remastered..THUMBS DOWN

[Gepard]

The HD versions are not original! The show was never broadcast in HD. It was never intended to be seen in HD. The original, classic, 1968 VFX and resolution version is right there, on DVD, like it's always been. For someone who hates the concept of "painting over the Mona Lisa" so much, you sure seem eager to embrace new technology for viewing TOS. But not too much new technology, or else the original has been ruined. RUINED!

 

[3D Master]

The HD versions are not original! The show was never broadcast in HD. It was never intended to be seen in HD. The original, classic, 1968 VFX and resolution version is right there, on DVD, like it's always been. For someone who hates the concept of "painting over the Mona Lisa" so much, you sure seem eager to embrace new technology for viewing TOS. But not too much new technology, or else the original has been ruined. RUINED!

The Remastered versions are not original indeed. The filmed material, however, IS original, in fact in a way it's MORE original than what we've been seeing, as it is closer to what they actually film.

Simply using the original film and show it in as high a resolution as possible doesn't make changed, it's still the same filmed material.

 

[trevanian]

The HD versions are not original! The show was never broadcast in HD. It was never intended to be seen in HD. The original, classic, 1968 VFX and resolution version is right there, on DVD, like it's always been.

Just TRY to understand this, just once okay? The originals were FILMED IN 35mm and dailies were theatrically screened for review ... that means most CREATIVE DECISIONS about the quality were made on the basis of seeing it under conditions totally unlike folks seeing it on a 60s era tube, but instead on the higher standard visible with 35mm and on a big screen.

The more of an HD experience that is created with modern tech, the closer (in theory anyway) you are getting to the way the makers saw the raw material and evaluated it. EXCEPT FOR THIS NEW STUFF!

 

[Gepard]

The originals were FILMED IN 35mm and dailies were theatrically screened for review ... that means most CREATIVE DECISIONS about the quality were made on the basis of seeing it under conditions totally unlike folks seeing it on a 60s era tube, but instead on the higher standard visible with 35mm and on a big screen.

Right. Because the HD-visible coffee stains on Spock's tunic were clearly an important creative element.

The more of an HD experience that is created with modern tech, the closer (in theory anyway) you are getting to the way the makers saw the raw material and evaluated it. EXCEPT FOR THIS NEW STUFF!

Perfectly true. Also perfectly irrelevant to the argument that the anti-TOS-R folks have been making so far, which has been to ignore any focus on 'what the creators might have intended' and instead focus on preserving what we, as 1960s viewers, got. I bet the producers saw the Enterpise in amazing, raw material glory when they looked at the model in person, too. Doesn't change that that was never what the original broadcasts showed, or what the public was intended to see. Or do you not care about preserving the artistic integrity of the show as a historical artifact? You are hereby banished for not being a Real Trek Fan (TM.) I banish you. You are banished.

Seriously, you want a newer, improved way of seeing TOS? So do I. But I object to this Luddite mindset, that only seems to want new technology when it doesn't interfere with carefully preserved golden idols.

 

[trevanian]

The originals were FILMED IN 35mm and dailies were theatrically screened for review ... that means most CREATIVE DECISIONS about the quality were made on the basis of seeing it under conditions totally unlike folks seeing it on a 60s era tube, but instead on the higher standard visible with 35mm and on a big screen.

Right. Because the HD-visible coffee stains on Spock's tunic were clearly an important creative element.

The more of an HD experience that is created with modern tech, the closer (in theory anyway) you are getting to the way the makers saw the raw material and evaluated it. EXCEPT FOR THIS NEW STUFF!

Perfectly true. Also perfectly irrelevant to the argument that the anti-TOS-R folks have been making so far, which has been to ignore any focus on 'what the creators might have intended' and instead focus on preserving what we, as 1960s viewers, got. I bet the producers saw the Enterpise in amazing, raw material glory when they looked at the model in person, too. Doesn't change that that was never what the original broadcasts showed, or what the public was intended to see. Or do you not care about preserving the artistic integrity of the show as a historical artifact? You are hereby banished for not being a Real Trek Fan (TM.) I banish you. You are banished.

Seriously, you want a newer, improved way of seeing TOS? So do I. But I object to this Luddite mindset, that only seems to want new technology when it doesn't interfere with carefully preserved golden idols.

I don't claim to be a trek fan (in fact, I'm not even comfortable with the appellation.) So banish all you like, whatever the 'in' reference means.

The luddite call is offensive as all get-out, btw.

If you can't see the sense of presence a model shot -- even a grainy, badly comped model shot -- has way over bad (not all, just bad and mediocre) CG then we're not looking at things with anything remotely like the same set of visual standards, and are therefore talking at cross purposes.

