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

[Solarbaby]

I think one of the reasons it looks dated especially in the bridge is that early computer terminals were just a transparency with a light behind it. Sometimes it looked like a really low watt bulb was illuminating it. Then right next to it in the adjacent terminal there would be a fully lit tv set playing video behind the transparency. These stood out starkly next to each other.

I don't know how they overcome this as the show progressed but it became less obvious there was a torch behind it. By the time Voy started these had all been fixed

 

[C.E. Evans]

Re: 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.

Yes, I noticed that long ago and I think Roddenberry and the gang were right that "the brightly lit space hotel" was better for TNG.

DS9 used a darker set decor with muted colors to better convey it was an alien space station, but VOY and ENT also went this route as well for different reasons. Shoot, with the exception of the sickbay, the NX-01's interiors looked almost murky at times because of its low-lit and very subdued set colors during ENT's first three seasons, IMO.

Even still, I think the Enterprise-D's interiors never looked better than in Generations.