Poll Do you prefer the digitally remastered Enterprise?

[tomswift2002]

You must be mistaken. The CBS Digital Enterprise is proportioned as essentially an exact match for the physical 11-footer. When you see proportions that look different, it's a matter of camera angle and what type of (real or digital) lens was being used. Lenses make a huge difference, and TOS original fx used them brilliantly.

These are the only differences between the ships that might stand out to a casual viewer:

- The 11-footer's lower saucer came of of the mold imperfectly in 1964 and is slightly out of round. The CBS Digital model corrects that to perfectly circular.

- The CBS ship has no risk of misaligned nacelles, a difficult feat for such a large practical model to achieve all the time.

- The CBS ship (2nd, refined version) adds a window to complete the broken row of windows on the forward side of the lower saucer. The digital ship has seven windows in a row, all lit, instead of six with a gap, two of which are dark. I personally disapprove of this change a lot; the original looked more real (internal structures mean you can't put a window everywhere).

- The CBS Digital ship uses the wrong font for "U.S.S. Enterprise NCC-1701" on the upper saucer.

- The CBS Digital ship appears to be a darker gray, but most of this difference is due to more "realistic" lighting choices. Also, the main deflector dish is a metallic copper color on the original, and somewhat grayish on the CBS version.

- The CBS ship's upper saucer has all four square panels lit, while the 11-footer had lighting in three of them, while the portside aft panel was just painted on the saucer.

I'm sure there are other differences in the detailing, but again, the CBS overall proportions are right.

Also another improvement that the CGI managed to do was the pearlescent paint scheme. Apparently the original model was painted in pearlescent paint to make it glow or just stand out, but it also caused problems with the green screen, as it would reflect the green cloth, which is why a couple of shots either had a torpedoe hole through the saucer or nacelles floating above the engineering section with no pylons attached.

But you should also remember that with the original effects we are also seeing generational loss". Even when the original 40-volume DVD set came out, I couldn't help but notice that in some of the later episodes, most likely because the reprinted the completed effects, the Enterprise appeared white, with no hint of grey, and even the smaller details, like the red lines on the nacelles, were either partially or completely missing.

 

[Warped9]

I havre never heard the TOS E was painted with a pearlescent finish. The TMP refit E was painted with a pearlescent finish.

 

[Tomalak]

I don't think they used green as a key colour at the time either - it was usually blue, which is why the Tomorrow is Yesterday scenes don't quite work.

 

[BeatleJWOL]

it was usually blue

Yup.

green screen

Marc Cushman, is that you??

 

[Navaros]

All of the remastered effects look terrible, less epic, more fake, and far worse than the original effects.

 

[ZapBrannigan]

All of the remastered effects look terrible, less epic, more fake, and far worse than the original effects.

The live-action scene extensions and backdrops often look better in the CGI version. Two examples: the Scalos city buildings (Wink of an Eye) and the view out Pike's hospital window (The Menagerie Part 1).

Stratos (The Cloud Minders) looks so much better in CGI that no one can disagree.

I prefer the CGI supernova that caps off All Our Yesterdays, but that's a matter of taste.

As for the Enterprise, the best CGI shots are the ones that carefully duplicate the original camera angle and movement. I love those shots.

 

[spockboy]

Also another improvement that the CGI managed to do was the pearlescent paint scheme. Apparently the original model was painted in pearlescent paint to make it glow or just stand out, but it also caused problems with the green screen, as it would reflect the green cloth, which is why a couple of shots either had a torpedoe hole through the saucer or nacelles floating above the engineering section with no pylons attached.

But you should also remember that with the original effects we are also seeing generational loss". Even when the original 40-volume DVD set came out, I couldn't help but notice that in some of the later episodes, most likely because the reprinted the completed effects, the Enterprise appeared white, with no hint of grey, and even the smaller details, like the red lines on the nacelles, were either partially or completely missing.

