That's my take. And with the optical processing technology available in 1966 and on a television budget they couldn't totally edit out the surrounding cloth.
If you love the Enterprise…
- Thread starter Warped9
- Start date
It wasn't the available technology. Rotoscope and garbage mattes have existed since the earliest days of cinematography. Although it does appear that a real light source—rather than hand-drawn animation—was used to produce the flares. I've noted many TOS composites where support pylons were not cleanly extracted, or spill light from the blue cyc resulted in noisy mattes.
TOS was unquestionably on a budget, and ran overtime on VFX. Bluescreen is among the easiest and cheapest extraction techniques because it does not require exotic film stocks, special lights, multi-magazine cameras, etc. For the time period, 2001: A Space Odyssey produced composites that still stand up to the closest scrutiny today (with only minor "seams" showing here and there). But they required a lot of time, and thus money. Less than ten years after TOS, Brian Johnson and company were producing superb composites for Space: 1999 merely with multiple, in-camera exposures. Every approach has its advantages and disadvantages. Had VANTAblack existed in the mid-'60s, the multiple exposure technique used in 1999 might have been feasible with the Enterprise.
Yeah, instead of spending money on CGI that now looks terrible, it would have been better spent just cleaning up the original footage the best they could.
That's what TOS-R should have been. Duplicating the original shots rather than changing things to something they were never meant to look like.
To add to my post. The conceit behind such an upgrade: to imagine TOS had a bit more time and money. It’s a similar or parallel conceit I’m exploring in my project Unseen TOS in the Arts forum.
So, yeah, I’d eliminate reuse of stock shots from the first two pilots from where they don’t belong throughout the series. Lets imagine TOS had had a bit more time and money to film some extra sequences with the series production version of the ship. And, yes, we could allow they had managed to finish both sides of the 11 footer.
There would be a lot of things to consider, but an overriding approach would be to make things look as if they’d been done under the best of conditions in the 1960s rather than inserting things that simply could not (or would not) have been done back in the day.
I’d give a lot of thought to how planets were depicted. Yeah, some of TOS’ planet shots could get stale, but they shouldn’t look like planets lifted from modern Trek productions.
Yeah, there would be a lot to think about.
I'm a voice in the wilderness on this issue, but I enjoy the TOS-R versions in all respects except those relating to the exterior shots of the Enterprise. The latter are fine, but I think the team that worked on it probably could made them excellent. Even with regard to the ship, there are exceptions - the space battle in "The Doomsday Machine" is fantastic.
As far as everything else, though, I love it. From the phaser stun effects in "Wink of an Eye" to the enhanced views of Stratos in "The Cloud Minders" to the better exteriors in "Arena" - there are so many examples.
Now, I would lovelovelovelove to see them do it all again - and I don't think they should make the mistake of thinking that there wouldn't be a market for it either. There would be. But first, give the writers and actors fair deals, you esteemed worthies.
As far as everything else, though, I love it. From the phaser stun effects in "Wink of an Eye" to the enhanced views of Stratos in "The Cloud Minders" to the better exteriors in "Arena" - there are so many examples.
Now, I would lovelovelovelove to see them do it all again - and I don't think they should make the mistake of thinking that there wouldn't be a market for it either. There would be. But first, give the writers and actors fair deals, you esteemed worthies.
And model the camera; viewing angle, focal length, depth of field, etc.
It also wouldn't hurt if one had the mindset of a 1960s film editor and matched the FX with the surrounding live action.
This was the biggest failure of TOS-R, IMHO. Which is why the replacements to the FX that were part of the live action shots were almost uniformly amazing and did exactly what the supposed mission statement of TOS-R was. They seamlessly updated the FX for big screen TV's and modern audiences. The space ship shots just didn't live with the same lighting and camera space that the live action did.
My issue with TOS-R is that it seemed there was more effort to fit TOS fit in with the rest of the franchise than just be true to what it was.
It's interesting to compare and contrast what they did with TNG-R, which they treated like the holiest of holys. I wish some of the same "fixing things if they had more time or money" had been utilized there, because I'm pretty sure the producers of that show wouldn't have used the Reliant, Excelsior and Grissom models to represent nearly every other Federation starship for almost the entire run or visited the same looking cave set every third episode if they had a bigger budget/more time.
It's interesting to compare and contrast what they did with TNG-R, which they treated like the holiest of holys. I wish some of the same "fixing things if they had more time or money" had been utilized there, because I'm pretty sure the producers of that show wouldn't have used the Reliant, Excelsior and Grissom models to represent nearly every other Federation starship for almost the entire run or visited the same looking cave set every third episode if they had a bigger budget/more time.
Last edited:
The TOS-Remastered Antares and Medusan vessel, though, were exquisite takes on first a TAS animated design made live action and what a Federation vessel operated by a noncorporeal civilization like the Medusans would look like. And they nailed both with skill.
Except even using TAS designs was blatant retconning of stuff that didn’t yet exist. You can bet Matt Jefferies would have done something different.
My take on the Antares while trying to ignore everything after 1966.
Last edited:
Indeed and I welcome those inclusions. Would they probably have done something different at the time? Yes, probably.
Can I appreciate it for what it is now? Also, yes. Both are true at the same time and I won't deny that I like them.
I'm not going to sit around and wonder if the great Matt Jefferies would have done the same or something 180 degrees different. I practically bow at Matt's throne and respect the legacy of TOS but it's not sacred religious scripture and we don't have to walk on eggshells every time the sound quality, color or even some effects are improved.
1000% this!
If you’re claiming to respect the original work and source material then you do it. If you make that claim and then turn around and ignore it then your credibility is shot.
CBS and TOS-R haven’t got an ounce of credibility.
Similar threads
