remastered..THUMBS DOWN

[number6]

This is about not having the option to see it unaltered in the best possible venue.

The standard DVDs are the best possible venue for seeing it unaltered.

Yes.

And so far there have been reports that TOS will be enhanced and released with unaltered effects and there have been reports that say that it won't. Paramount is aware of the demand for both and Okuda himself said that he hoped both would be available.

Frankly I don't care anymore. I've bought several versions of TOS. The only thing that keeps me coming back are the extras and things I haven't seen.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

This is about not having the option to see it unaltered in the best possible venue.

The standard DVDs are the best possible venue for seeing it unaltered.

They're certainly the most appropriate, given the medium for which the episodes were designed.

I suppose what would be nice would be to see the clean-up and color-correction that's been applied to the TOS-R episodes done for the unaltered TOS episodes on DVD. Aside from that, there's nothing wrong with DVD as the available medium for TOS - for now. Everything is transitory.

 

[Mallory]

The personal shit ends now people. Warnings will be forthcoming to ANYONE who tosses out a personal insult from this point forward.

 

[trevanian]

This is about not having the option to see it unaltered in the best possible venue.

The standard DVDs are the best possible venue for seeing it unaltered.

The standard DVDs are not the current HQ standard for viewing in general, as that has been supplanted. Therefore that means the unaltered have been 'left behind' for now.

 

[ST-One]

This is about not having the option to see it unaltered in the best possible venue.

The standard DVDs are the best possible venue for seeing it unaltered.

The standard DVDs are not the current HQ standard for viewing in general, as that has been supplanted. Therefore that means the unaltered have been 'left behind' for now.

The question is: Are they good enough for you?
Will you be satisfied with the original VFX-shots exposed to the HD-format in all their 1960s-TV-crapyness?

 

[ancient]

Hmm, yes, we CAN have it both ways and yet continue to bitch. This thread is most enlightening.

Seeing the originals in HD would look a lot worse than the SD DVD version. Even in SD, the res on the DVDs is uncomfortably revealing. Which is why they made the TOS-R in the fist place...oh fuck it, YES, they made TOS-R to appeal to TOS haters. I admit it. The logic is so complicated that it almost doesn't exist.

 

[trevanian]

The standard DVDs are the best possible venue for seeing it unaltered.

The standard DVDs are not the current HQ standard for viewing in general, as that has been supplanted. Therefore that means the unaltered have been 'left behind' for now.

The question is: Are they good enough for you?
Will you be satisfied with the original VFX-shots exposed to the HD-format in all their 1960s-TV-crapyness?

Of course. Same as the crappiness of the live-action sets and the unsubtle makeup as you guys see in HD-format. I'd love to have them that way.

 

[Outpost4]

The standard DVDs are not the current HQ standard for viewing in general, as that has been supplanted. Therefore that means the unaltered have been 'left behind' for now.

For that matter, season 2 and 3 of TOS-R have also been "left behind" since only season 1 has come out in HD.

As a guy who watched a syndicated-cut, VHS 6 hour version of Star Trek for a couple of decades, the regular DVDs are good enough for me for now.

And as Dennis said upthread, I'll bet 1,000 quatloos that the regular, unaltertered version of Star Trek will eventually come out on some future hi-def format (hopefully Blu-ray) just so Paramount can make another buck on Star Trek.

I remember reading somewhere on this board that Paramount has made a billion dollars over the years on Trek. That's astounding. You can count on them wanting to make that two.

 

[ATimson]

The standard DVDs are not the current HQ standard for viewing in general, as that has been supplanted. Therefore that means the unaltered have been 'left behind' for now.

No, you haven't been left behind, because the effects for the original aren't HD-ready. Given the visible flaws, the non-effects shots aren't exactly HD-ready either. The currently available DVDs present the original show in the highest quality they're designed for--higher quality than they're designed for--in a format that any current HD disc player can play. How is that being left behind?

