• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

News Star Trek: Discovery’s AR Wall Virtual Set

Yep. And that's fine.

Also, it's not something that I look for, it's just something that I notice.

It's like watching an episode of the current (or one of the other) Law & Order shows... living in New York City you see scenes all the time that you know exactly where they are and where they shot them at... And when you see something else that's supposed to be New York City, but it's obviously shot on a set in Hollywood or something, you just notice it. Because you know what the real location looks like.

Also, I'm not a big "behind the scenes" person, because I really don't care that much about it. But some things you just notice because they're obvious to me.

In Discovery, all of the scenes in "That Hope Is You, Part 1" that involved Michael and Book outside on the planet Hima looked fantastic to me, and I could help but notice it because of that. And when they went to Sanctuary Four, I thought that looked fantastic too. And scenes in other episodes that didn't look as fantastic to me, I couldn't help but notice that too because of that reason.

So it's not something that I look for, it's just something that I notice from watching the show. Which is obviously the case for everyone, I'm sure.

The same holds true for The Mandalorian. It's not something that I look for, I just notice it is all.
Yes, but insisting that it is obvious is not always the case for everyone. For some they actually have to hunt for these bits that stand out to you. People complain about green screens and what not but it is not something that I noticed terribly in most films. And, I've never been to New York so I have no idea if a location is right or not.

But, the larger point is treating something as obvious and then being surprised by people not finding it obvious is quite odd to me. So, I guess we all learned something.
 
I felt the scenery in Mandalorian was amazing, it all looked so real. As for use in Trek series, I mean, they were doing this anyway, just in front of green screens and rendering it in post.

As for the "New York" discussion, NYC has distinct lighting that you won't find anywhere else. It's a mixture of the longitude/latitude, buildings, and pollution, that is almost never replicated. That plus intricate things like sidewalks, and the way the stoneface/concrete on the buildings are "weathered." Moreover, it's funny, whenever they shoot elsewhere and say this is New York or Boston or whatever, aka the Northeast, I can tell instantly when it isn't. Again, having lived here, it's a variety of things like the position of the sun, the humidity, foliage, whatever. They normally cannot get the lighting just right.
 
The stating the obvious part was my response to you and others saying that "Only if you're looking for it I guessed" and "...but then I don't watch a show to purposely look for it's flaws."
More my point is that a) it's not obvious to all, anymore than a green screen is obvious to all. Sorry, it just isn't. You have an eye for those details and I do not. Obviously.
 
Yes, I understand you point. I always understand your points
Clearly not, but that's OK. Appreciate the full explanation and such. The use of Volume and Stage Craft or being on location is not obvious to me. That was my only point. It is very rare that such things stand out to me.
 
Better than the old ways of crappy looking sets, even green screens with bad cgi.
Tech is always getting better, there will be new stuff coming out sooner or latter.
 
I'm not jumping on anything. I work in the film industry and I cannot see any obvious delineation between the volume and practical set. Using the Unreal Engine software with the camera software also helps the realism. Hopefully Trek is using a similar system and it's not just a huge LED wall.
 
It goes back to the simple use of the word "obvious" as though this particular technology stands out every single time a person watches it. Except, that's ridiculous, to put it mildly. No, it is not obvious to me and the constant drum beating of "It's obvious!" doesn't make that any more true. I'm dismissive of this idea because it is ignoring the fundamental idea that what is supposedly obvious is not true for everyone.

It's not a lack of knowledge that impacts my perception. It is simply how I view the medium.
 
Once again, do you even know what we were talking about?

Did you bother to read the rest of the comments in the thread? And that part is essential to fully understanding what we were talking about.

Because if you did bother to read the rest of the comments in the thread, then the comment that you made is ridiculous. And I say it's ridiculous because it's not an issue of what I think I know, and most likely being wrong because I'm looking so hard at something. No, what I think I know is actually fact, and it is not a by product of looking hard at anything. It's simply from having an understanding of the technology and it's limitations, and how they make the show in general.

And it's fact because the director of photography said as much in the Disney Gallery episode on the making of season 2 of the show. But I didn't need him to confirm that, because it was immediately obvious to me from simply watching the episode in question. Because again, I do have an understanding on how they make the show.

Do you have that same understanding on how they make the show? Do you have that same base of knowledge on the uses and limitations of the technology?

Yes, and while I don't work in the film industry, I do in fact have an understanding on how they make the show simply from reading and watching the publicly released information about how the show is made. Some of which I posted above, which I assume you read and watched?

Moreover, it's very easy for me to tell the difference between what was shot in the Volume and what was not, because again, I have knowledge of how the show is made from information that is publicly available for any and all to see. For example, before the first episode of the show aired I saw photographs of The Mandalorian sets on the show's backlot in EL Segundo, California. And so when I first saw those sets in the episodes, I immediately knew that was not shot in the Volume. So that wasn't a function of looking hard for anything. It was just simply a function of having an understanding of how the show is made from information that was publicly available for any and all to see.

The episode in question, that the director of photography said in a video posted on Disney+'s website, that it was shot on location in Simi Valley, California, that was obvious to me immediately because of the terrain in the episode, and the scale of the scenes. So I knew immediately that wasn't shot in the Volume, because again, of having an understanding of the technology, and of how the show is made from information that was publicly available for any and all to see. What was done and how it was done in that episode is too large to do in the Volume. And that was immediately obvious to me. And I didn't have to look hard, I just simply had to look at it.

Do you have a similar understanding of the technology, and how the show is made from information that's publicly available for any and all to see? And I ask, because I see now that I mistakenly thought that the people making dismissive comments had the same base of knowledge that I had. But was not the case. No, they were simply making dismissive comments do to a lack of knowledge and understanding on their part.

That also goes back to my question: did you even know what we're talking about before you made your comment? Or did you also simply make a dismissive comment do to a lack of knowledge and understanding on your part?
You are obviously way smarter than everyone here......I'll just let you go with that. You saw a BTS doc on Disney +.
 
You will have to elaborate, because I don't understand what you're trying to say...

Yes, I am very smart, but I don't have the ability to read minds.

I am working on that, though. :)
Simply that, as an uninterested outside observer on the issue at hand, every post you've made has come off as dismissive of what others are trying to tell you. So the irony of you lecturing others on not making dismissive comments is truly thick.
 
Please summarize all of it for me, and please be specific with quotes and context and anything else that may be germane to the issue. And I will correct you if I find you in error.
No, no I don't think I will. You can't, or won't see it, will rationalize every instance I will quote (because everybody thinks they're righteous), and then attempt to turn it all around on me. And, again as an uninterested in the topic, I don't care enough. You do you, "my guy."
 
Last edited:
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top