Another set of weird high-def screencaps!

[Cheapjack]

Check THESE out! :

http://movies.trekcore.com/

The ones from ST2 look fuzzier and more filmic than ST1,2, and Four.

This goes against reviews in high def digest that said that ST4 was the worst, ST2 the best.

Is there such a thing as truth or reality in this high def world? Can you tell where ANYTHING was sourced from?

I mean, all these movies that are being re-released on HD. Are they sourcing from film, or just upscaling? Any blu-ray player will do that, if you stick in a standard DVD.

Are we being ripped off?

They still look good, though. Not the same as when I saw these films inn the 80's, but I could still get a lump in my throat, when Spock gets his marbles back!

 

[trevanian]

TWOK may have gotten a fresh transfer, but when you see the same stock image from TMP in TWOK, it clearly suffers in the latter, something I remember thinking in the theater too.

in TMP: http://movies.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/tmphd/tmphd0734.jpg

in TWOK: http://movies.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/twokhd/twokhd0289.jpg

And that's even taking into account that the DNR applied to TMP seems seriously destructive to the image. Reinforces my thought that the stock shots in TWOK weren't always recomps, but might just have been double contactprinted copies of the finals from TMP, which takes it that much further from first generation in optical/analog photography.

EDIT ADDON: A lot of the dislike for the newest is probably because it was shot with so much smoke, which softened the image to a crappy level to start with. Applying DNR to a smokesoft image is going to obliterate even more detail than usual. The bad look on TWOK might have to do with film stock and DP quality.

 

[Cheapjack]

The thing I've noticed. is that there is so much detail in these pictures, your eyes doesn't know where to look at first!

It's not the same as being at the original showing at the 'pictures', though!

I bet if they wanted too, they could get back to that original look. Though, there are disadventages. Film is really grainy, and there are faults on the film, like hairs.

I'm willing to bet all these other films that are being re-released are just upscaled and processed. I've looked at 2001 and star wars, and they look good, but not that good.

Just have to wait for ultra high def. The BBC are interested in it. I bet they won't rip us off then.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

and there are faults on the film, like hairs.

Specifically, Shatner's toup.

 

[Cheapjack]

TWOK may have gotten a fresh transfer, but when you see the same stock image from TMP in TWOK, it clearly suffers in the latter, something I remember thinking in the theater too.

in TMP: http://movies.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/tmphd/tmphd0734.jpg

in TWOK: http://movies.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/twokhd/twokhd0289.jpg

And that's even taking into account that the DNR applied to TMP seems seriously destructive to the image. Reinforces my thought that the stock shots in TWOK weren't always recomps, but might just have been double contactprinted copies of the finals from TMP, which takes it that much further from first generation in optical/analog photography.

EDIT ADDON: A lot of the dislike for the newest is probably because it was shot with so much smoke, which softened the image to a crappy level to start with. Applying DNR to a smokesoft image is going to obliterate even more detail than usual. The bad look on TWOK might have to do with film stock and DP quality.

Whether or not it's just these screencaps or not, I don't know, and I have seen good ones of st2, but it seems that they are trying to make it look like stuff taken from film looks bad, and stuff upscaled looks better. a blu ray will upscale anyway.Can anyone post a home upscaled scrrencap and one done by the company to compare? They seem to want everyone to buy their films all over again on bluray, and there's no point, if you can home upscale.

I suppose you will never get it exactly the way you saw it at the pictures. Everything degrades.Formats change. In addition to that, as well as the fact that everyone observes differently, your eyesight degrades over time! They would have to give you the same eyes, ( and ears)you had twenty years ago, to get it exactly the same!!

 

[Cheapjack]

I've looked at them again, and I think they're quite good. You can see much more detail of the Enterprise in dock in TMP.

Whether or not they're just upscaled or not, I don't know, but I'll definitely be buying them.

 

[Nick086]

I admit I like seeing the enterprise going through and out of warp drive in the motion picture. These new DVDs they have already release they are in HD?

 

[Cheapjack]

I hope if they release another edition on blu ray, they put the European intro at the beginning. And, they use the logo seen in the UK, which was different to the American one. It had a huge O, in the shape of the Earth, in the Voyage bit.

These screencaps, having looked at them for the tenth time, look quite good, even the ST4 ones. But ST2 looks the best, nearly as good on my Apple display as a photograph. ST1 and ST3 are processed to look filmic, but I don't think they are sourced from film. It's strange, today we can make video look like film and perhaps vice versa.

There's supposed to be an ultra high def TV system being developed that has 4000 lines. Maybe a 3d version of this could be developed?

 

[Cheapjack]

They said in a TV show in the Uk last night, that people are choosing to download HD movies from the net, rather than by bluray.

Is there any official site, where you can do this for the ST movies?