Rumor: TNG-HD is a-coming

[Keith1701]

I'll wait until the official word, of course, but I hope it happens.

Oh Yes. 'MAKE IT SO"

 

[RAMA]

I have no doubt that all of the filmed elements can be reused. The resolution may not be the best, but the model effects look great and I would hate losing them.

The big potential improvement in TNG FX isn't so much in the model quality (although certain aspects of the 4ft model, like the deflector - could stand to be improved), but the relatively limited shot selection - how many shots of the E-D from above are there, for instance? (It was almost entirely shot from below - technically above since it was upside-down - not for artistic reasons, but because the model was a lot easier to handle that way since the design was so top-heavy).

Even just a few new stock shots to mix in with the standard ones would be nice.

(It sounds like, from what the DS9 book says, that the spinoffs saved their elements, but I'm not sure if that changed or what happened since then).

I'd have to check EAS & Drex Files to be sure, but ISTR that while many of the models still exist (Doug Drexler's posted renders of a lot of them), some of them are damaged due to newer versions of the software not reading them right, combined with them not being designed for HD resolution. And they don't necessarily have the data to just rerender the scenes straight up even if the models were perfect.

Read these bits: http://darthmojo.wordpress.com/2008/06/20/sci-ficandy-voyager-strikes-back/#comment-830 & http://darthmojo.wordpress.com/2008/06/20/sci-ficandy-voyager-strikes-back/#comment-834

[There is] a 16:9 version with cropped live-action and expanded CGI effects.

A lot of HD syndication channels preferred to buy the cropped version because idiots complain about black bars left and right,
which is why it was produced.

What markets showed this version? I've never seen or heard of it.

CBS Action in the UK show the cropped version, for starters.

Someone could make the argument that new FX of the E-D would go a long way towards "correcting" the discrepancies in the various models of the Enterprise.

RAMA

 

[RAMA]

Re: Rumor: TNG-HD

As a side note to the dicussion above, CRT monitors have vastly better color quality than all but the most expensive LCD's. When I switched from CRT to LCD it was shocking how washed-out everything looked. Sadly now, I don't even notice.
But it would have to be a good CRT. The one that died on me was a high-end 21" I'd picked up from an computer recycler for $70 around 10 years ago. So it had good dot pitch, refresh up to 120hz, and could do super-high resolutions.
However, I'm sure the better LCD's will continue to come down in price over time.

I don't miss my CRTs one bit...my first LCD was slightly washed out, but the last 2 have been immeasurably better.

 

[MANT!]

Re: '

Actually, a good CRT is going to have better blacks and shadow detail than what's out there today. An HD signal might contain more detail, but in terms of blacks LCDs/Plasmas just can't compare to a good CRT.

Good luck seeing them through the scan lines, interlacing, and low refresh rate. There's nothing actually better about CRTs.

Unless one happens to own a CRT HDTV...like myself..

it handles multiple resolutions MUCH better than my newer LCD set...

But it's small.. 26" and heavy so it now lives in the bedroom...

 

[Mark 2000]

Re: '

it handles multiple resolutions MUCH better than my newer LCD set...

That's because CRTs don't have a native resolution like an LCD. Unfortunate that's only a byproduct of being analog, who's other by product it being less sharp.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Any added resolution that CRT HDTVs might have is, IMHO, far outweighed by the increased risk of hernia and/or extreme back pain incurred by LIFTING the damn things.

 

[Lateralus]

For all those times you pick up and move your television...

 

[BlobVanDam]

For all those times you pick up and move your television...

Don't you know? They apparently need to be dead lifted into the air just to turn them on.

 

[BillJ]

Any added resolution that CRT HDTVs might have is, IMHO, far outweighed by the increased risk of hernia and/or extreme back pain incurred by LIFTING the damn things.

For all those times you pick up and move your television...

My wife likes to move the furniture around every two or three months. That fact alone made the move to LCD worth it.

 

[RAMA]

Some interesting info on HD/35mm film...while 35mm is indeed superior in pixels this will not necessarily always be so, HD is a relatively NEW technology, first being used in 2000 in Japan so we can expect it to improve, but in terms of TV viewing of course, its a huge improvement. The line between the actual quality of the differing pixels in 35mm and HD is already blurring because the "perceived" picture we see is based on lines, not pixels, and audiences and experts alike already can't tell the difference. Add to this, the resolution for HD has now reached 4,250 lines! Well above what we see on or tvs now.

http://filmschoolonline.com/sample_l...HD_vs_35mm.htm

RAMA

 

[Mr. B]

A 35mm film frame has the equivalent of 25-50 megapixels of usable information, which is about equivalent to a 4,500 line image, but Super Hi-Vision or something like it is at least 20 years from wide adoption

 

[RAMA]

A 35mm film frame has the equivalent of 25-50 megapixels of usable information, which is about equivalent to a 4,500 line image, but Super Hi-Vision or something like it is at least 20 years from wide adoption

True, the point here is that the series need to be open to future upgrading.

Also, as the article says the best 35mm and HD are already roughly equivalent to human eyesight, because of the lines of res, anything else is just gravy..

