Remastered Shots vs. Original Shots

[3D Master]

Ah, so when Leonardo DaVinci is resurrected from the grave, looks at the new computer generated Mona Lisa, and says; "Hey, it's okay! Yeah, I can live with this. It may even be better than my original." You have no problem with looking at the computer generated new one for the rest of eternity, while the original one gets locked away in a basement, right?

'cept the original ain't locked away in a basement. In fact, I've got all the original versions on DVD in my living room, unless the Paramount stormtroopers come and take them away.

Oh, wait. I don't think Paramount has stormtroopers.

Besides. I like TOS-R. Also, you can still get the originals. And you can download them.

What you have, doesn't matter. What people in the future are able to buy and watch, is the concern. When new formats to carry data come around - and they will - and nobody has a DVD player anymore, never even had one, let alone VHS, and the new data carriages do not carry the originals, then what?

 

[skylark]

Ah, so when Leonardo DaVinci is resurrected from the grave, looks at the new computer generated Mona Lisa, and says; "Hey, it's okay! Yeah, I can live with this. It may even be better than my original." You have no problem with looking at the computer generated new one for the rest of eternity, while the original one gets locked away in a basement, right?

'cept the original ain't locked away in a basement. In fact, I've got all the original versions on DVD in my living room, unless the Paramount stormtroopers come and take them away.

Oh, wait. I don't think Paramount has stormtroopers.

Besides. I like TOS-R. Also, you can still get the originals. And you can download them.

What you have, doesn't matter. What people in the future are able to buy and watch, is the concern. When new formats to carry data come around - and they will - and nobody has a DVD player anymore, never even had one, let alone VHS, and the new data carriages do not carry the originals, then what?

I'm sure Paramount will figure something out. And I'm sure you'll find some reason to complain about it.

 

[Doug Otte]

Everyone says, and you know how wrong they can be, that the Blu-ray version of TMP will have to be the theatrical version. The special effects for the DE were not done in HD.

Umm, no, I don't think anyone said that...at least, anyone knowledgeable. Everyone (knowledgeable) has said that the sfx were created at film-ready resolution, then composited at SD-level resolution when they decided to put it straight on DVD. The sfx creators said they only need to composite the existing new sfx at a higher resolution into the film.

Doug

 

[Outpost4]

Doug, I'm afraid you are wrong. I'm going to look it up, but I specifically remember reading a recent story from the folks that did the renders for the DE where they said, at the time, they pushed Paramount to have them do them in HD. Paramount refused. They did them in resolution good enough for DVD. In fact, part of the discussion was that there was never a film transfer of the DE. It couldn't be done without looking bad.

The folks had kept their work and had been waiting for a call from CBS Digital to go back and re-do the renders in film quality resolution for the Blu-ray release but had yet to receive a call.

 

[Outpost4]

Here is the info, Doug, in the comments section for an article over on Trek Movie. They are by Daren Dochterman, the guy who headed up the CGI work for TMP DE, specifically comments #64 & 67.

http://trekmovie.com/2008/03/05/new...-works-description-of-new-movie-set/#comments

I'll also post them here:

I’m flattered that people are giving me credit for the effects in the Director’s Edition of TMP… but I had a team of wonderful artists working on that project from Foundation Imaging. When Foundation had to close it’s doors, the crew was scattered to the winds, some winding up at Zoic, EdenFX, and Battlestar Galactica. All of them continue to do great work… and I learned a lot from them. I’m hoping that someday we can call them back to bring TMP: The Director’s Edition to Film/HD res. I still find it sad that the studio was so short sighted that they wouldn’t have us render in HD back in the day.

We kept as much of the original project materials as possible for the DE, including model files, sequences, scenes, and elements… we always planned to do HD at some point. We were hoping it would have been closer to the production time, I hope that software advancements don’t make the original scenes so out of date and incompatible that we have to start from scratch on any of them… but that is always a possibility. These are the realities of the situation. I’m sure if enough people are courteously vocal about it to the right entities, the DE will see the Hi Def light of day, somehow.

