Anyone else notice the huge difference 1987 TNG and 1995 Voyager?

[ReadyAndWilling]

hey guys, i've been watching a bit of both TNG and VOY and wow, there is such a huge production and just overall advancement between 1987 and 1995. was i the only one that noticed this? hell, voyager from 1995 still looks brand new and modern to me, even compared to recent shows like SG: Atlantis. the interior of the 2 ships are what really look different to me. TNG 1987 looks like it's from the 80's and Voy 1995 looks brand new.

 

[C.E. Evans]

In-universe, there was a seven year span between TNG and VOY, and Starfleet/the Federation seemed to be in a transitionary period in many ways during that time. I would gather that the Enterprise-D was the end result of one era, and the Voyager the start of another, IMO...

In real life, one show was made in 1987 and the other in 1995. There were bound to be improvements along the way, but there was also that different production personnel, designers, etc., worked on the two shows and lessons learned during TNG were incorporated into VOY.

However, I would argue that the Enterprise-D's interior looked "fabolous" in Generations...

 

[Cepstrum]

Actually, I think once TNG hit seasons three and four, it was closer-looking to VOY than to season one TNG.

Even though VOY is my favorite (though I love all TNG-era series), I always thought the space FX looked terrible until season four. I can't believe how bad they look, really. To me they looked *worse* than DS9's or season 3--4+ TNG. As an example, the scene in the Badlands in Caretaker looks, to, me, worse than almost all Badland space opticals in DS9 or anywhere in DS9. That goes for the rest of the first few seasons' space scenes.

I will agree, though, that VOY's intro looked best (better by far), and its interior sets looked much better. Especially the warp core. And from season four on, they space FX scenes looked great.

I think DS9 and VOY look pretty timeless, but I'd disagree that the space SFX look as good as in more modern shows such as Atlantis. And even TNG, IMO, still looks excellent. The only thing that betrays its time of production was the over-reliance on contemporary colors, hair styles, and civilian clothes, something that I *think* DS9 and VOY avoided.

I'll reiterate that VOY's interior sets, FX, etc., look a lot better and still look fine. Though I believe if it were being shot today, the cast would be younger, "sexier", and more artificial-looking (I prefer the "style" of casting back then to today's.)

 

[FordSVT]

TOS doesn't look like TNG either, who'd a thunk it?

 

[ReadyAndWilling]

TOS doesn't look like TNG either, who'd a thunk it?

but TOS ended 20 years earlier.

 

[I am not Spock]

I agree. I think the visual look of VOY is great, and the production values still hold up today. The FX, especially since season 4 when they started using CGI a lot, are still pretty good. Early TNG has dated. It looks veeery 80s. However, I am more into the stories, and less the FX, of Trek, so it doesn't bother me that much. I have all 6 series and all 11 films on DVD. I can watch anything from The Cage up to Star Trek (2009).

 

[ReadyAndWilling]

yeah Spock, i agree.

Voyager just seems so much cleaner than the TNG sets.

 

[Nardpuncher]

I agree with the OP.

Even in 1995 or so, I would look at old episodes of TNG and be startled by the difference.

Same thing with Star Wars compared to The Empire Strikes Back.
While Empire and Return of the Jedi look similar. Or of similar production quality I mean.

 

[jefferiestubes8]

Actually, I think once TNG hit seasons three and four, it was closer-looking to VOY than to season one TNG.

hey guys, i've been watching a bit of both TNG and VOY and wow, there is such a huge production and just overall advancement between 1987 and 1995. was i the only one that noticed this? hell, voyager from 1995 still looks brand new and modern to me

TNG 1987 looks like it's from the 80's and Voy 1995 looks brand new.

Cepstrum TNG was mastered to 1" Analog videotape for the first two seasons. Season 3-7 were mastered to D-2 digital video tape from what I've read. D-2 was state of the art in 1988 as a lower-cost alternative to the D-1 digital video format. VOY was always mastered to digital videotape.
One of the reasons ReadyAndWilling that VOY season 1 and the first 2 seasons of TNG looking so different is due to the film telecine technology and videotape formats the show has been mastered to.
As you guys probably know with digital video it plays back exactly how it was initially converted to digital so there is no loss of quality. That is partly why VOY

voyager from 1995 still looks brand new and modern

to all of us.
I'm looking forward to ENT on Blu-ray so I can see it in HD as it was always mastered in (& in season 4 shot in HD video). ENT will always look just like it was done in HD in 2001. This is something TNG, DS9, and VOY have always suffered from due to videotape mastering in standard definition NTSC video.

VOY's intro looked best (better by far), and its interior sets looked much better. Especially the warp core.

As far as the sets I think the creative choice for production designer to move away from the bland neutral colors and the DP's brightly lit interiors of the Enterprise-D 'space hotel' to the more dynamic lighting and colors on VOY's interior scenes was partly due to the ability of the video telecine & digital videotape medium's higher dynamic range abilities along with general television lighting styles in the mid-1990s changing.
After the bigger budgeted Trek feature films VOY was able to reuse some of the components for the standing sets.
As far as any argument that the Ent-D was only brightly lit look at ST: Generations where the Director of Photography used a lot more dynamic lighting on the bridge & other interior sets. Lighting is partly it, but also color choice is another aspect of a show 'looking modern'.



for video info on TNG & VOY Trek see:
http://www.trekbbs.com/showpost.php?p=2971852&postcount=35

 

[Cepstrum]

I agree with the OP.

