New TOS discoveries in HD/DVD

[Therin of Andor]

Here's something new I noticed yesterday in my HD set. Throughout most of the scenes in "Arena" where Kirk battles the Gorn, his boots have laces on them and he's wearing black socks (because of the location shooting and all the running around).

Funny!

I recall being astounded watching a "Tarzan" TV show rerun as a teen and suddenly noticing Ron Ely wearing battered-up old tennis sneakers (minus the laces) as Tarzan ran - supposedly barefooted - through the jungle! Shattered many illusions that day.

 

[Rulius]

I imagine the regular boots would have had him sliding all over the place

 

[Forbin]

I don't have the dvd sets that you have, but I DO have them on VHS (anyone have them on Betamax?..lol) ....

I only recently tossed my Beta copy of Errand of Mercy. It was the first ep I bought, just before my Betamax crapped out and we switched to VHS.

 

[Trevacious]

I imagine the regular boots would have had him sliding all over the place

He's no fool, he saw what happened to Lazarus.

 

[alchemist]

You can also see Shatner's long underwear peaking-out. This episode was filmed in November 1966 and it was pretty cold outside.

Here's something new I noticed yesterday in my HD set. Throughout most of the scenes in "Arena" where Kirk battles the Gorn, his boots have laces on them and he's wearing black socks (because of the location shooting and all the running around). But I never saw this before!

 

[The Squire of Gothos]

Or even just regular DVD, if you don't feel like spending the extra couple of bucks.

I'm sure the Blu Ray editions are all shiny and flawless, but I'm personally pretty happy with the regular DVDs and haven't seen a particularly striking need to upgrade.

Of course, I'd have to buy a Blu Ray player first.

It appears that your recommendation is based upon not having experienced HD. Am I correct? If so, then I hope everyone takes you recommendation with a huge grain of salt.

If I'm wrong, then let me know.
Thanks,
Doug

I was happy with DVDs on a bog standard flat screen TV, until I saw Transformers on Blu-Ray on an HD tv

I can't wait (well, I can, money and all that) to check out TOS in the same way...

 

[davejames]

It just goes to show NO ONE ever expect the show to survive this long or be watched at such high resolution (and I saw the series first run back in 1969).

Just curious, but what WAS the picture quality like during the original run? Was it really as faded and unfocused and scratchy as those "episode previews" make it look?

Or, considering color TVs were brand new at the time, was the quality even WORSE? lol

 

[Rulius]

Well from what examples I've seen the black and white was really grainy...not sure about the color theres a .. thread somewhere that gives you an idea of what it looked like,, lemme see if I can find it had to do with the Constellation,,

 

[Mistral]

If the blue-ray is truly color-corrected then the colors are set to the standards of the panavision or technicolor cameras themselves. Actually quite vivid and crisp for its time.

 

[Noname Given]

It just goes to show NO ONE ever expect the show to survive this long or be watched at such high resolution (and I saw the series first run back in 1969).

Just curious, but what WAS the picture quality like during the original run? Was it really as faded and unfocused and scratchy as those "episode previews" make it look?

Or, considering color TVs were brand new at the time, was the quality even WORSE? lol

If you never watched TV using terestrial 'rabbit ears', it's hard to explain; but generally, it was NOT as clear as cable (and I'm talking cable prior to digital switchover). One way that might work is this:

Look at a non upconverted 'regular TV' (480i) picture as compared to a 1080i HD picture - the 480i looks more blurry/soft - well, a terestrial 'rabbit ear' signal would look blurry/soft compared to a current DTV 'regular TV' (480i) signal. The colors of a 1960ies era set would also 'bloom' more. The scratchiness of the promos you see on Youtube look that way because they are on old 16mm film and someone did a quick and dirty 3/4" analog video tape tranfer. In the 1960ies, the 'big 3' networks used 1" analog video tape, which had better resolution (for what it was worth).

Needless to say; the reason the U.S.S. Constellation had the 1017 regiosry number (as opposed to say 1710) was because on someTV sets of the time; you wouldn't see enough of a difference between '1701' and '1710'; so the concern about confusuing the audience as to which ship was which WAS honestly a valid one.

 

[Maurice]

Well from what examples I've seen the black and white was really grainy...not sure about the color theres a .. thread somewhere that gives you an idea of what it looked like,, lemme see if I can find it had to do with the Constellation,,

You mean this?

...As for why they used the number that they did for the Constellation... the same reasoning behind using "0", "1", and "7" on the Enterprise, plus they didn't want the numbers to look similar (and have people mistake the Constellation for the Enterprise, again, on the poor quality of broadcast television of that day).

 

[Hober Mallow]

If you never watched TV using terestrial 'rabbit ears', it's hard to explain; but generally, it was NOT as clear as cable (and I'm talking cable prior to digital switchover). One way that might work is this:

Back in the day you also took a more active role in your own TV reception. You'd usually turn on the TV, flip to the correct channel and hope for decent reception. If it was clear enough that there was only a little fuzziness interfering, you'd probably leave it alone. If it was too fuzzy and indistinct, you'd fiddle with knobs and your antenna until someone said, "There! That's good!" You never got a perfectly clear picture; you only got "good enough." For really bad reception you sometimes had to crumple up tin foil and stick it on the end of your antenna.

