Restored 1960s VFX of the Enterprise

[Lord Garth]

CBS/Paramount isn't going to do any of that. Trust me, a 4K release will be a straight repackaging, like every rerelease since 2006.

Could be. Probably will be. But I'm hoping someone with the power to make these decisions realizes the 2006 CGI looked cheap back then, and looks even worse in 20XX, whenever this would happen. 2030 or later, I'm guessing. We'll be pretty far removed from TOS-R by then.

4K is where I'm stopping, though. By the time 8K would become standard, I'm pretty sure my eyesight will have deteriorated to the point where I'll no longer be able to tell the difference!

 

[Ronald Held]

If there is a 4K version, just clean up the prints and leave the old VFX alone. Maybe do some work with the music.

 

[ZapBrannigan]

I watch everything on a 32-inch, 720p set. Also, my cable service is 720p. It's more than we had growing up... so why do I feel deprived?

I'm sure I would be more than satisfied by the detail in a 1080p image for TOS. I own the Blu-rays, and as long as they work, that's it for me.

At 4K, you're probably counting the pores in someone's forehead, and noticing truly minuscule imperfections in the stitching of a costume. Fabrics of the future would look coarse and Earth-bound. That would take me out-of-universe.

 

[David cgc]

I don't know the specifics of the film TOS was shot or mastered on, but you might be running into diminishing returns with a 4K edition (we already were with the optical composites just on the 2K blu-rays). Film does have limits to its resolution. Off-hand, I believe that's theoretically something like the equivalent of 8K in digital terms, but it would vary with the specific film stock, but the bigger issue would be focus.

An image on color film can only be so sharp, because the film has thickness to it (it's basically three layers of black-and-white film). The camera lens focuses the image to a certain distance behind it, but some of the film is a bit in front of or behind that plane. Digital camera sensors are perfectly flat, so you can get a color image with perfect focus (sometimes too perfect, if you've ever noticed a picture that locked on to someone's ears rather than their eyes). That's also why black and white pictures were known for being sharper back in the day.

It's possible that a 4K release of TOS wouldn't actually reveal much more detail, it'd be trying to get blood from a stone. Though it's possible the film would have some more shadow and highlight detail that didn't make it on to the blu-rays which would be revealed in the HDR picture, but probably not that much, since TOS was a brightly-lit show meant to be legible over a staticky over-the-air television transmission.

 

[Metryq]

CBS/Paramount isn't going to do any of that.

We'll see a commercial release of a 4K Star Wars as it originally appeared in cinemas first.

 

[scotpens]

An image on color film can only be so sharp, because the film has thickness to it (it's basically three layers of black-and-white film).

Huh? A film negative or print, whether black-and-white or color, is a single thickness of cellulose acetate (or cellulose nitrate before 1950). The thickness of the emulsion (the chemical coating that carries the image) is microscopic in scale.

 

[Ssosmcin]

I watch everything on a 32-inch, 720p set. Also, my cable service is 720p. It's more than we had growing up... so why do I feel deprived?

I'm sure I would be more than satisfied by the detail in a 1080p image for TOS. I own the Blu-rays, and as long as they work, that's it for me.

Hell, my Go-To source are the DVDs. And I often watch the Laserdiscs.

 

[David cgc]

Huh? A film negative or print, whether black-and-white or color, is a single thickness of cellulose acetate (or cellulose nitrate before 1950). The thickness of the emulsion (the chemical coating that carries the image) is microscopic in scale.

Everything’s microscopic in scale, it’s a camera, not a canvas. The image on 35 mm film is about 22 mm wide. Dividing by 1,920 to get the size of a 2K point at that scale gets you about 11 micrometers. Some quick and admittedly non-comprehensive googling shows me that an emulsion layer is about 10 micrometers thick. In 4K, the scanned pixels are significantly smaller than emulsion is thick. These things are all on the same order of magnitude.

To actually measure the effect of that margin of error, you’d need to compare focal distances (the effect would be greater in close-ups and negligible at long distances), to know the camera’s aperture, to have some measure of the distance between the lens and the film within the camera, and a lot more optical details that are beside the general point that focus on film is more forgiving than it is with digital, and that you’re going to run out of image detail because of limits of focus before you run out because you’re scanning individual silver grains at 8k or 16k or whatever.

 

[Ronald Held]

Short of, because it makes more $$$, why do it?

 

[UssGlenn]

Everything’s microscopic in scale, it’s a camera, not a canvas. The image on 35 mm film is about 22 mm wide. Dividing by 1,920 to get the size of a 2K point at that scale gets you about 11 micrometers. Some quick and admittedly non-comprehensive googling shows me that an emulsion layer is about 10 micrometers thick. In 4K, the scanned pixels are significantly smaller than emulsion is thick. These things are all on the same order of magnitude.

I happened to be comparing blu-ray vs 4K screencaps of Temple of Doom the other day, and I don't think the 4K version shows any more detail, definitely maxing out the resolution of the film.

 

[publiusr]

About the "proximity phasers" in Balance of Terror. How was that achieved?

When the Enterprise is struck by disruptors later in the series, each bolt looks like a tiny cluster of lights.

 

[blssdwlf]

About the "proximity phasers" in Balance of Terror. How was that achieved?

When the Enterprise is struck by disruptors later in the series, each bolt looks like a tiny cluster of lights.

Looks like multiple exposure of a light dragged forward from the saucer captured with a 4 point star lens.

 

[Jim Payne]

The 11 foot model at Anderson Co. on 1-23-65. No grilles, globes, or rectangles.