So I guess that means, 'banish ye, fat jack' (not an insult, a FALSTAFF/CHIMES AT MIDNIGHT reference.)

 

[Gepard]

So banish all you like, whatever the 'in' reference means.

Sadly, not a Trek reference at all.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

The originals are NOT there. They do not exist in any HD format, and the its going now, they never will be.

They continue to exist in the format for which they were designed.

The artists and technicians working on TOS never designed their work to be seen in high definition or on large screens; everything about the show was designed to look as good as possible within the broadcast standards of color television in the United States in the 1960s.

There's no reason to embarrass the TOS effects artists by blowing their work up to a size and resolution that makes all of the flaws apparent in ways that they could not anticipate or compensate for at the time.

As it is, most of the live-action photography is now available in HD as part of the Remastered episodes - and unfortunately it doesn't always hold up either (check out Spock's ears).

Sadly, not a Trek reference at all.

"In" references are to be discouraged. Clumsy and nerdish references to badly written 1970s-era student films are preferred.

 

[trevanian]

If I understand the above correctly ... it is the first time I've ever seen a mid-60s Orson Welles-directed independent feature film referred to as being a "badly written 1970s-era student film."

 

[3D Master]

The originals are NOT there. They do not exist in any HD format, and the its going now, they never will be.

They continue to exist in the format for which they were designed.

The artists and technicians working on TOS never designed their work to be seen in high definition or on large screens; everything about the show was designed to look as good as possible within the broadcast standards of color television in the United States in the 1960s.

There's no reason to embarrass the TOS effects artists by blowing their work up to a size and resolution that makes all of the flaws apparent in ways that they could not anticipate or compensate for at the time.

As it is, most of the live-action photography is now available in HD as part of the Remastered episodes - and unfortunately it doesn't always hold up either (check out Spock's ears).

Except for the annoying fact that's we've SEEN hi-res HD pictures of the effects - amateurish blown up, not cleaned up, and not from the film that's remained of it - and it still looks good. Put any genuine effort into it, and it'd look amazing. So they won't be embarrased, and even if it did look bad, it still wouldn't be embarrassing if you know the in what time, and under what constraitns they made them.

And it's only a matter of time, before the format it was made for is obsolete, and the originals will never be seen in the process if they are not added to future releases.

Simple fact is, ALL releases until the advent of HD and not shot on film, will have to be viewed in the future on HD sets, whether it's kept in SD resolution (and as a result gets enlarge and blurred out) or somehow gets blown up properly to HD resolutions. Star Trek should not be any different, except that for it new CGI effects are made, and the originals are kept under lock and key.

 

[Gepard]

and it still looks good.

Then we must have very different definitions of "good." I saw blurry, grainy, smeared, scratched, double-exposed garbage. That's not to say a really talented team of artists couldn't have cleaned it up to one extent or another, but I bet it would not have been easy or cheap or all that great. As ST-One brought up in another thread, there's so little detail in the FX shots (for example, the red stripes on the side of the secondary hull are one big blur) that any cleanup effort would have had to paint in a significant amount pof new detail, reslting in "original" effects shots that woudl be partially CGI anyway.

and the originals are kept under lock and key.

They. Are. NOT. UNDER. LOCK. AND. [highlight]KEY!!!!![/highlight]

Holy flying frak, they're right where they always were, on DVD, VHS and being repeated on TV Land every night. Acting like Paramount is holding them hostage because they've had the temerity to keep them exactly like they've been for 42 years is nothing more than sour grapes. Dislike the CGI effects on aesthetic grounds all you like, but this hyperbole about the horrible fate suffered by the original versions is beyond absurd.

 

[RobertScorpio]

I didn't consider the J2 notion extreme ... to be honest, I'd probably be less offended, because at least it would be an object that looked physical.

When you rescore LEGEND, dumping Goldsmith and replacing him with TANGERINE DREAM, you are significantly altering the experience of the film. Yet the visual is unchanged. In this instance, they ARE altering the visual, which is at least the 'meat' in meat&potatoes, even with a talk-happy show like TOS.

For me it is about respecting the work and the original artists (which is why the other thread I'm in right now in GENERAL is about the HarlanEllison treksuit.) If not for an obscure bit of legal verbiage in Welles' CITIZEN KANE contract, Turner would have released a colorized version more than two decades back. Your point is that affords the viewer options. My point is that the viewer is being afforded an option the artist did not want. And, to trot out my old screed against chooseyourownending, I don't think there should be a version of MOBY DICK where Ahab gets a bionic leg and beats Moby, all the while shouting in Shatneresque parody, "DICK!!!!"

Bravo..I totally agree..

Rob
Scorpio

 

[number6]

The originals are NOT there. They do not exist in any HD format, and the its going now, they never will be.

