Season FOUR OFFICIAL TNG Blu-Ray Discussion Thread

[LOKAI of CHERON]

I'm sure it's been mentioned, but has anyone noticed that Timothy Carharts name appears twice in the credits on the "Redemption" bluray?

There was an error in creating the credits for the feature-length Redemption, yes. Unfortunately Whoopi Goldberg's credit was substituted for a (second) Timothy Carhart.

D'OH!!!

 

[mr.peany]

I'm sure it's been mentioned, but has anyone noticed that Timothy Carharts name appears twice in the credits on the "Redemption" bluray?

There was an error in creating the credits for the feature-length Redemption, yes. Unfortunately Whoopi Goldberg's credit was substituted for a (second) Timothy Carhart.

D'OH!!!

Oh that's awkward. Poor Whoopi.

I also find it odd that they included Denise Crosby in the credits. Somewhat dampens the surprise of her return.

 

[cbspock]

You can see the big differences between the two
http://images.wikia.com/memoryalpha...nces_between_the_4-foot_and_6-foot_models.jpg

-Chris

Ugh. Would it really have been that damn hard for them to use a thinner grade of plastic for the model? That's what ruins the look and lines of the ship the most. I can take the exaggerated lines and panels and such on it but look at the thickness of the deflector housing that's just fugly. I mean did they make the model out roofing tiles?

The deflector is completely different, and the shape of the secondary hull is really off from from the 6 footer.

-Chris

 

[Dick_Valentine]

And yet those of us who came to the show after the 4-footer was introduced find the 6 footer too thin, weak looking and far too brightly lit and undetailed.

Everybody is different

 

[Trekker4747]

You can see the big differences between the two
http://images.wikia.com/memoryalpha...nces_between_the_4-foot_and_6-foot_models.jpg

-Chris

Ugh. Would it really have been that damn hard for them to use a thinner grade of plastic for the model? That's what ruins the look and lines of the ship the most. I can take the exaggerated lines and panels and such on it but look at the thickness of the deflector housing that's just fugly. I mean did they make the model out roofing tiles?

The deflector is completely different, and the shape of the secondary hull is really off from from the 6 footer.

-Chris

Oh, I know. There's a number of problems. I mean, ugh, how damn hard would it have been to make the damn model match the 6-footer? It's especially jarring in episodes where footage of BOTH models are used. Ugh.... TREKKER SMASH!

 

[GameOn]

Oh, I know. There's a number of problems. I mean, ugh, how damn hard would it have been to make the damn model match the 6-footer? It's especially jarring in episodes where footage of BOTH models are used. Ugh.... TREKKER SMASH!

The thing that bugs me are the warp nacelle pylons that go from being smooth curves on the 6-footer to being "L" shaped on the 4-footer.

 

[Dream]

Oh, I know. There's a number of problems. I mean, ugh, how damn hard would it have been to make the damn model match the 6-footer? It's especially jarring in episodes where footage of BOTH models are used. Ugh.... TREKKER SMASH!

It's a trade off between the three models. The 6 footer looked best, but they could barely move the thing because of how large it was. The 2 footer could move much more easily, but it looked terrible. The 4 footer was the compromise, and the main reason the ship was able to move more in later seasons.

I'll just say I prefer good models over bad CGI ships any day!

 

[Trekker4747]

Oh, I know. There's a number of problems. I mean, ugh, how damn hard would it have been to make the damn model match the 6-footer? It's especially jarring in episodes where footage of BOTH models are used. Ugh.... TREKKER SMASH!

It's a trade off between the three models. The 6 footer looked best, but they could barely move the thing because of how large it was. The 2 footer could move much more easily, but it looked terrible. The 4 footer was the compromise, and the main reason the ship was able to move more in later seasons.

I'll just say I prefer good models over bad CGI ships any day!

I don't see how "trade-off" means utterly changing the smooth lines and look of the ship. If the 6-foot models clean, smooth nice lines and "thin-ness" of the edges can translate to an 18" plastic model kit I'm sure they could've done it for the 4-footer.

 

[RAMA]

Just loving the set so far, about halfway through. I'm not really in one of my normal "Trek watching" phases right now, but this set is worth a look since it's my favorite season.

RAMA

 

[Trekker4747]

Yeah, I've yet to fully watch the set either, only episode I've watched so-far, really, is "Brothers."

 

[RAMA]

Yeah, I've yet to fully watch the set either, only episode I've watched so-far, really, is "Brothers."

I watched one episode today..I'm still in awe sometimes...just the shot of the Enterprise coming toward the screen with the detail and clarity amazed me still. Amazing that it always should have looked that way.

RAMA

 

[cbspock]

There are some good shots of the 4 footer, usually the between the nacelles looking toward the saucer from above looks good.

-Chris

 

[dg1379]

While watching Galaxy's Child, I noticed some amusing items in the MSD in engineering. I'm sure it's been discussed before. I found a duck, airplane, mouse, sports car, and some odd creature in front of the car. Pretty cool!

And maybe a bunny. Not sure though.

 

[jimbotron]

I notice there's a minor change at the end of Redemption Part I.

Before, the episode ended on a freeze frame of Sela when "To Be Continued" appears. In the HD version, the shot continues without freezing.

 

[jimbotron]

The shot looks much better at the end of "The Nth Degree." For some reason it looks too flat and low contrast in "Galaxy's Child" with missing nav lights. Here, I whipped up a screenshot comparison... sorry for the 720p resolution, it's easier for me to take screencaps from my rips than go back to the blu-rays at the moment:

http://www.screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/34947

Thanks. The shot appears in Redemption II. CBS-D's work on that shot looks great.

 

[cbspock]

The opening shot of Enterprise in Suddenly Human is just awful in both SD and HD. it is just sad some of the model shots that were done in TNG. The ENT-D is supposed to be a huge starship, and it always looks tiny because the camera can't get close enough to it. The Enterprise on TOS / TOS-Movies always looked big because the camera could get to within an inch of it (the refit) and it still look good.

The under the saucer shot of the 4 footers always looked crappy.


-Chris

 

[jimbotron]

The 4-footer is a double-edged sword. On the bright side, it eliminated the need for the 2-footer. Now when the ship is scaled down, it still looks like the Enterprise and not an small scale model. But then when fine detail was needed, it fell flat (with the exception of overhead shots).

 

[TheSeeker]

And yet those of us who came to the show after the 4-footer was introduced find the 6 footer too thin, weak looking and far too brightly lit and undetailed.

Everybody is different

Considering how big the Enterprise is supposed to be I find the exaggerated hull plating on the 4-footer to be a bit ridiculous.

 

[BillJ]

Considering how big the Enterprise is supposed to be I find the exaggerated hull plating on the 4-footer to be a bit ridiculous.

This. It makes it seem much smaller than its suppose to be.

 

[jimbotron]

It's not even the exaggerated hull plating. You can see the texture of the spray paint.