These sections are also quoted in a thread over in the Trek Movie forum. In that thread, there was an interesting post by 22 Stars, responding to a post of mine.

[W]asn't there a limited theatrical run of ST-TMP Director's Edition after it was created? I remember a premier night with Robert Wise in attendance and the theatrical model of the Enterprise-A set up in the lobby. I'd be shocked if they threw a regular NTSC picture up on the screen that night.

^ I worked at Paramount at this time, and there was no DE film print ever made, and the effects were not rendered at a higher resolution than standard DVD res. The DE creators are trying to get Paramount to let them render the effects at a HD res, but so far no word. Perhaps the BluRay move will make it so.

I asked TPTB at the time to do some sort of theatrical run for the DE and no dice. The premiere was certainly digitally projected from the same DVD source that we all have who purchased the DE DVD.

 

[Gepard]

Ah, so when Leonardo DaVinci is resurrected from the grave, looks at the new computer generated Mona Lisa, and says; "Hey, it's okay! Yeah, I can live with this. It may even be better than my original." You have no problem with looking at the computer generated new one for the rest of eternity, while the original one gets locked away in a basement, right?

'cept the original ain't locked away in a basement. In fact, I've got all the original versions on DVD in my living room, unless the Paramount stormtroopers come and take them away.

Also, the original TOS VFX ain't exactly the work of DaVinci, you know?

Obviously you've never seen the state of the Star Wars masters and other masters before they get cleaned up. They are ALL like that, and WORSE. Yet after the cleanup is over, they look pristine. It's the people who believe crap like "the SFX can't be properly made for HD", that are the obtuse ones. To blinded by blind belief in whatever anyone says to think for themselves.

Cleanup taking how much time and requiring how much work? The Star Wars films also have effects work that beats the snot out of what CBS Digital did for the Remastered project, so the quality of work and time spent on it in these two cases is not even comparable. You can't just throw degraded, shitty prints like what the original TOS effects shots have become at a small team of low-paid artists who hadn't even been given the time to do proper tests of their digital starship Enterprise and expect them to do film restoration to be as quickly and easily as you seem to think it should be.

 

[ST-One]

Obviously you've never seen the state of the Star Wars masters and other masters before they get cleaned up. They are ALL like that, and WORSE. Yet after the cleanup is over, they look pristine. It's the people who believe crap like "the SFX can't be properly made for HD", that are the obtuse ones. To blinded by blind belief in whatever anyone says to think for themselves.

Have you seen what was done to the picture quality of 'Gone with the Wind'?
Up until the restoration the images were blurry, out of focus and in some cases even warped.
Do you know how they restored the original picture quality? They used the very original prints and re-cut, re-colored and re-composited the whole film from scratch.
This is not possible with the the TOS-VFX since the original (35 mm) prints of these shots no longer exist.

:sighs: Which doesn't matter. The Star Wars masters were every bit as bad, indeed far worse, than the TOS VFX. Yet, they still managed to get it back to perfect quality. Whether you have the masters or not, doesn't matter; what matters is HOW BAD the footage, of masters or otherwise, IS. And the fact is, they can be brought back from being all but destroyed.

They could do the same with the TOS VFX shots. May take more effort than simply CGI'ing new effects, but it can be done. You just have to be willing to put in the effort.

The image resolution simply isn't high enough.
But I too think they could re-create the original VFX-shot as they were - they would just need to digitally repaint them, since they don't have the original elements for re-compositing. But then that would make these images CG, and that you hate, for whatever reason.
Oh, and give these TOS-R people more money and resources. But I don't think you would be willing to pay more for the BlueRay-discs either.

If they can't be bought, it's the exact same thing.

So?
Robert Wise himself considered the DE as the final version - the version he wanted.

That's nice for him, but it doesn't matter.

And if what's his name was here, he would be able to explain why it's rather ignorant as well. What's the TMP expert's name again?