Even in 1995 or so, I would look at old episodes of TNG and be startled by the difference.

Same thing with Star Wars compared to The Empire Strikes Back.
While Empire and Return of the Jedi look similar. Or of similar production quality I mean.

I completely agree about the stark contrast between SW and ESB. The light sabers in the former looked like fluorescent tubes. In ESB, however, they look as good (IMO, better than) those in the prequels. And RotJ looked about the same. And that was only a three year difference.

I still maintain, however, that the first few seasons of VOY's space FX looked bad. I never knew why until yesterday I saw who was handling the FX. It was a different company for DS9, and VOY switched around season three or four, which is when it started to look great.


I will agree, though, that the sets and overall production quality were the best of the TNG-era shows.


There was only a seven year gap between TNG season one and VOY season one. I think those seven years made a much bigger difference than seven years today would; ie, a 2003 vs a 2010 TV show.


But don't you agree that the difference between later TNG and its first season was even greater than the difference between TNG and VOY overall? I thought by seasons four--seven, aside from the dated sets, still look pretty good. TNG season one looks like there was a 15 year gap betwen it and say, season five.

 

[Cepstrum]

Actually, I think once TNG hit seasons three and four, it was closer-looking to VOY than to season one TNG.

hey guys, i've been watching a bit of both TNG and VOY and wow, there is such a huge production and just overall advancement between 1987 and 1995. was i the only one that noticed this? hell, voyager from 1995 still looks brand new and modern to me

Cepstrum TNG was mastered to 1" Analog videotape for the first two seasons. Season 3-7 were mastered to D-2 digital video tape from what I've read. D-2 was state of the art in 1988 as a lower-cost alternative to the D-1 digital video format. VOY was always mastered to digital videotape.
ReadyAndWilling
one of the reasons ReadyAndWilling that VOY season 1 and TNG looking so different is due to the telecine technology and videotape formats the show has been mastered to.
As you guys probably know with digital video it plays back exactly how it was initially converted to digital so there is no loss of quality. That is partly why VOY

voyager from 1995 still looks brand new and modern

to all of us.
I'm looking forward to ENT on Blu-ray so I can see it in HD as it was always mastered in (& in season 4 shot in HD video). It will always look just like it was done in HD in 2001.

VOY's intro looked best (better by far), and its interior sets looked much better. Especially the warp core.

As far as the sets I think the creative choice for production designer to move away from the bland neutral colors and the DP's brightly lit interiors of the Enterprise-D 'space hotel' to the more dynamic lighting and colors on VOY's interior scenes was partly due to the ability of the video telecine & digital videotape medium's higher dynamic range abilities along with general television lighting styles in the mid-1990s changing.
After the bigger budgeted Trek feature films VOY was able to reuse some of the components for the standing sets.



for video info on TNG & VOY Trek see:
http://www.trekbbs.com/showpost.php?p=2971852&postcount=35

jeffriestube8: I think I missed seeing your post before I posted mine.

Thank you very much for giving us some very useful information! I just wish I'd seen it sooner. Whoops.

 

[Nardpuncher]

I agree with the OP.

Even in 1995 or so, I would look at old episodes of TNG and be startled by the difference.

Same thing with Star Wars compared to The Empire Strikes Back.
While Empire and Return of the Jedi look similar. Or of similar production quality I mean.

I completely agree about the stark contrast between SW and ESB. The light sabers in the former looked like fluorescent tubes. In ESB, however, they look as good (IMO, better than) those in the prequels. And RotJ looked about the same. And that was only a three year difference.

I still maintain, however, that the first few seasons of VOY's space FX looked bad. I never knew why until yesterday I saw who was handling the FX. It was a different company for DS9, and VOY switched around season three or four, which is when it started to look great.


I will agree, though, that the sets and overall production quality were the best of the TNG-era shows.


There was only a seven year gap between TNG season one and VOY season one. I think those seven years made a much bigger difference than seven years today would; ie, a 2003 vs a 2010 TV show.


But don't you agree that the difference between later TNG and its first season was even greater than the difference between TNG and VOY overall? I thought by seasons four--seven, aside from the dated sets, still look pretty good. TNG season one looks like there was a 15 year gap betwen it and say, season five.

Sure! It's not only VOY that looked better, but TNG and DS9 also.

 

[I am not Spock]

Late seasons of TNG still look pretty good for a show that left the air 16 years ago. VOY's look holds up pretty well. As does late DS9. Early DS9 is starting to look a little old. ENT looks fantastic, having been done in HD. But the general cheesiness of ENT (the forced sexuality, decon scenes, the theme song, etc) will probably date the show in years to come.

 

[Arpy]

yeah Spock, i agree.

Voyager just seems so much cleaner than the TNG sets.

