which is believed to be involved in judgement and art.
That is just one of many possible technologies which could keep computers getting more powerful, as we seem to be coming to the end of "Moore's Law" for conventional silicon chips.
Sometimes tech goes off in a direct not foreseen. In the 1950s, people assumed cars would keep getting faster and more powerful, and would fly. Instead, they became more efficient, safer, and more reliable and they produced less toxic gas. Not as exciting a story, but not necessarily a worse direction.
Perhaps computers will reach the singularity some predict, and perhaps they won't. But right now our computers are capable of doing much more than they do. Our use of their power is highly inefficient. I suspect that software development with an eye on efficiency alone could increase their effective power many times over.
For heaven's sake, your cell phone has more power than an IBM 360 had in the 1970s. The computers you use to render art have many times more power that all of NASA had in 1969 for the real moon landing.
Tech is moving forward, and it keeps moving faster.
Computer dream: http://www.iflscience.com/technology/artificial-intelligence-dreams
*********************
I'm glad to hear that DS9 and VOY were shot on film. That will, when the work becomes cheap enough, make then end product truer and better than it would have been without the film. I know nothing about filmmaking. But I do see TVs being sold with 4x the number of pixels that HD has, so even that is not at an end.
The first use of microwave communications was on D-Day in WWII. The Nazis were able to cut or create static for the telephone, radio, and every previously KNOWN tech that day. The Army Corp of Engineers kept the troops in touch with their commanders with the first ever use of microwave communications equipment. The people who operated the equipment were good and courageous communications officers, like my sister's late father-in-law, who landed on Omaha beach. Her father-in-law was a good end user, and doubtless helped drive back the Nazis and kept the troops on track. But it was my father who designed the equipment and field tested and corrected it. My father, the engineer. My father, the geek.
After the military, my father invented many other base technologies which lead to such developments as satellite TV, cell phone towers, (both are microwave communications equipment) and the first anti-missile system. He was listed as 'inventor' on the first patent developed for production for the fax machine.
My sister's father-in-law went into sales and made more than three times as much money.
I am not questioning the usefulness, skill, or value of end-users, but that's not where the tech development lies. As Star Trek fans, I find your incredulous response to the idea that we are in the midst of rapidly advancing technology to be... illogical.
RIGHT NOW, scientists at select universities, IBM, Intel, Cray, and other high-end computer manufacturers are trying to jump the problem that you can't make processors smaller than atoms, by creating a whole new technology of computing, quantum computing. It potentially has massive potential for the idea called, 'fuzzy logic' which is believed to be involved in judgement and art.
That is just one of many possible technologies which could keep computers getting more powerful, as we seem to be coming to the end of "Moore's Law" for conventional silicon chips.
Sometimes tech goes off in a direct not foreseen. In the 1950s, people assumed cars would keep getting faster and more powerful, and would fly. Instead, they became more efficient, safer, and more reliable and they produced less toxic gas. Not as exciting a story, but not necessarily a worse direction.
Perhaps computers will reach the singularity some predict, and perhaps they won't. But right now our computers are capable of doing much more than they do. Our use of their power is highly inefficient. I suspect that software development with an eye on efficiency alone could increase their effective power many times over.
For heaven's sake, your cell phone has more power than an IBM 360 had in the 1970s. The computers you use to render art have many times more power that all of NASA had in 1969 for the real moon landing.
Tech is moving forward, and it keeps moving faster.
Computer dream: http://www.iflscience.com/technology/artificial-intelligence-dreams
*********************
I'm glad to hear that DS9 and VOY were shot on film. That will, when the work becomes cheap enough, make then end product truer and better than it would have been without the film. I know nothing about filmmaking. But I do see TVs being sold with 4x the number of pixels that HD has, so even that is not at an end.
It's good you are open enough to admit this; not many people can.
That said, there are several people on this forum who do know quite a bit about filmmaking. Perhaps it's worth considering that they do know what they are talking about?
I tend to agree.
I watched the cut of Renegades provided to the backers and was mostly entertained. The film has several issues of course, most of which are sadly rooted in a script that probably could have benefited from a tight rewrite, but I suspect that most fans will enjoy the production regardless.
Wilkinson is lovely to watch on screen and it's nice to see so many familiar faces from the official productions making appearances. I have more to add, but I'll wait till the final, wide release is distributed before doing so.
I watched the cut of Renegades provided to the backers and was mostly entertained. The film has several issues of course, most of which are sadly rooted in a script that probably could have benefited from a tight rewrite, but I suspect that most fans will enjoy the production regardless.
Wilkinson is lovely to watch on screen and it's nice to see so many familiar faces from the official productions making appearances. I have more to add, but I'll wait till the final, wide release is distributed before doing so.
Wait, provided to the backers? I'm a backer, I haven't gotten anything yet. Did I miss a release?
Yeah it was about two weeks ago and only available for a short time.
A
Amaris
Guest
Our goal is to have the final film completed by the August 1st LA premiere. A public release date has not been set yet, we hope it won't be to long afterwards.
Fredh, please email me at: tom @ startrekrenegades.com and I will see why you did not get the email about the backer streaming we had.
Fredh, please email me at: tom @ startrekrenegades.com and I will see why you did not get the email about the backer streaming we had.
This is absolutely true and the praise is well-earned. With today's technology and some know-how, it's quite possible for just about any group to create great looking sets and visual effects, however a good script is the sine que non when it comes to producing an entertaining product.
I have said in the past that if you have a good script that any halfway competent troupe of actors can pull it off but it the writing isn't good all even the best actors will do is reveal the precise degree of its crapitude.
(There are occasions where great actors can transcend the material and make you enjoy the performances so much you lose track of how bad the writing is. But that's really uncommon.)
(There are occasions where great actors can transcend the material and make you enjoy the performances so much you lose track of how bad the writing is. But that's really uncommon.)
Similar threads
- Poll