I don't care actually what that neo-nazis has to say.
Robert Wise is the man who gave us TMP in the first place (he directed it, you know) not TGT.

 

[Outpost4]

Boy, ST-One, TGT hasn't posted in this thread or to my knowledge even read it. I don't know why he deserves your flippant distain. Personally, I've learned a lot from him over the years.

Plus, in a battle of wits, I'd recommend not taking him on. That advice goes for every poster on this board.

 

[3D Master]

Ah, so when Leonardo DaVinci is resurrected from the grave, looks at the new computer generated Mona Lisa, and says; "Hey, it's okay! Yeah, I can live with this. It may even be better than my original." You have no problem with looking at the computer generated new one for the rest of eternity, while the original one gets locked away in a basement, right?

'cept the original ain't locked away in a basement. In fact, I've got all the original versions on DVD in my living room, unless the Paramount stormtroopers come and take them away.

Also, the original TOS VFX ain't exactly the work of DaVinci, you know?

Which is a. your opinion, and b. doesn't matter.

Obviously you've never seen the state of the Star Wars masters and other masters before they get cleaned up. They are ALL like that, and WORSE. Yet after the cleanup is over, they look pristine. It's the people who believe crap like "the SFX can't be properly made for HD", that are the obtuse ones. To blinded by blind belief in whatever anyone says to think for themselves.

Cleanup taking how much time and requiring how much work? The Star Wars films also have effects work that beats the snot out of what CBS Digital did for the Remastered project, so the quality of work and time spent on it in these two cases is not even comparable. You can't just throw degraded, shitty prints like what the original TOS effects shots have become at a small team of low-paid artists who hadn't even been given the time to do proper tests of their digital starship Enterprise and expect them to do film restoration to be as quickly and easily as you seem to think it should be.

:sighs:

Of course NOT!

I told you; it's all about how much effort you put into it. Paramount/CBS had no interest in putting any real effort into it. WHICH IS THE PROBLEM! They just needed a quick cheap way to make another buck off of Star Trek - to hell with keeping the product's integrity intact. So, cleaning up the VFX shots properly? The way Lucas did with his Star Wars masters? Nah, let's just cheaply CGI in some new effects, tada!

The image resolution simply isn't high enough.

Bullshit. Even if they needed 35mm resolution, they can always blow them up to it, without hardly any loss of quality at all.

But I too think they could re-create the original VFX-shot as they were - they would just need to digitally repaint them, since they don't have the original elements for re-compositing. But then that would make these images CG, and that you hate, for whatever reason.

Ah, so now you think you're psychic, huh? Please tell me exactly where I said I hated CG. You'll find, I never said such thing. In fact, I've said I hated bad VFX whether it is model work or CGI one way or the other. But you know, keep trying, maybe one day you really will become psychic.

Oh, and give these TOS-R people more money and resources. But I don't think you would be willing to pay more for the BlueRay-discs either.

Wrong again - that psychic stuff isn't working out for ya, is it?

 

[ST-One]

Boy, ST-One, TGT hasn't posted in this thread or to my knowledge even read it. I don't know why he deserves your flippant distain. Personally, I've learned a lot from him over the years.

Plus, in a battle of wits, I'd recommend not taking him on. That advice goes for every poster on this board.

I know that he is very knowledgeable and intelligent.
But he IS also a neo-nazi, and that I have a huge problem with.

 

[skylark]

Bullshit. Even if they needed 35mm resolution, they can always blow them up to it, without hardly any loss of quality at all.

Well, you're approximately right about frame blowups, but it shows that you don't understand the process. You can blow up a degraded print with relatively little loss of quality. This yields a large format print of a degraded image. In other words, such a blowup is no more useful for digital effects than was the original film.

True, digital image processing can do some amazing things, but it's not magic, nor can it restore what isn't there. No amount of shouting is likely to change this.

And speaking of such things, I've personally met several people from CBS Digital. They seem like talented artists who worked very hard. Your childish name calling of these good people and their work is uncalled for. You're certainly entitled to your opinion of their work, but your assumptions of their motives clearly indicate that you, too, are no psychic.