They continue to exist in the format for which they were designed.

The artists and technicians working on TOS never designed their work to be seen in high definition or on large screens; everything about the show was designed to look as good as possible within the broadcast standards of color television in the United States in the 1960s.

There's no reason to embarrass the TOS effects artists by blowing their work up to a size and resolution that makes all of the flaws apparent in ways that they could not anticipate or compensate for at the time.

As it is, most of the live-action photography is now available in HD as part of the Remastered episodes - and unfortunately it doesn't always hold up either (check out Spock's ears).

Sadly, not a Trek reference at all.

"In" references are to be discouraged. Clumsy and nerdish references to badly written 1970s-era student films are preferred.

QFT.

If I understand the above correctly ... it is the first time I've ever seen a mid-60s Orson Welles-directed independent feature film referred to as being a "badly written 1970s-era student film."

You don't understand correctly.

and it still looks good.

Then we must have very different definitions of "good." I saw blurry, grainy, smeared, scratched, double-exposed garbage. That's not to say a really talented team of artists couldn't have cleaned it up to one extent or another, but I bet it would not have been easy or cheap or all that great. As ST-One brought up in another thread, there's so little detail in the FX shots (for example, the red stripes on the side of the secondary hull are one big blur) that any cleanup effort would have had to paint in a significant amount pof new detail, reslting in "original" effects shots that woudl be partially CGI anyway.

and the originals are kept under lock and key.

They. Are. NOT. UNDER. LOCK. AND. [highlight]KEY!!!!![/highlight]

Holy flying frak, they're right where they always were, on DVD, VHS and being repeated on TV Land every night. Acting like Paramount is holding them hostage because they've had the temerity to keep them exactly like they've been for 42 years is nothing more than sour grapes. Dislike the CGI effects on aesthetic grounds all you like, but this hyperbole about the horrible fate suffered by the original versions is beyond absurd.

Again QFT.

There are now two versions of TOS available. Enjoy the one you like and let the other guy like the one he likes. Why is that so difficult?

 

[trevanian]

Quote:
Originally Posted by trevanian
If I understand the above correctly ... it is the first time I've ever seen a mid-60s Orson Welles-directed independent feature film referred to as being a "badly written 1970s-era student film."

From #6
You don't understand correctly.

Trevanian again (new)
Okay, I'll bite. Enlighten me.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

... we've SEEN hi-res HD pictures of the effects - amateurish blown up, not cleaned up, and not from the film that's remained of it - and it still looks good.

Sorry, it doesn't.

It looks very limited, and pretty bad. The shot design is nice sometimes, but the original effects look awful in HD - period.

There are now two versions of TOS available. Enjoy the one you like and let the other guy like the one he likes. Why is that so difficult?

There appears to be no good answer to that question.

 

[3D Master]

Whether or not some old versions on an old format are still around, doesn't matter. It's the future that is a problem. Soon, they will not be around anymore, they won't be playable. And thus, the originals are gone.

I can't imagine how utterly incapable people are at looking at the near future, and what's going on. If they were ever planning on releasing the originals on HD and further future formats, they would have been on those HD-DVDs NOW. Even if it is, as you call, badly scratched up and done with, they would have been at least on there.

Yet they are not.

 

[trevanian]

Looking at his watch, trevanian is still waiting for #6 to enlighten him ...

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Oh, calm down.

They'll eventually release a set with both old and improved versions of TOS on it.

You can be sure of that. You know why?

Because that will enable them to resell TOS yet again to completists and to people who wouldn't buy the Remastered version.

 

[Outpost4]

And trevanian, calm down about number6, too. He's been offline since you first posted, an easy enough fact to check if you look at his profile.

 

[trevanian]

And trevanian, calm down about number6, too. He's been offline since you first posted, an easy enough fact to check if you look at his profile.

If somebody is going to drop a sillyass snipe like that and NOT expect a reply, he/she/it shouldn't be dropping the sillyass snipe in the first place. But I guess there isn't any law here against sillyass sniping, considering the nature of certain other posters ...

Plus, you don't have to be online to read the site, which is why I never bother checking that anyway.

 

[number6]

And trevanian, calm down about number6, too. He's been offline since you first posted, an easy enough fact to check if you look at his profile.

If somebody is going to drop a sillyass snipe like that and NOT expect a reply, he/she/it shouldn't be dropping the sillyass snipe in the first place. But I guess there isn't any law here against sillyass sniping, considering the nature of certain other posters ...

Plus, you don't have to be online to read the site, which is why I never bother checking that anyway.

You need to stop experimenting with the dosage.

Especially if you feel you need to check with me for enlightenment.

if I have to explain it, you just wouldn't get it.