So, shortly after The Cage but several months before WNMHGB?

Yeah. The slate says Star Trek #2, which means it's a shot for WNMHGB, I would guess it went unused because, next thing you know, Roddenberry ordered a grille to be painted on the end caps.

Also of note, the 11-footer is hanging from wires. That's an early thing only, afaik.

I assume the top edge of the large "window" for WNMHGB became the cut line that lowered the bridge dome for the regular series.

Yeah, it looks like that is where it got cut. But they must have painted over the rectangle for "The Cage" before it was cut in half. I just treat it as a sensor window.



None that we're aware of. The vents on the rear caps made appearances in 60+ episodes, plus all 3 seasons' titles.

I don't think it was added until WNMHGB, as the ship for The Cage had no lighting

The 11 foot model was originally delivered on Tuesday morning, December 29, 1964.

The hung it from the roof, and shot the "approach and over the saucer" shot. And then Gene gave them a small list of changes he wanted made while he would still be waiting for the "Yes/No" decision on the Cage from NBC.

So Richard Datin takes the model back with him to make these changes, and then he returns a month later on Saturday, January 23, 1965 and they hung the model again; and then took a series of shots that this photo is from. As a result of these shots; Gene had even more requested changes for Richard to make.

In February, Gene was told that the Cage was rejected. And that they wanted a second pilot.

The model was returned with the changes he had asked for: the "window" on the front of the bridge, and lights - just too name a few without getting into too many details. The lighted "window" wasn't on the model until after the Cage. The overall bridge dome was raised for WNMHGB and the window. Then it was lowered again when they came back with the series requested changes (nacelle lights, etc).

 

[publiusr]

There was even some work done on the production era...the sensor dome stop the lowered bridge...and after the nacelle spires removed, some of the lights were different.

The Enterprise of our minds is most likely the one of the slow turn of the 11 footer that looked a bit beige.

For TOS-R, I might have tried to capture each look as a separate ship in the M-5 drill on ULTIMATE COMPUTER...

 

[Warped9]

For TOS-R, I might have tried to capture each look as a separate ship in the M-5 drill on ULTIMATE COMPUTER...

In my Unseen TOS I’m thinking I would like to explore the possibility of seeing some starship variation rather than just reused stock shots to represent one class of ship.

 

[ZapBrannigan]

For TOS-R, I might have tried to capture each look as a separate ship in the M-5 drill on ULTIMATE COMPUTER...

On the Lexington, I think I recall four sensor lights on the leading edge of the saucer, instead of three. That was nice, but the updated "Ultimate Computer" was a disappointment generally, with everything happening too far away from the camera.

 

[publiusr]

In my Unseen TOS I’m thinking I would like to explore the possibility of seeing some starship variation rather tan just reused stock shots to represent one class of ship.

Excellent!
Some suggestions perhaps?

The Second Pilot Enterprise should be Lexington.

Tall Bridge dome with that tall command chair.

That and the wider dish just screams “Command Ship” to me. No nacelle spikes…
Make her forward nacelle caps look hotter perhaps…to explain why Lexington suffered less…it had more power for shields.

She alone gets the vents on the nacelle aft section. A hot-rod.

Poor Excalibur needs to be First Pilot…the most primitive?

One of the things Shaw talked about is how the nacelle pylons don’t attach on the nacelle centerline—but closer to the outer curve of each.

On Lexington as well as Enterprise, the raised nacelles perk up the look of the ships…like clipped Doberman ears.

With Excalibur, flip the script where they droop a bit…giving it a sadder cast—with perhaps the nacelle trench lights on the outer surface of the nacelles exposed.

This way, you see the lights go out as Excalibur dies…instead of the reused shot of the damaged AMT Constellation.

Hood…maybe a different look altogether…

This way, the very look of the shipFX helps tell the story.

Enterprise the Second Pilot, bright and beige. Lexington bluer…Excalibur a lifeless grey.

 

[Warped9]

Excellent!
Some suggestions perhaps?

The Second Pilot Enterprise should be Lexington.

Tall Bridge dome with that tall command chair.

That and the wider dish just screams “Command Ship” to me. No nacelle spikes…
Make her forward nacelle caps look hotter perhaps…to explain why Lexington suffered less…it had more power for shields.

She alone gets the vents on the nacelle aft section. A hot-rod.

Poor Excalibur needs to be First Pilot…the most primitive?

One of the things Shaw talked about is how the nacelle pylons don’t attach on the nacelle centerline—but closer to the outer curve of each.

On Lexington as well as Enterprise, the raised nacelles perk up the look of the ships…like clipped Doberman ears.

With Excalibur, flip the script where they droop a bit…giving it a sadder cast—with perhaps the nacelle trench lights on the outer surface of the nacelles exposed.

This way, you see the lights go out as Excalibur dies…instead of the reused shot of the damaged AMT Constellation.

Hood…maybe a different look altogether…

This way, the very look of the shipFX helps tell the story.

Enterprise the Second Pilot, bright and beige. Lexington bluer…Excalibur a lifeless grey.

This sounds really involved. Remember they’re not shooting a feature film with near unlimited resources. My project assumes some more time and money and what might be possible beyond reusing stock footage of the Enterprise to depict different ships.

 

[Ssosmcin]

They could run out and get a couple more model kits of different types of UFOs. A little kit bashing and there's a nice cheap attack fleet

 

[Metryq]

They could run out and get a couple more model kits of different types of UFOs. A little kit bashing and there's a nice cheap attack fleet

What is this, The Adventures of Stella Starr?