 

[NewHorizon]

Regarding TMPE.

It is common knowledge that the 'theatrical release' was never intended to be considered the 'final' release. What made it's way into theaters was a preview release. There was no sound mix, the final edit hadn't been finished, effects sequences were unfinished...it was barely passable. I'm sure Robert Wise felt ashamed to have his name attached to an unfinished film. Mr. Wise was responsible for some truly great films, so to have the film released before it was even finished must have been horrible. The Motion Picture was Mr. Wise's film...he and his team tastefully and respectfully finished it and did not pull any George Lucas tricks. They put so much effort into making the new effects match the existing film...I find it insulting that there are people who cling to the 'theatrical' release, when it was not even the film Mr. Wise intended to show the public. I could understand these opinions if the film had been finished, but this isn't revising history at all...it's 'FINISHING' a piece of history that was left unwritten for years.

 

[3D Master]

Bullshit. Even if they needed 35mm resolution, they can always blow them up to it, without hardly any loss of quality at all.

Well, you're approximately right about frame blowups, but it shows that you don't understand the process. You can blow up a degraded print with relatively little loss of quality. This yields a large format print of a degraded image. In other words, such a blowup is no more useful for digital effects than was the original film.

That's why you would blow it up, AFTER you cleaned up, so you blow up the cleaned up version, and not get a blowup with exaggerated flaws.

True, digital image processing can do some amazing things, but it's not magic, nor can it restore what isn't there. No amount of shouting is likely to change this.

There is not that isn't there. They have all they need, whether the original 35mm is lost or not.

And speaking of such things, I've personally met several people from CBS Digital. They seem like talented artists who worked very hard. Your childish name calling of these good people and their work is uncalled for. You're certainly entitled to your opinion of their work, but your assumptions of their motives clearly indicate that you, too, are no psychic.

I've never done any name-calling of them, but go ahead, put your fantasies in my mouth.

Regarding TMPE.

It is common knowledge that the 'theatrical release' was never intended to be considered the 'final' release. What made it's way into theaters was a preview release. There was no sound mix, the final edit hadn't been finished, effects sequences were unfinished...it was barely passable. I'm sure Robert Wise felt ashamed to have his name attached to an unfinished film. Mr. Wise was responsible for some truly great films, so to have the film released before it was even finished must have been horrible. The Motion Picture was Mr. Wise's film...he and his team tastefully and respectfully finished it and did not pull any George Lucas tricks. They put so much effort into making the new effects match the existing film...I find it insulting that there are people who cling to the 'theatrical' release, when it was not even the film Mr. Wise intended to show the public. I could understand these opinions if the film had been finished, but this isn't revising history at all...it's 'FINISHING' a piece of history that was left unwritten for years.

Except that it wasn't "finished" it was altered in several ways. Most notably the change from an ecological very different San Francisco, to a San Francisco barely different to out San Francisco. There are many more such changes. A particular sore spot to myself is the removal of the "we create our gods in our own image" line. It's so poignant it should have remained in.

 

[Outpost4]

All life is suffering, 3D Master.

 

[Doug Otte]

Outpost, thanks for doing the legwork to document your point. I had misremembered that the effects were rendered at HD and were downscaled for DVD, but now I see I was wrong. I stand corrected

Doug

 

[Outpost4]

No problem, Doug. I've been wrong so many times on this board, I should change my screen name to Commodore Stocker.

 

[skylark]

Bullshit. Even if they needed 35mm resolution, they can always blow them up to it, without hardly any loss of quality at all.

Well, you're approximately right about frame blowups, but it shows that you don't understand the process. You can blow up a degraded print with relatively little loss of quality. This yields a large format print of a degraded image. In other words, such a blowup is no more useful for digital effects than was the original film.

That's why you would blow it up, AFTER you cleaned up, so you blow up the cleaned up version, and not get a blowup with exaggerated flaws.