 

[Therin of Andor]

In January 1984, I was on vacation in New York and stayed at the ramshackle Times Square Hotel on 43rd Street. I shared the room with incredibly noisy water pipes and a mouse.

The b/w TV in the room had rabbit ears and I stayed up to watch Star Trek and was lucky enough to see an ad for a Creation Convention with Walter Koenig being held the very next day! Yay! Too bad I literally had to watch the episode with one hand on the TV set and the other arm stretched up into the air!

We had b/w TV in Australia until 1975, so it was a lovely bit of deja vu and nostalgia to go b/w witn ST again in NYC!

 

[Rulius]

Ah thats the one I was thinking of..heh U.S.S. Constantinople

 

[Jeri]

Therin, we can be quaint, can't we...

 

[davejames]

If you never watched TV using terestrial 'rabbit ears', it's hard to explain; but generally, it was NOT as clear as cable (and I'm talking cable prior to digital switchover). One way that might work is this:

Look at a non upconverted 'regular TV' (480i) picture as compared to a 1080i HD picture - the 480i looks more blurry/soft - well, a terestrial 'rabbit ear' signal would look blurry/soft compared to a current DTV 'regular TV' (480i) signal. The colors of a 1960ies era set would also 'bloom' more. The scratchiness of the promos you see on Youtube look that way because they are on old 16mm film and someone did a quick and dirty 3/4" analog video tape tranfer. In the 1960ies, the 'big 3' networks used 1" analog video tape, which had better resolution (for what it was worth).

Needless to say; the reason the U.S.S. Constellation had the 1017 regiosry number (as opposed to say 1710) was because on someTV sets of the time; you wouldn't see enough of a difference between '1701' and '1710'; so the concern about confusuing the audience as to which ship was which WAS honestly a valid one.

Yeah, I'm 35 so I definitely remember the rabbit ears (in fact I still had a B&W TV in my room until I was about 15, lol).

I was just wondering how much worse it might have looked than the late 70s and 80s TV I remember. Sounds like a little bit at least.

Thanks for the info.

 

[Yeoman Randi]

In January 1984, I was on vacation in New York and stayed at the ramshackle Times Square Hotel on 43rd Street. I shared the room with incredibly noisy water pipes and a mouse.

The b/w TV in the room had rabbit ears and I stayed up to watch Star Trek and was lucky enough to see an ad for a Creation Convention with Walter Koenig being held the very next day! Yay! Too bad I literally had to watch the episode with one hand on the TV set and the other arm stretched up into the air!

We had b/w TV in Australia until 1975, so it was a lovely bit of deja vu and nostalgia to go b/w witn ST again in NYC!

What a great memory to have and hows that for luck as far as your timing to be in NYC?

 

[Hober Mallow]

You were in real trouble if you were trying to watch Star Trek on a UHF station. In that case, you played with knobs and the antenna until you could just make out faces, and that was about as good as your reception was going to get.

God, just thinking back... between constantly turning the reception knob and pointing the rabbit ears every which way every time we changed the channel... TV sure was a big f*cking hassle back then. Almost a waste of time.

You kids today, you have no idea how we lived back then. It was the stone age. Instead of surfing the net for porn, we sat for hours in front of the wibbly wobbly movie channel that didn't come with our cable package hoping to just make out the occasional nude. Spoiled rotten kids today...

Oh, come on, I'm not the only one who did that.

 

[Noname Given]

You were in real trouble if you were trying to watch Star Trek on a UHF station. In that case, you played with knobs and the antenna until you could just make out faces, and that was about as good as your reception was going to get.

God, just thinking back... between constantly turning the reception knob and pointing the rabbit ears every which way every time we changed the channel... TV sure was a big f*cking hassle back then. Almost a waste of time.

You kids today, you have no idea how we lived back then. It was the stone age. Instead of surfing the net for porn, we sat for hours in front of the wibbly wobbly movie channel that didn't come with our cable package hoping to just make out the occasional nude. Spoiled rotten kids today...

Oh, come on, I'm not the only one who did that.

And don't forget - for most back then a remote control was a LUXURY. If you wanted to change the channel, you usually had to get up off your ass from the couch, and turn the dial (yes, a dial; with between 9 or 10 VHF channels, you DIDN'T key in numbers on a 10-key keypad).

Oh, and you kids, GET OFF MY LAWN!

 

[Forbin]

And don't forget - for most back then a remote control was a LUXURY. If you wanted to change the channel, you usually had to get up off your ass from the couch, and turn the dial (yes, a dial; with between 9 or 10 VHF channels, you DIDN'T key in numbers on a 10-key keypad).

Oh, and you kids, GET OFF MY LAWN!

Somewhere around then I got a Sony with a vertical stack of 12 buttons down the side, one for each station.