 

[AviTrek]

Some interesting info on HD/35mm film...while 35mm is indeed superior in pixels this will not necessarily always be so, HD is a relatively NEW technology, first being used in 2000 in Japan so we can expect it to improve, but in terms of TV viewing of course, its a huge improvement. The line between the actual quality of the differing pixels in 35mm and HD is already blurring because the "perceived" picture we see is based on lines, not pixels, and audiences and experts alike already can't tell the difference. Add to this, the resolution for HD has now reached 4,250 lines! Well above what we see on or tvs now.

http://filmschoolonline.com/sample_l...HD_vs_35mm.htm

RAMA

When used in TV context, HD refers to 720p, 1080i, or 1080p(if you include blu ray). We may have 4k cameras now, but just because they are higher resolution doesn't mean they are HD. When TV switches to 4k, there will be a new name for it. But if TNG is remastered, CBS should be smart and future proof the work by remastering at 4k not HD(1080p).

 

[RAMA]

Some interesting info on HD/35mm film...while 35mm is indeed superior in pixels this will not necessarily always be so, HD is a relatively NEW technology, first being used in 2000 in Japan so we can expect it to improve, but in terms of TV viewing of course, its a huge improvement. The line between the actual quality of the differing pixels in 35mm and HD is already blurring because the "perceived" picture we see is based on lines, not pixels, and audiences and experts alike already can't tell the difference. Add to this, the resolution for HD has now reached 4,250 lines! Well above what we see on or tvs now.

http://filmschoolonline.com/sample_l...HD_vs_35mm.htm

RAMA

When used in TV context, HD refers to 720p, 1080i, or 1080p(if you include blu ray). We may have 4k cameras now, but just because they are higher resolution doesn't mean they are HD. When TV switches to 4k, there will be a new name for it. But if TNG is remastered, CBS should be smart and future proof the work by remastering at 4k not HD(1080p).

Well that's semantics, better left to some marketing dept of the future..whatever the term is for it in the future they'd better be ready for it.

 

[DeafPoet]

Re: Rumor: TNG-HD

In the film and TV business this is called conforming an edit since the editors work is already done and the original high resolution footage needs to be conformed to the edit.
Currently when a TV series edits on downconverted standard definition DVCAM after the edit is complete the nonlinear editor's edit decision list with timecodes (as XML of AAF files) is used to conform the original high definition tapes. Usually this is somewhat automated once the footage is loaded in. Dissolves and effects are rendered, CGI visual effects are added and a master is ready.
Back in the 1980s and 1990s though the tape-to-tape linear videotape editing systems had an EDL (edit decision list) which was a semi-proprietary format (usually saved on 3.5" floppy discs) that had minimal information such as tape# and timecodes in & out for each edit to be able to edit from videotapes of the film telecine to create a videotape master. If that EDL material were printed out and saved it would help assistant editors and a post-production-supervisor's work on TNG-Remastering.
If not then all the raw 35mm footage will take a lot more effort to catalog the 35mm film to be able to locate scenes and takes used and then edits eye-matched to the original master.

This is a good point that I was going to make. There's a relatively good explanation of how TNG and DS9 were edited down to video in The Making of DS9. Everyone keeps saying that it would need to be edited from scratch, and that may be true if all the original stuff from editing is gone. But, I'd imagine that if they bothered to save the original film elements then the edit logs are probably still kicking around somewhere too.

So, it might be a somewhat arduous task to re-create the episodes but nowhere near as bad as having to eyeball the whole thing.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Any added resolution that CRT HDTVs might have is, IMHO, far outweighed by the increased risk of hernia and/or extreme back pain incurred by LIFTING the damn things.

For all those times you pick up and move your television...

My wife likes to move the furniture around every two or three months. That fact alone made the move to LCD worth it.

It's not so much the *desire* to move your TV, it's the *ability* to do so. What if you move? What if you somehow do need to reorder the furniture (for whatever reason)? What if your TV breaks and you need to get it fixed? Good luck doing any of that shit with a CRT unit. You'll break your back in the process.

 

[TeutonicNights]

I just hope they don't air the episodes in order.
New FX and sharp picture won't make me excited for "Encounter at Farpoint" (or any other season 1 episode).

I mean, I could take remastered "The Last Outpost" between "The Wounded" and "Ensign Ro", but having to sit through a whole season of trash before the good stuff comes along would be terrible.
If they can work out some clever airing order, that would be great.
Like they would air "Data's Day" pretty soon (because of Keiko), but not before they air "The Neutral Zone" (b/c of the Rommies "being back"). For DS9 that wouldn't work, but for TNG it might.
They also should start with BOBW. It will get people's attention.

 

[BillJ]

They also should start with BOBW. It will get people's attention.

Obviously no learned anything from Balance of Terror.

 

[TeutonicNights]

I admit, if they pulled a BoT-R purist wank on BoBW that would be worse than Encounter at Farpoint.

But they do know there aren't so many TNG FX purists out there, right? Or are there?

 

[BillJ]

They also should start with BOBW. It will get people's attention.

Obviously no learned anything from Balance of Terror.

I admit, if they pulled a BoT-R purist wank on BoBW that would be worse than Encounter at Farpoint.

But they do know there aren't so many TNG FX purists out there, right? Or are there?

Nothing about purists here. It was the first episode redone and the models and effects just weren't very good. They should probably work the kinks out of the process before trying to do effects heavy episodes.