 

[trevanian]

The standard DVDs are not the current HQ standard for viewing in general, as that has been supplanted. Therefore that means the unaltered have been 'left behind' for now.

No, you haven't been left behind, because the effects for the original aren't HD-ready. Given the visible flaws, the non-effects shots aren't exactly HD-ready either. The currently available DVDs present the original show in the highest quality they're designed for--higher quality than they're designed for--in a format that any current HD disc player can play. How is that being left behind?

HD-ready?
I'm just repeating stuff from upthread, but the show was shot on 35mm film, which is a helluva lot higher resolution than any current STANDARD digital system, and has a lot more info than current HD can display, if you care to scan it at a high enough level.

Kodak's magazine has printed a study that suggests you need to scan 35mm not at 4k but at 6K if you want to get all the info ... and for dvd, very few things have even been scanned at 4K (early bond films is all I know of.) For all their faults, the trek live-action has an enormous wealth of detail, owing in part to film stock and in part to Finnerman's exposure technique.

HD-ready? Come again?

 

[ATimson]

HD-ready? Come again?

The show was never meant to be seen at film resolutions, which is why the film has all sorts of stuff like poor makeup and coffee stains that blend away at 480i but stand out at 1080p.

Yes, you could display it at HD resolutions as-is. But it'll look better blown up from DVDs, and also be closer to "what the makers intended".

 

[trevanian]

HD-ready? Come again?

The show was never meant to be seen at film resolutions, which is why the film has all sorts of stuff like poor makeup and coffee stains that blend away at 480i but stand out at 1080p.

Yes, you could display it at HD resolutions as-is. But it'll look better blown up from DVDs, and also be closer to "what the makers intended".

As I said earlier, I've seen these things projected and they looked pretty good to me. That may not be as it was intended, but it was effective nonetheless. And it was of a single piece, which is at least as important given the stylistic variations introduced with -r

 

[ST-One]

HD-ready? Come again?

The show was never meant to be seen at film resolutions, which is why the film has all sorts of stuff like poor makeup and coffee stains that blend away at 480i but stand out at 1080p.

Yes, you could display it at HD resolutions as-is. But it'll look better blown up from DVDs, and also be closer to "what the makers intended".

As I said earlier, I've seen these things projected and they looked pretty good to me. That may not be as it was intended, but it was effective nonetheless. And it was of a single piece, which is at least as important given the stylistic variations introduced with -r

ah, consistency ... like the Enterprise having different bridge modules, different nacelle end-caps, deflector, bussard-collectors,...
All part of the charm of TOS. But it takes not one iota from the show since these (budget-related) glaring mistakes are fixed.

BTW: I will only buy TOS in a HD-format when both versions are in that set, just for completeness' sake.

And a little advise to you, trevanian: stop acting like you childhood is being raped.

 

[trevanian]

ah, consistency ... like the Enterprise having different bridge modules, different nacelle end-caps, deflector, bussard-collectors,...
[snip]
And a little advise to you, trevanian: stop acting like you childhood is being raped.

No, consistency as in the ship doesn't start looking like cel animation, which is what some of the -r stuff looks like.

As to the last bit of 'advise' ... it isn't past memories that concern me in this thread, it is being able to see things presented well in the present and future that concerns me.

EDIT ADDON: The whole notion of 'ready for HD' puzzles me now. You can see wires holding up a model plane in GOLDFINGER in shots in the theater, on laserdisc and probably VHS too, and you sure can see them on DVD. Now that they did 4K masters for the BluRay, I imagine the wires are going to be a helluva lot more visible. Does that mean Sony and MGM and Eon don't realize the old flagship of the Bond fleet isn't ready for HD yet, even though it is being reissued again next month?

 

[ST-One]

ah, consistency ... like the Enterprise having different bridge modules, different nacelle end-caps, deflector, bussard-collectors,...
[snip]
And a little advise to you, trevanian: stop acting like you childhood is being raped.

No, consistency as in the ship doesn't start looking like cel animation, which is what some of the -r stuff looks like.

