Remastered Shots vs. Original Shots

[FalTorPan]

This YouTube video is a montage of selected remastered shots, compared with their original counterparts.

What amazed me most while watching the video is how much I appreciate not only the remastered shots, but also the original shots. Generally speaking, both look great, to the extent that in many ways, replacing a shot seems to be little more than the replacement of one stylized and thus fake-looking shot for another stylistic and thus fake-looking shot.

 

[JNG]

What amazed me most while watching the video is how much I appreciate not only the remastered shots, but also the original shots. Generally speaking, both look great, to the extent that in many ways, replacing a shot seems to be little more than the replacement of one stylized and thus fake-looking shot for another stylistic and thus fake-looking shot.

Agreed--I think this was the artistic intent and I appreciated it much more than I would have some attempt to make everything photorealistic just to show off that photorealistic CGI visual effects are possible (after all, we know that).

It is a pity more people didn't "get" this; there's an awful lot of the "DAT'S NOT AS REALISTIC AS TEH CGIS I CAN MAEK, CBS DIGITAL SUX" kind of talk.

 

[sbk1234]

Very nice video. It's hard to appreciate all of what they've done without seeing them together like that. I don't know if my views are in the minority or not, but I always thought that the point of Trek remastered was to add more visual continuity with the newer series, rather than create realistic shots. In this regard, I think they've succeeded.
I know many don't like Trek Remastered, but I think this is a great way to bring more viewers into TOS, who might have been turned off by the outdated SFX. I think this is better than people not watching them at all. In this regard, I also have no problem colorizing old black and white movies.
I don't expect too many others to share my views on this topic! But those are my feelings on the matter.

Just one more question, why were they playing music from the Next Generation for a video about TOS?

(Don't hurt me!)

 

[TheMurph]

Nice. I liked it a lot.

Just one more question, why were they playing music from the Next Generation for a video about TOS?

(Don't hurt me!)

It's music from Star Trek: TMP.

 

[sbk1234]

Yes, I know. It was a joke. I guess if I have to spell it out, it wasn't very funny. Sorry.

 

[TheMurph]

Yes, I know. It was a joke. I guess if I have to spell it out, it wasn't very funny. Sorry.

Whoops... I didn't realize it was a joke, I miss them sometimes.

 

[A beaker full of death]

Yes, the stills are very pretty. But the damned thing doesn't move right.

 

[Timewalker]

In this regard, I also have no problem colorizing old black and white movies.

Then you obviously never saw both the black and white version and the colorized version of some of the old Richard Greene Robin Hood TV series from the late '50s.

Robin Hood and his men looked okay in black and white. But the colorized version showing just what shade of green they were all wearing... it was one of the most ridiculous things I've ever seen! Colorizing that show was a travesty!

 

[sbk1234]

^^All I can say is to each his own. Personally, I've always found color more interesting to look at. True, some movies truly used black and white to full effect, such as Citizen Cane, Maltese Falcon, among others. Movies like these should be left alone. But most movies were simply filmed in black and white because that is what was available at the time. I know there was color pretty far back, but production realities ruled it out for most. I really don't think that the integrity of "Francis the Talking Mule" will be lost if colorized.
That's the way I see it, anyway. I know it's not a popular view.

 

[Timewalker]

Well, there's color... and then there's ridiculous color. The 1950s Robin Hood series in color looks extremely ridiculous. But in black and white, the viewer just gets on with enjoying the story.

I grew up with black and white TV. Even after most CBC productions were done in color, we still had a black and white TV. I remember the first time I saw "Adventures in Rainbow Country" (in 1969) in color and thinking how beautiful it was.

 

[c5maier]

^^ It seems to me that (besides genre) it really is a question of technical and artistic quality. Some attempts of colouring in b/w films in the early 90's looked just like that. Then again I recently watched the first season of "Jeannie" and I would not have believed it was not originally produced in colour had I not read about it. The effort certainly helps that series to sell in our days - as does the "remastering" help TOS.

Speaking of which: I, too, grew up with black and white TV. We got our first colour set in 1972 and the first episode of Star Trek that I saw in colour was "Where no Man has Gone Before". The barrier shure looked better than it had in "By Any Other Name", which I had seen previously.

 

[Captain Leslie]

The only thing that bothers me about the Remastered Series, is that it took me long enough to buy the original series sets, not being a particularly wealthy man. The prospect of buying them all again if I like them is somewhat daunting. Also, they should have a 1 dvd taster edition with one or two shows on, so we can try out the new versions rather than having to buy a whole series.

