TOS-R question...

[GNDN]

This argument is never going to come to a consensus. It really does come down to what an individual prefers. And no amount of "expert opinions" will sway anyone.

i do have a tiny problem with this one though... (runs and hides)

In the scheme of things, what the Bussard collectors look like--and for Christ sake they looked different in EVERY episode of TOS, give it a rest--or a few minor details on the Enterprise in comparison to the better, cleaner imagery, the higher resolution, the greater realism, better lighting, lack of stuttering, lack of matte lines, et al, do not even come remotely close to an argument for the TOS FX being better than TOS-R in any way, shape or form.

For the record, I don't have any egregious problem with the ship in that shot

(...although it could be brighter, I mean it's being lit by the sun ferchrissakes...sorry...)

The other problem with your conclusion is your yardstick for 'better'. Everyone gets that you love the technical improvement, and for the most part, so do I. Technical improvement, however, doesn't mean that I must lose my critical eye, and in fact, I will judge the new FX on a finer scale because of the improvements in technology.

You are still saying its a matter of taste, when in reality...by all measure in the advancement of FX the TOS-R is superior. No there won't ever be a consensus, but only because purists in any form are oblivious to evidence.

There is no scale left other than taste. I don't have a problem with new effects. Fixing matte lines, making the image sharper, eliminating technical deficiencies are all wonderful!! So once that's done, all that remains is how does this shot fit the story, is it well framed, well lit, do the objects move in a believable way, etc? The evidence is what's on screen, and the deciding factor is purely emotional. You have a far bigger problem than anyone you label 'purist' if you can't simply accept that not everyone embraces every single one of the shiny new computer generated images.

 

[BillJ]

It is the third apparent goal of the "remastering" that starts to trip people up, and that's where stylistic choices of framing, compositing, and change just for the sake of change seem to creep in. This is where we arrive at unnecessary alteration to the look of the Tholian ships, or the wonky framing from Adnonais that Warped9 brought up. One and two from above are clearly satisfied: no matte lines, nice color, great detail, etc. So it all comes down to angle and taste. Doesn't mean any of us have blurry vision or are opposed to the idea of new effects on a vague principal, just that sometimes the new team "got it" and sometimes they didn't.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

...

 

[Warped9]

There is no scale left other than taste... The evidence is what's on screen, and the deciding factor is purely emotional. You have a far bigger problem than anyone you label 'purist' if you can't simply accept that not everyone embraces every single one of the shiny new computer generated images.

 

[MANT!]

In 1080p HDTV the ORIGINAL effects are jarring to me and take me out of the story...For the originals, it's not the matt lines,nor the lack of sharpness....it's simply the repetition of shots..often that contradict each other.

But to each his own...the originals aren't dead..and have been provided with the love they needed...Therefore, the entire arguement is usless..and a waste of valuable time..


It only allows for the formation of different groups hostile to each other...


Ohh , anytime you're in Northern CA....We can discuss this like civilized men..over a glass of beer at the local watering hole..

 

[Tallguy]

In the scheme of things, what the Bussard collectors look like--and for Christ sake they looked different in EVERY episode of TOS, give it a rest--or a few minor details on the Enterprise in comparison to the better, cleaner imagery, the higher resolution, the greater realism, better lighting, lack of stuttering, lack of matte lines, et al, do not even come remotely close to an argument for the TOS FX being better than TOS-R in any way, shape or form.

You are still saying its a matter of taste, when in reality...by all measure in the advancement of FX the TOS-R is superior. No there won't ever be a consensus, but only because purists in any form are oblivious to evidence.

RAMA

Better compositing, sure. Smoother camera moves, ok. Less grain isn't always a win, but I see your point.

Greater realism? No. One looks like 1966 FX. The other looks like 2006 FX.

TOS-R isn't even in the running for lighting. And that's where it all falls down for me. That's where you turn CG into a physical thing. And almost always TOS-R looks like CG.

Composition isn't always as good as it might be either.

Do I think that modern CG should be able to surpass the TOS FX shots? Yes. Do I think TOS-R did it? No. I guess I'll see what they do in 2016.