There is not that isn't there. They have all they need, whether the original 35mm is lost or not.

The issue is resolution, not dirt. The inherent sharpness of the original image can't be restored. Digital processes can approximate some of the original qualities, but even dirt removal results in some loss of the original. In most cases, the gain (removal of dirt) is worth the sacrifice (localized loss of picture information), but you can't get something for nothing.

 

[3D Master]

Well, you're approximately right about frame blowups, but it shows that you don't understand the process. You can blow up a degraded print with relatively little loss of quality. This yields a large format print of a degraded image. In other words, such a blowup is no more useful for digital effects than was the original film.

That's why you would blow it up, AFTER you cleaned up, so you blow up the cleaned up version, and not get a blowup with exaggerated flaws.

There is not that isn't there. They have all they need, whether the original 35mm is lost or not.

The issue is resolution, not dirt. The inherent sharpness of the original image can't be restored. Digital processes can approximate some of the original qualities, but even dirt removal results in some loss of the original. In most cases, the gain (removal of dirt) is worth the sacrifice (localized loss of picture information), but you can't get something for nothing.

If people can blow up 16mm to 35mm and show it just about perfect quality in the theater, then whatever little you miss (and it's very little indeed) isn't going to matter for the HD transfer of 60s tv show. Seriously, it's a 60s tv show; tt doesn't have to look like a perfect HD filmed stuff from the 21st century.

 

[Outpost4]

I'm not sure the problem is the film, 16mm or what, but the generations. As we well know, they reused and reused and reused the stock footage of the models in Star Trek. New copies were made to be inserted in that week's episode. You can easily see this. The stock footage used in the two pilots and the early season one episodes looks much clearer than the later shots. Many of the model shots in season 2 and 3 are so many generations down, they will never look crisp, no matter how much they are cleaned up, blown up, or futzed with. Add onto that the bad mattes (In one of the linked HD pictures upthread, a quarter of the deflector dish is missing. In another, the black matte line is huge.) and you have serious problems with the original effects shots in many episodes.

Still, I hope when they cleaned up the episodes prior to adding in the new CGI effects, they cleaned up the old F/X shots, too. I'd like the own the original, unaltered episodes as sharp and clean as they can be. I'll live with being able to see right through a nacelle because of a bad matte. But I can also understand the desire to make the ship shots the same resolution as the live action shots. Thus, the creation of the CGI effects.

Still, I do understand what 3D Master is saying. I'm a taper. It's the classic conundrum of how would you record Neil Young's guitar? The answer is you'd reproduce his distortion as cleanly as you can. I would like those old effects, even with all their fuzzy faults, reproduced as clearly as possible, please.

 

[3D Master]

I'm not sure the problem is the film, 16mm or what, but the generations. As we well know, they reused and reused and reused the stock footage of the models in Star Trek. New copies were made to be inserted in that week's episode. You can easily see this. The stock footage used in the two pilots and the early season one episodes looks much clearer than the later shots. Many of the model shots in season 2 and 3 are so many generations down, they will never look crisp, no matter how much they are cleaned up, blown up, or futzed with. Add onto that the bad mattes (In one of the linked HD pictures upthread, a quarter of the deflector dish is missing. In another, the black matte line is huge.) and you have serious problems with the original effects shots in many episodes.

Doesn't matter. That's the reason that Star Wars and other films get RE-mastered. The old masters are worn out and horribly bad, so they need new ones. And there's hardly a bad quality that can't be brought back to pristine condition. And indeed, matte lines, and deflector dishes, ironing them out/putting them back using a computer is not a problem. This wouldn't be adding in new CGI effects, or trampling over old work, it's simply restoring/performing restoration the old work back to its former glory.

You see I don't even mind brand new CGI effects, I was kind of excited and hopeful when it was announced. However, it must be done RIGHT, and the old original must remain intact and available, and in essence on the same set that contains the CGI. I'd never waste my money on a set that doesn't have both.