That was one of the reasons I made this video. I wanted to demonstrate the degradation through optical printing of the original color scheme, to the faded de-saturated version.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Spockboy

 

[Maurice]

Also another improvement that the CGI managed to do was the pearlescent paint scheme. Apparently the original model was painted in pearlescent paint to make it glow or just stand out, but it also caused problems with the green screen...

No pearlescent paint on the TOS ship. No greenscreen used on TOS or TMP. Bluescreen was the go-to color for most traveling matte work prior to digital.

 

[Warped9]

No pearlescent paint on the TOS ship. No greenscreen used on TOS or TMP. Bluescreen was the go-to color for most traveling matte work prior to digital.

Right. The TMP refit had a pearlescent finish.

 

[tomswift2002]

Right. The TMP refit had a pearlescent finish.

You might want to double check. The reason we got shots of the saucer missing or even the pylons disappearing was because of the green- or blue-screen reflecting onto the ship, and due to time constraints, the shots were not able to be keyed properly, thus was got a see-through saucer or nacelles flying on their own. The TOS-E was not painted in flat-paint.

 

[Warped9]

You might want to double check. The reason we got shots of the saucer missing or even the pylons disappearing was because of the green- or blue-screen reflecting onto the ship, and due to time constraints, the shots were not able to be keyed properly, thus was got a see-through saucer or nacelles flying on their own. The TOS-E was not painted in flat-paint.

I don't have to check. Those who restored the ship to it's original state have said nothing about a pearlescent finish. The paint colours they released are not pearlescent.

 

[Warped9]

Semi-gloss, yes.

 

[Maurice]

Flat paints reflect color as well. Let's not get silly with our pedantry here.

 

[MGagen]

Even the most flat, rough surfaces exhibit reflective effects when the light is coming across at a glancing angle. This is the Fresnel effect. The bleed through in the mattes has to do with this, not a gloss component in the paint.

 

[tomswift2002]

With the pearlescent paint scheme, I was just reading about that recently in either 'Return To Tomorrow' or another non-fiction Trek book. But they were saying that it was pearlescent because Roddenberry wanted originally to just light the model externally, and he wanted it to glow. roddenberry did not ant the tos e To have internal lighting.

 

[Warped9]

With the pearlescent paint scheme, I was just reading about that recently in either 'Return To Tomorrow' or another non-fiction Trek book. But they were saying that it was pearlescent because Roddenberry wanted originally to just light the model externally, and he wanted it to glow. roddenberry did not ant the tos e To have internal lighting.

This sounds like completely made up (Trump like) bs. and counter to everything known about the TOS E for fifty years.

 

[Tomalak]

That thing about the glow rings a bell. Don't know where it comes from though.

 

[spockboy]

Flat paints reflect color as well. Let's not get silly with our pedantry here.

Yes but not nearly as much, Maurice.

Silly and Pendantic?
LOL. Too funny.

Actually I was trying to make peace between Warped 9 and Tom Swift 2002.

BTW, how many physical model effects videos (with both gloss and flat surfaces so you could compare them) have you shot Maurice?
What, none?

Spockboy

 

[spockboy]

Even the most flat, rough surfaces exhibit reflective effects when the light is coming across at a glancing angle. This is the Fresnel effect. The bleed through in the mattes has to do with this, not a gloss component in the paint.

Agreed, I am aware of this effect, however if you have a reflective surface and it is reflecting, in this case a blue background that will be keyed out , it will key out the reflecting part as well.

Clearly BOTH effects are a concern when shooting a physical model and keying it out which I have done many times.

Why do you think all the drydock scenes in Star Trek TMP were shot in front of black velvet and not bluescreen?
Could it be that the surface of the Enterprise was too reflective?

LOL

Spockboy

 

[Maurice]

BTW, how many physical model effects videos (with both gloss and flat surfaces so you could compare them) have you shot Maurice?
What, none?

Spockboy

I was shooting models on 8mm film in 1978, thank you very much. How's that foot tasting?

And that comment about the reflective paint wasn't aimed at you, just the general idea that something has to be gloss to reflect anything.