(Get ready, TNG-ers. You're next! Bwahahaha!)

 

[Tallguy]

Labeling of some here as "purists" or objecting on "principal" seems a bit simplistic, especially considering that most here acknowledge that at least some of the CGI shots do improve the look of the show.

...

It is the third apparent goal of the "remastering" that starts to trip people up, and that's where stylistic choices of framing, compositing, and change just for the sake of change seem to creep in. This is where we arrive at unnecessary alteration to the look of the Tholian ships, or the wonky framing from Adnonais that Warped9 brought up. One and two from above are clearly satisfied: no matte lines, nice color, great detail, etc. So it all comes down to angle and taste. Doesn't mean any of us have blurry vision or are opposed to the idea of new effects on a vague principal, just that sometimes the new team "got it" and sometimes they didn't.

...

What I won't accept is that EVERY choice and EVERY shot that CBS Digital produced is BETTER, on every level, than what they were replacing. Others feel exactly that, and while I don't agree, I really don't care since I can pick and choose what I watch and what I like.

I missed two extra pages before I posted...

Wow, this is pretty much the final word on the subject, isn't it? (I bet it won't be, but it should.)

GNDN is my new best friend. Thanks for summing it all up.

 

[David cgc]

Greater realism? No. One looks like 1966 FX. The other looks like 2006 FX.

TOS-R isn't even in the running for lighting. And that's where it all falls down for me. That's where you turn CG into a physical thing. And almost always TOS-R looks like CG.

Composition isn't always as good as it might be either.

Do I think that modern CG should be able to surpass the TOS FX shots? Yes. Do I think TOS-R did it? No. I guess I'll see what they do in 2016.

This is exactly my opinion, as well, especially the last part. And I find it doubly frustrating because the new matte paintings and incidental effects (like that slick bridge clock) were excellent and completely blew the spaceship effects out of the water. If anything, it should've been considerably easier to get the spaceships to look good than to model and render a computer panel that matched seamlessly with the live-action footage.

While we're talking about "Who Mourns For Adonis," I was really, really disappointed that the hand of Apollo, if anything, looked more slapdash than the original. I was hoping for something really cool, like the way the shot was redone for the Ships of the Line '06 calendar. (The energy ribbons made of greek text are an especially nice touch).

(Oh. I just looked at the page I linked to, and the effects team had a good reason. Apparently, Spock has to explain to everyone that it's not a flesh-and-blood hand, since the fact that it was giant, had no body, translucent, and in space wasn't a big enough clue. Still, it could've looked more impressive than it ended up.)

 

[BillJ]

While we're talking about "Who Mourns For Adonis," I was really, really disappointed that the hand of Apollo, if anything, looked more slapdash than the original. I was hoping for something really cool, like the way the shot was redone for the Ships of the Line '06 calendar. (The energy ribbons made of greek text are an especially nice touch).

(Oh. I just looked at the page I linked to, and the effects team had a good reason. Apparently, Spock has to explain to everyone that it's not a flesh-and-blood hand, since the fact that it was giant, had no body, translucent, and in space wasn't a big enough clue. Still, it could've looked more impressive than it ended up.)

That is slick!

 

[number6]

The criticisms I see here are less about the quality of what was done but how it weighs on what some fans were hoping for instead. That's a pretty subjective thing. There's no way to please anyone.. Some are simply just upset that they did anything at all.. That's exactly what I mean by "on principle." That is a no-win scenario as far as any changes are concerned. I don't think there are many objective criticisms here. Simply criticisms based on what "they" should have done, and that is completely up for multiple interpretations, which are neither right or wrong.

 

[number6]

While we're talking about "Who Mourns For Adonis," I was really, really disappointed that the hand of Apollo, if anything, looked more slapdash than the original. I was hoping for something really cool, like the way the shot was redone for the Ships of the Line '06 calendar. (The energy ribbons made of greek text are an especially nice touch).

Which illustrates my point. There are some who think this is cool, and those who think it's too different from the original effects and is therefore disrespectful to the original. As someone who grew up with the original show, I prefer what they did.