As to the last bit of 'advise' ... it isn't past memories that concern me in this thread, it is being able to see things presented well in the present and future that concerns me.

EDIT ADDON: The whole notion of 'ready for HD' puzzles me now. You can see wires holding up a model plane in GOLDFINGER in shots in the theater, on laserdisc and probably VHS too, and you sure can see them on DVD. Now that they did 4K masters for the BluRay, I imagine the wires are going to be a helluva lot more visible. Does that mean Sony and MGM and Eon don't realize the old flagship of the Bond fleet isn't ready for HD yet, even though it is being reissued again next month?

You know perfectly well, that it isn't about a few visible wires when it comes to TOS.

 

[FalTorPan]

EDIT ADDON: The whole notion of 'ready for HD' puzzles me now. You can see wires holding up a model plane in GOLDFINGER in shots in the theater, on laserdisc and probably VHS too, and you sure can see them on DVD. Now that they did 4K masters for the BluRay, I imagine the wires are going to be a helluva lot more visible. Does that mean Sony and MGM and Eon don't realize the old flagship of the Bond fleet isn't ready for HD yet, even though it is being reissued again next month?

You know perfectly well, that it isn't about a few visible wires when it comes to TOS.

That's true. It isn't about undesirably visible wires. It's a undesirably visible compositing artifacts.

(For the record, I'm neither pro- nor anti-TOS-R, as long as the original material remains commercially available.)

 

[RAMA]

^Too bad. Your Trek was designed to be watched on a 1966 RCA color set and not HD. You can either go out and buy one so you can see it as the producers intended or see it in HD with new fx and deal with it. That's your only choice if you want to be a "purist." Sounds like a bunch of spoiled whining to me!

Sounds like a simpering moron to me. As has been pointed out often enough, whatever the show was intended to be seen upon, the films have been projected with spectacular results at conventions. Even in 16mm, the shows looked good projected. So the HD argument, such as you and the rethinkproducers would make it, is dead from well before the onset. 35mm -- even scratched, grainy, or faded 35mm -- still trumps the quickly knocked-out -r stuff.

I bet you can't wait till somebody decides there are too many stock shots in THE PRISONER so they do a virtual village that they can put a cg #6 into to create sweeping new walkthroughs to make the show work for HD audiences (HD standing for Heavily Dumbeddown)

Actually your argument is dead right from the start because whether its seen at home or projected on a large screen, in its proper format HD will look cleaner, brighter and better....even without the full HD format it looks better on my HDTV. Face it, the new FX--even without being Enterprise quality--will always be better. Showing the comparison to the uninitiated (and I have) the difference is readily apparent.

TOS was meant to be a commercial network show. In the modern age, almost any work of visual fiction from the past could be considered a maleable technical project. If there is merit in its re-production, and those who work on it are serious and concerned parties, then I feel there is reason enough to produce it. Firmly embedding your thought process in the archaic technical past is something you need to move beyond. This is the 21st century...a lot is going to change in the visual medium.

RAMA

 

[RAMA]

ah, consistency ... like the Enterprise having different bridge modules, different nacelle end-caps, deflector, bussard-collectors,...
[snip]
And a little advise to you, trevanian: stop acting like you childhood is being raped.

No, consistency as in the ship doesn't start looking like cel animation, which is what some of the -r stuff looks like.

As to the last bit of 'advise' ... it isn't past memories that concern me in this thread, it is being able to see things presented well in the present and future that concerns me.

EDIT ADDON: The whole notion of 'ready for HD' puzzles me now. You can see wires holding up a model plane in GOLDFINGER in shots in the theater, on laserdisc and probably VHS too, and you sure can see them on DVD. Now that they did 4K masters for the BluRay, I imagine the wires are going to be a helluva lot more visible. Does that mean Sony and MGM and Eon don't realize the old flagship of the Bond fleet isn't ready for HD yet, even though it is being reissued again next month?