Yeah, but I find that they're also less realistic. Later series were made so that he visuals look good on TV - the sets, lighting, uniforms, etc...much like TOS' bright colors were added after the initial pilot "The Cage" because the studio wanted to make the most of this new "color" television.

Overall though, I think the early and middle seasons of TNG had the highest level of verisimilitude.

By ENT's third and fourth season, I felt I was watching Flash Gordon serials more than exploring the final frontier.

 

[Dale]

I think the OP just doesn't like beige. Speaking for myself I still, today, find the D attractively appointed.

 

[amandak695]

Actually, I think once TNG hit seasons three and four, it was closer-looking to VOY than to season one TNG.

Even though VOY is my favorite (though I love all TNG-era series), I always thought the space FX looked terrible until season four. I can't believe how bad they look, really. To me they looked *worse* than DS9's or season 3--4+ TNG. As an example, the scene in the Badlands in Caretaker looks, to, me, worse than almost all Badland space opticals in DS9 or anywhere in DS9. That goes for the rest of the first few seasons' space scenes.

I will agree, though, that VOY's intro looked best (better by far), and its interior sets looked much better. Especially the warp core. And from season four on, they space FX scenes looked great.

I think DS9 and VOY look pretty timeless, but I'd disagree that the space SFX look as good as in more modern shows such as Atlantis. And even TNG, IMO, still looks excellent. The only thing that betrays its time of production was the over-reliance on contemporary colors, hair styles, and civilian clothes, something that I *think* DS9 and VOY avoided.

I'll reiterate that VOY's interior sets, FX, etc., look a lot better and still look fine. Though I believe if it were being shot today, the cast would be younger, "sexier", and more artificial-looking (I prefer the "style" of casting back then to today's.)

I also think so.

 

[Cepstrum]

yeah Spock, i agree.

Voyager just seems so much cleaner than the TNG sets.

Yeah, but I find that they're also less realistic. Later series were made so that he visuals look good on TV - the sets, lighting, uniforms, etc...much like TOS' bright colors were added after the initial pilot "The Cage" because the studio wanted to make the most of this new "color" television.

Overall though, I think the early and middle seasons of TNG had the highest level of verisimilitude.

By ENT's third and fourth season, I felt I was watching Flash Gordon serials more than exploring the final frontier.

I don't know what to think about Enterprise. Something made everything about seem just a little odd (to me). I think that the computers and screens looked too similar to today's (except Daniels' 3-D setup), yet in some ways the tech was about as good as late 24th century.


I think the producers et al., after TNG's first two seasons did an amazing job making the shows look as good as possible on a TV budget and somehow slowed their aging far more than any other shows (and most movies) made way back then. I think just about the only avoidable slip-up was the overuse of contemporary hair styles in early TNG. They seemed to have learned their lesson and thence gave the characters a distinct "Trek" look that didn't conform to contemporary styles.


It's just a big shame that they transferred the film to tape before doing all the post-production. Now I'm sure we'll never see HD or remastered TNG-era shows (though if they turned out anything like the Special Edition Star Wars films, I wouldn't want that).


I think the thing that dates them more than production quality is the relatively slower paced, less "edgy" style common to shows of today. I doubt they could get away casting such old, out of shape actors and let, eg, Picard give his charming, long, moralizing monologues (that look almost naïve today).

 

[jefferiestubes8]

music

One of the differences between TNG season 1-3 and season 4 and newer is the music scores were mastered to DAT (digital audio tape) instead of 4-track 1/2" analog tape. This reduces tape hiss and allows for slightly more accurate sound of the orchestra. By accurate I mean the subtle differences between the nature of analog and digital audio recordings.

I'm not sure if they were recorded in analog or fully recorded digitally (not just the mix or the master) from this information:
The episode scores are newly remastered from the first-generation two-track stereo mixes archived by CBS (on ½″ tape, with program on channels 1 and 2, channel 3 blank and a synch-tone on channel 4). The score for “The Price” (episode #156) could not be located on ½″ tape, so we used Ron Jones’s personal ¼″ stereo tape instead. Some fourth-season scores and the two computer games are mastered from Jones’s first-generation stereo DATs.

http://www.filmscoremonthly.com/notes/box05_intro.html

 

[Atariboy]

Watching TNG as a teen, I distinctly recall the first two seasons looking old already compared to season three.

 

[jefferiestubes8]

TNG lighting

As far as any argument that the Ent-D was only brightly lit look at ST: Generations where the Director of Photography used a lot more dynamic lighting on the bridge & other interior sets.

However, I would argue that the Enterprise-D's interior looked "fabolous" in Generations...

C.E. Evans check out TNG Season 2 opening episode "The Child"

Director Rob Bowman and director of photography Edward R. Brown experimented with a different, even lower-key than usual style of lighting in this episode.

However, Gene Roddenberry and the other producers did not approve of this lighting style, and by the next episode Bowman and Brown reverted to the series' usual style of lighting.

http://memory-alpha.org/wiki/The_Child_%28episode%29

At least they tried to darken the brightly lit space hotel.