 

[3D Master]

What amazed me most while watching the video is how much I appreciate not only the remastered shots, but also the original shots. Generally speaking, both look great, to the extent that in many ways, replacing a shot seems to be little more than the replacement of one stylized and thus fake-looking shot for another stylistic and thus fake-looking shot.

Agreed--I think this was the artistic intent and I appreciated it much more than I would have some attempt to make everything photorealistic just to show off that photorealistic CGI visual effects are possible (after all, we know that).

Then there's no point of a remastering, and they should have just left things alone.

It is a pity more people didn't "get" this; there's an awful lot of the "DAT'S NOT AS REALISTIC AS TEH CGIS I CAN MAEK, CBS DIGITAL SUX" kind of talk.

There's nothing to get. The Remastered shots look no better at best, and often worse than the original. There's no point to it.

Which is amazingly sad. Done right, a remastered Star Trek could be amazing. Sadly they didn't, they just produced the latest fake-looking cartoon SFX.

Very nice video. It's hard to appreciate all of what they've done without seeing them together like that. I don't know if my views are in the minority or not, but I always thought that the point of Trek remastered was to add more visual continuity with the newer series, rather than create realistic shots.

That was a huge mistake then.

Are all future Star Trek projects going to look like visual continuity with the earlier shows? Or will they produced the best SFX?

I hope they go for best SFX, because ST will soon look like shite. Hell, it looks pretty bad now.

 

[NCC621]

^ Reasonable enough, if yours is the only axe to grind.

Myself, I mostly like the remastered effects. They respect the artistic intent of the originals, yet are upgraded.

 

[3D Master]

They respect the artistic intent of the originals, yet are upgraded.

I don't think they respected the artistic intent of the originals at all. They "respected" the artistic LIMITATIONS of the originals, which I don't know if it's such respect. When you look at the originals, there are many times when the Enterprise is seen, it looks like an actual 3D object almost as much as if you were wearing 3D glasses. Nothing of that is preserved, there isn't even an attempt. It's simply the same 2D cartoony SFX we've had in SF since Star Wars.

Like it was said above, it's more like they just wanted the SFX to look like the later series, than to actually delve into what was done back then, and create that. Which would require a lot of work with shadows and lighting to make the ship look like an actual solid object.

 

[NCC621]

I disagree. I think it's clear that the CBS-D team went out of their way to respect the original material. You may feel that they did not do so, or that their approach was not a good one. That's fine. It obviously depends on what axe you want to grind.

As I said, I believe that CBS-D was generally successful in creating new effects that fit in with the original, while upgrading it in places.

 

[Beyerstein]

I think the remasted shots look nice and are in good taste, but if I'm ever gonna still sit down and watch an episode of TOS I'd rather it be the unchanged version

 

[ST-One]

They respect the artistic intent of the originals, yet are upgraded.

I don't think they respected the artistic intent of the originals at all. They "respected" the artistic LIMITATIONS of the originals, which I don't know if it's such respect. When you look at the originals, there are many times when the Enterprise is seen, it looks like an actual 3D object almost as much as if you were wearing 3D glasses. Nothing of that is preserved, there isn't even an attempt. It's simply the same 2D cartoony SFX we've had in SF since Star Wars.

Like it was said above, it's more like they just wanted the SFX to look like the later series, than to actually delve into what was done back then, and create that. Which would require a lot of work with shadows and lighting to make the ship look like an actual solid object.

 

[cbspock]

They never did some of the classic shots of the ship like this..

-Chris

 

[Timelord79 (he/him)]

Are there still people who don't get, that replacing the original effects is not the purpose of the whole remastering effort but a byproduct?
TPtB decided to release the show with HD resolution. Because the original effects would simply look like crap after the remastering process they needed to be replaced. And while the FX team was at it anyway they decided to replace the constant stock footage with new shots.
If you're not interested in HD resolution there's nothing to stop you from putting your standard DVD into your player and watch the original version. Then this is not meant for you, and there is nothing wrong with that, too. Just don't expect other people to endure crappy picture quality when the whole point is to have an optimal resolution and crystal sharp pictures.
Also don't expect theatrical effects like what we will get in the new movie. There is not enough budget obviously. In fact I believe there is not even as much budget for this as Enterprise or Voyager had as the most recent comparable Trek shows.