No need to be puzzled, the studio could well avail themselves of the new technology, but as always whether to update it or not is up to the them. No one is being forced to do it. We should be ecstatic that there is enough modern interest in TOS that it was one of the first considered worthy enough of a project like this...and I AM!

This is about not having the option to see it unaltered in the best possible venue.

The standard DVDs are the best possible venue for seeing it unaltered.

They're certainly the most appropriate, given the medium for which the episodes were designed.

I suppose what would be nice would be to see the clean-up and color-correction that's been applied to the TOS-R episodes done for the unaltered TOS episodes on DVD. Aside from that, there's nothing wrong with DVD as the available medium for TOS - for now. Everything is transitory.

If you want to be technical there IS a lot wrong with unaltered TOS, however I understand your point. I would encourage CBS to release older versions with the new material if possible, or at least make it available in an archive, but for myself...TOS-R is now the standard.

RAMA

 

[trevanian]

Face it, the new FX--even without being Enterprise quality--will always be better. Showing the comparison to the uninitiated (and I have) the difference is readily apparent.

TOS was meant to be a commercial network show. In the modern age, almost any work of visual fiction from the past could be considered a maleable technical project. If there is merit in its re-production, and those who work on it are serious and concerned parties, then I feel there is reason enough to produce it. Firmly embedding your thought process in the archaic technical past is something you need to move beyond. This is the 21st century...a lot is going to change in the visual medium.

RAMA

The difference is readily apparent, but it is a difference that distracts more than it improves.

But since we're clearly never going to agree on that part, let me move to your other 'graph, which has the part that really bothers me. In the modern age, and work of visual fiction from the past could be considered a malleable technical project?

?!!!!!

From a corporate standpoint maybe. From a hobbyist's viewpoint, perhaps. From any other POV, that's about as scary as anything anybody has said in this thread. With that perspective tied to, say, a politically correct perspective, can BIRTH OF A NATION altered so the KKK are the bad guys be far off?

Even considering it is frightening. But if that is your idea of living in the now (rewriting the past with tech), you are welcome to it. Once you've rewritten it enough or altered enough of the visual content, you won't be able to learn enough from it to make it valid to re-view anyway.

 

[trevanian]

ah, consistency ... like the Enterprise having different bridge modules, different nacelle end-caps, deflector, bussard-collectors,...
[snip]
And a little advise to you, trevanian: stop acting like you childhood is being raped.

No, consistency as in the ship doesn't start looking like cel animation, which is what some of the -r stuff looks like.

As to the last bit of 'advise' ... it isn't past memories that concern me in this thread, it is being able to see things presented well in the present and future that concerns me.

EDIT ADDON: The whole notion of 'ready for HD' puzzles me now. You can see wires holding up a model plane in GOLDFINGER in shots in the theater, on laserdisc and probably VHS too, and you sure can see them on DVD. Now that they did 4K masters for the BluRay, I imagine the wires are going to be a helluva lot more visible. Does that mean Sony and MGM and Eon don't realize the old flagship of the Bond fleet isn't ready for HD yet, even though it is being reissued again next month?

You know perfectly well, that it isn't about a few visible wires when it comes to TOS.

Responding to the RAMA thing really blew me out, to the point that I probably won't even check in for the weekend, but let me quickly reply on this and be done.

For me, a bad shot at a crucial moment is worse than a whole show full of mediocre stuff. Example: the plane crash at the end of AIR FORCE ONE. It just pisses on the whole movie for me. So I could easily see the wires on the plane crash at the end of GF being more objectionable than a bunch of generic flybys in trek getting replaced with CG, for some folks anyway.

You're talking about image defects, grain, comping issues (stuff that to some degree is visible in nearly all pre-digital comping work.) Some of the TOS looks good, some great, some cringworthy bad. But except for the nacelle eating shot and the wiggle through time in TOMORROW IS YESTERDAY, I don't think there is a single ship shot of the E that is so glaringly bad that it distracts me away from the show, whereas the digital stuff has got contrast and sharpness issues that set it glaringly apart from the tos live action. Nothing is going to change that perception.