So... Is that it for hopes of remastered TNG?
- Thread starter gastrof
- Start date
I'm very aware of that fact; however, I'm not at all convinced that a key reason for building the four-foot miniature was to beef up the saucer rim in order to make it more capable of containing the Ten Forward set. Models cost a lot of money to build, and this is an extremely trivial detail.
You know... I just don't get this attitude that these shows are not viewable at HD resolutions. I own a 720p set and both an HD-DVD player (HD-A3) and the Sony Playstation 3. These shows look fine when upscaled to the 720p resolution over HDMI. There are some matte shots that don't quite work (Picard standing in front of the main viewscreen during 'Lonely Among Us'.), but these are definitely the exception.
I honestly don't think that I would shell out the cash for another twenty-one seasons of 24th century Trek for a few updated effects shots. As a matter of fact I think my Trek buying list for HD would be rather short:
1. Star Trek Season 1 on Blu-Ray
2. Star Trek Season 2 on Blu-Ray
3. Star Trek Season 3 on Blu-Ray
4. The Motion Picture on Blu-Ray
5. Star Trek (2009) on Blu-Ray
Plus II, III, VI and Star Trek: Enterprise as the prices come down.
The only reason I didn't get ST Season 1 on HD-DVD was it was already dying format by the time the set was released.
Last edited:
I really wouldn't want the effects replaced, they are part of the charm of the show. The only thing I would like would be for Season 5 to be sharpened up a bit, it bugs me that the early seasons are crystal clear, just towards the middle of the run it's like watching the show on a blurred TV. I realise that was the fashion for all shows at the time, but it really dates it.
ST-One
Vice Admiral
That wasn't the reason (at least not the sole reason) for the 'remastering' of TOS.
TNG's FX are pretty consistant on the whole and don't really need the overhaul TOS got. Looking at the various shots of orbiting starships across TOS-R, TNG, DS9 & VOY, they're quite uniform and compliment each other.
Not having a HD TV myself yet, does TNG really look that bad when upscaled from Standard Definition? There must be many shows from the late 80's/90's, when everything was done on videotape, which can't be improved on because the film rushes were not kept (to say nothing of studio based sitcoms done entirely on VT). For those, we're really looking for a time when technology can artificially create extra lines of picture information.
Not having a HD TV myself yet, does TNG really look that bad when upscaled from Standard Definition? There must be many shows from the late 80's/90's, when everything was done on videotape, which can't be improved on because the film rushes were not kept (to say nothing of studio based sitcoms done entirely on VT). For those, we're really looking for a time when technology can artificially create extra lines of picture information.
I've watched some TNG at my Mom's, who has a big plasma 1080p. It didn't look nearly as bad as some of the currently broadcast low-def shows like Friends and the like -
TNG could use a bunch of new incidental ship shots, but I would be aghast to see CGI remakes of the custom ones they did, like in Where No One Has Gone Before. Those are ingenius pinnacles of that art form, whereas with TOS, that form was much less mature (and IMO much easier to stomach replacing).
One worry I have with high def TNG - Data and Worf. Especially Data. In the films, closeups of Spiner looked pretty bad. It's definetly a can of worms. Like others are saying, it may come down to some kind of yet uninvented upconversion, and (hopefully) a larger palette of ship exteriors.
That being said, it doesn't look bad on a highdef TV. Other shows look a lot worse to me. Maybe because the lighting of TNG is often so dramatic.
TNG could use a bunch of new incidental ship shots, but I would be aghast to see CGI remakes of the custom ones they did, like in Where No One Has Gone Before. Those are ingenius pinnacles of that art form, whereas with TOS, that form was much less mature (and IMO much easier to stomach replacing).
One worry I have with high def TNG - Data and Worf. Especially Data. In the films, closeups of Spiner looked pretty bad. It's definetly a can of worms. Like others are saying, it may come down to some kind of yet uninvented upconversion, and (hopefully) a larger palette of ship exteriors.
That being said, it doesn't look bad on a highdef TV. Other shows look a lot worse to me. Maybe because the lighting of TNG is often so dramatic.
Wasn't Friends shot on video, though? Even though TNG was mastered on video, it was originally filmed in 35mm (outside of the effects in seasons 1 & 2).
But that's the thing: When you watch TNG (or DS9 or Voyager) like that, you aren't actually viewing the show *in native HD*. Just upconverted standard-def programming. There is a difference. Upconversion does not mean HD.
Take your 720p set, for example, and watch a TV channel that is standard def, i.e. not HD. You are still watching something that's upconverted (if it wasn't, it'd be in a little box in the middle of the screen surrounded by black).
This is why 'upconverting DVD players' are a bullshit marketing gimmick. ALL HDTVs upconvert (for exactly the reason I just gave). And most of them have upscalers that are better than any upconverting DVD player could hope to have.
Let's take a show like Divorce Court which plays on WXIX-TV here in Cincinnati. Obviously, the show has been recorded in 480i. The show is still simulcast over the WXIX-DT station (not replaced with HD programming). Now Divorce Court looks a hell of a lot better on the later and comes to my set as a 720p digital transmission (the upconversion is done before the program ever reaches my set). The same can be done for any show that was done in the pre-HD era.
Or...
Take two DVD players hook them both to your HD set. Take one and use the HDMI (720p/1080i/1080p) port and take the other and hook it up using the composite (yellow) video cable. Now watch a snippet of any DVD using both (all DVD's are mastered at 480i). Tell me that there isn't a world of difference... not only in detail and sharpness of image but in depth of color.
Now...
Upconversion/progressive scan is something depending on type of set, quality of set and quality of input signal. LCD is something known as a progressive fixed pixel display (1366x768) every image is displayed at that resolution no matter what. Some sets do the upconversion better than others, best way to tell is to set you DVD player to 480i and compare the image to when it's set at a higher resolution.
Last edited:
Well of course it's going to look like crap if you use the composite video cable. But who in the hell would do that if they have an HDTV? Any decent DVD player is going to be connected using either HDMI or component video. There's really no excuse not to, if you have an HDTV.
But that's not what this is about. All DVD players worth their purchase price will at least have component video connections (if not HDMI), but at the same time the HDTV itself is likely to have a better upconverter. Some, if not all, of the 'upconverting' DVD players will only do so over HDMI, anyway.
But you said DVD player upconversion is bullshit marketing (it's not). Shouldn't your TV be able to upscale any image given to it and make it pretty?
Similar threads
- Locked