 

[BillJ]

The criticisms I see here are less about the quality of what was done but how it weighs on what some fans were hoping for instead. That's a pretty subjective thing. There's no way to please anyone.. Some are simply just upset that they did anything at all.. That's exactly what I mean by "on principle." That is a no-win scenario as far as any changes are concerned. I don't think there are many objective criticisms here. Simply criticisms based on what "they" should have done, and that is completely up for multiple interpretations, which are neither right or wrong.

I'm not even sure that I'd call my thoughts on the subject criticisms. I own all three seasons on Blu-ray and have enjoyed them. Just the fact that in some instances the new effects didn't work as well as their original counterparts.

When I made a statement to that effect, I got told I "lack common sense". Some people seem so attached to being right that they can't allow people to have an individual opinion differing from their own.

 

[number6]

I've been told I lack "artistic sense" for liking the new FX. Your point?

 

[BillJ]

I've been told I lack "artistic sense" for liking the new FX. Your point?

But why is it an "either/or" proposition? Why can't someone be inclined to like a little from column A and a little from column B?

 

[BillJ]

By the way, these are stunning.

https://drexfiles.wordpress.com/2009/01/31/fresh-baked-classic-images/

Might have to sit down and give the remastered episodes a watch in classic black and white.

 

[number6]

I've been told I lack "artistic sense" for liking the new FX. Your point?

But why is it an "either/or" proposition? Why can't someone be inclined to like a little from column A and a little from column B?

Tell that to the ST v SW folk..

 

[JJohnson]

As an aside, does anyone have a comparison between the earlier, higher-resolution version of the Enterprise they used, and the later, lower-resolution model? I was wondering how they stack up against each other.

 

[Tallguy]

As an aside, does anyone have a comparison between the earlier, higher-resolution version of the Enterprise they used, and the later, lower-resolution model? I was wondering how they stack up against each other.

I would be interested to know which model was used for what. Maybe someone could produce some sort of catalog.

 

[RAMA]

OK I watched another TOS-R ep I normally wouldn't have because of this thread. Corbomite Maneuver. In real HD and in motion the Fesarius looks dazzling. The TOS-R Enterprise model looks more contrasty on my TV than it does in the picture posted the other day. Literally blows the old Fesarius out of the space-time continuum!

RAMA

 

[RAMA]

i do have a tiny problem with this one though... (runs and hides)

In the scheme of things, what the Bussard collectors look like--and for Christ sake they looked different in EVERY episode of TOS, give it a rest--or a few minor details on the Enterprise in comparison to the better, cleaner imagery, the higher resolution, the greater realism, better lighting, lack of stuttering, lack of matte lines, et al, do not even come remotely close to an argument for the TOS FX being better than TOS-R in any way, shape or form.

For the record, I don't have any egregious problem with the ship in that shot

(...although it could be brighter, I mean it's being lit by the sun ferchrissakes...sorry...)

The other problem with your conclusion is your yardstick for 'better'. Everyone gets that you love the technical improvement, and for the most part, so do I. Technical improvement, however, doesn't mean that I must lose my critical eye, and in fact, I will judge the new FX on a finer scale because of the improvements in technology.

You are still saying its a matter of taste, when in reality...by all measure in the advancement of FX the TOS-R is superior. No there won't ever be a consensus, but only because purists in any form are oblivious to evidence.

There is no scale left other than taste. I don't have a problem with new effects. Fixing matte lines, making the image sharper, eliminating technical deficiencies are all wonderful!! So once that's done, all that remains is how does this shot fit the story, is it well framed, well lit, do the objects move in a believable way, etc? The evidence is what's on screen, and the deciding factor is purely emotional. You have a far bigger problem than anyone you label 'purist' if you can't simply accept that not everyone embraces every single one of the shiny new computer generated images.

If this is the case, then the TOS-R imagery again fits the story better because they fix continuity errors, from phaser beams, to things appearing in shots when they didn't appear before due to the use of stock shots, and patterns of flight that were mapped out and used rather then senseless static shots. Also, they already move better because this is a technical element...next...

RAMA