What are your controversial Star Trek opinions?
- Thread starter Amasov
- Start date
B&W Classics were filmed on film. The resolution is higher than shitty VHS. So B&W movies from 1940 can look better than a TV show from 1990 mastered to tape instead of film.
I have tastes and preferences, and they're not other people's. That's why I put it in "Controversial Opinions". No offense to anyone reading, but DS9 and VOY are not as "sacred" as TOS and TNG. They're just not. So if TOS and TNG can be re-mastered, so can DS9 and VOY.
I have tastes and preferences, and they're not other people's. That's why I put it in "Controversial Opinions". No offense to anyone reading, but DS9 and VOY are not as "sacred" as TOS and TNG. They're just not. So if TOS and TNG can be re-mastered, so can DS9 and VOY.
Last edited:
It's not sacred so doesn't need updating. It's also more money. Is the quality so shitty?
I exaggerated for effect.
Seen on a 1920x1080 flat screen? Yes, yes it is. On UHD it's a tiny window in the corner.
Because I just want to watch it in fucking HD. I don't like SD. Is that a crime? Am I allowed to have preferences that aren't yours? Jesus Christ! Sometimes you just don't know when to quit.
Let's agree to disagree and move on.
Everything is to each their own until it treads on a specific fan's own likes and dislikes. I don't think TOS needed Remastering but it ended up making the show look even crisper and sharper and that series was already 40 years old at the time. Studios will find the money necessary if they think they can profit from an HD upgrade of an existing series and I'd much rather they invest in some project like that than pour it into producing a really crappy new police show or sitcom I and a lot of others won't care about.
As is often said in this forum: to each their own. DS9 has never been "blurry" to me in any way, shape or form but I certainly would enjoy seeing an HD Remastering.
As is often said in this forum: to each their own. DS9 has never been "blurry" to me in any way, shape or form but I certainly would enjoy seeing an HD Remastering.
I used to have a VHS collection of 400. Movies I bought, shows I recorded, rentals I copied with a second VCR, you name it. Within a few years of getting a DVD Player, I junked 90% of my video tape collection. Whatever I kept was something I couldn't replace with on DVD at the time. Someone asked me, "Why did you throw out all those video tapes?" I told them, "If I never would've used VHS in the first place if I had a better option."
In 2008, I got Blu-Ray Player, and didn't look back. But this was around the time when I had to start doing a lot more "adulting" (which is also the reason why I dropped off TrekBBS originally) and I had bills and debt, and so on (still do), so my Blu-Ray Collection never overshadowed my regular DVD collection. That and streaming. But my point about preferring to watch things in HD stands.
When I first bought a Blu-Ray Player and watched something on a Blu-Ray disc at home, nothing compared. I like the visual experience.
In 2008, I got Blu-Ray Player, and didn't look back. But this was around the time when I had to start doing a lot more "adulting" (which is also the reason why I dropped off TrekBBS originally) and I had bills and debt, and so on (still do), so my Blu-Ray Collection never overshadowed my regular DVD collection. That and streaming. But my point about preferring to watch things in HD stands.
When I first bought a Blu-Ray Player and watched something on a Blu-Ray disc at home, nothing compared. I like the visual experience.
Last edited:
I want to understand the experience that it is that shitty. It's not my experience but I want to understand it, what makes it so diminished. Is that a crime to try to understand?
Agree to disagree indeed.
I don't understand what that means.
Eventually, computers will just remaster everything for free.
Since I see it come up so often I'm gathering that many do not want to wait on that.
They are facts, don't trouble yourself.
Right, because the best idea for me to learn and grow and to understand another person's point of view is to "not trouble myself."
V
Vale
Guest
He means that a standard HD ("high definition") definition display (1920✕1080 pixels) stretches the standard definition videos (720✕480) and makes them blurry as a result.
UHD ("ultra high definition") usually refers to a 4K display (3840✕2160 pixels), and playing DVD-quality video on one of these displays without stretching it means it's a tiny rectangle in the corner:
The problem a lot of people are experiencing now with older video that hasn't been remastered to HD or UHD is that stretching them to fit modern high-resolution screens makes them blurry to the point that they look worse than they did running on older, lower resolution screens.
Hope that helps!
Last edited by a moderator:
I wish I could give you a cookie! Thank you so much. That is the most clarity anyone has ever shared on the topic with me in recent time. I don't use an HD screen ever, and I primarily stream or DVD. So, this whole "modern display" thing is almost a foreign language to me because I don't utilize larger screens. That makes way more sense as to why it would appear blurry and if people are preferring to watch DS9 or VOY on a bigger screen then I could see the impact.He means that a standard HD ("high definition") definition display (1920✕1080 pixels) stretches the standard definition videos (720✕480) and makes them blurry as a result.
UHD ("ultra high definition") usually refers to a 4K display (3840✕2160 pixels), and playing DVD-quality video on one of these displays without stretching it means it's a tiny rectangle in the corner:
The problem a lot of people are experiencing now with older video that hasn't been remastered to HD or UHD is that stretching them to fit modern high-resolution screens makes them blurry to the point that they look worse than they did running on older, lower resolution screens.
Now, the controversial part for me is that I still don't think it is a worthwhile investment, but that's just me. I have no intent of updating my video equipment any time soon.
There's even more to that topic in terms of Apple's marketed "Retina Quality" display and how far your eyeballs should be to each type of display and what's their use case.
But that's an entirely seperate rabbit hole that we can go down another time or you can PM me if you want.
I guess this would be an inopportune time to post about how I think Riker is a bad kisser.
Slow down, Warp Drive ! She's not a freaking apple...
Slow down, Warp Drive ! She's not a freaking apple...
Well, I imagine the topic is quite intensive. I just had never made the connection of ratios in terms of screen to picture size. I had always imagined the screens had adapted to the picture itself. As I said my knowledge is very limited.
When it comes to the tech side of these things, I am definitely the equivalent of a Pakled.
Me: We like screens. Screens show things. Things that make us think.
Tech Guy: With this remote, you can access your channels from anywhere in the room. Your remote's home button will take you right back to the main menu.
Me: Buttons are for pushing!
(I kept trying to find a way to add "Teeth are for chewing" because I find that line hilarious for some reason. The best I could do is my buttons line.)
Me: We like screens. Screens show things. Things that make us think.
Tech Guy: With this remote, you can access your channels from anywhere in the room. Your remote's home button will take you right back to the main menu.
Me: Buttons are for pushing!
(I kept trying to find a way to add "Teeth are for chewing" because I find that line hilarious for some reason. The best I could do is my buttons line.)
What the hell?
That’s quite enough of that.
The discussion seems to have righted itself so I’ll keep it open and let’s move in from here.
Similar threads
- Locked
