And with 179 episodes, the costs can be spread out over the entire run.
Same reason stock footage gets used so much.
Same reason stock footage gets used so much.
Star Trek remastered- your opinions
- Thread starter Toban Kal
- Start date
I'm sure there are lots of good budget and production discussions going on at CBS about this. Crunching the numbers it would cost to produce and projecting revenue from the various streams; syndication, bluray, itunes, etc. Would be fun to be in on those meetings!
Yeah, it's a pretty simple equation. If CBS calculates it will make money (and they no doubt have someone crunching the numbers), it will happen. If they calculate they won't, it won't!
Ah, but the cost of one episode would not be plus anything at all, so it'd still be less.
Ah, but the cost of one episode would not be plus anything at all, so it'd still be less.
But it would be less cost EFFECTIVE... since you cannot project the same revenue for one episode as apposed to selling a set of episodes.
What would be a sad reality is that the CBS-D would have learnt so much from the TOS-R project that I would say confidentially that the new effects in a TNG-R project would be much more consistant and to a higher quality than their first attempt at remastering Trek. I mean no criticism of the work done on the TOS-R episodes, but they have admitted themselves that they didn't have time to do everything they wanted and they got better as they went along - the change of Enterprise model being a prime example. That's a sad reality to me because TOS is my favourite and it needed the work more than the other series. There really is nothing wrong with nearly all of the effects in TNG, other than they can't be replicated in HD.
Well, there's a few dodgy effects in Seasons 1 and 2, but in general it's true, it's not really a show that needs new effects- the lack of budget never really got in the way of telling the story the way it sometimes did on TOS.
Since I did not think TOS needed remastered efects, neither should TNG.
^ Actually TNG must have new effects in order to be released on Blu-Ray. It is literally impossible to do it without that.
TOS was different, because it was all done on film. But since TNG was edited on videotape (and the EFX were created on tape as well, AFAIK), that alone makes it impossible to do in native HD. Same goes for DS9 and Voyager.
TOS was different, because it was all done on film. But since TNG was edited on videotape (and the EFX were created on tape as well, AFAIK), that alone makes it impossible to do in native HD. Same goes for DS9 and Voyager.
TNG could probably get by with a lot of stock flyby stuff, so that should bring the overall cost down (again, a big factor in deciding whether to do a few episodes or the whole series, how far the expenses can spread). Hell, even the episode-specific sequences wouldn't be much of a hassle these days.
The possible deal breaker, though, is having to dig out the original film and re-edit each and every episode, something that didn't have to be done with TOS.
The possible deal breaker, though, is having to dig out the original film and re-edit each and every episode, something that didn't have to be done with TOS.
Actually, I think it worked fine. The Enterprise was in orbit, we don't know what range. Could have been mighty close to the atmosphere. After they started getting hit, the ship went into a higher orbit and were out of range. I think it's safe to assume they were in pretty close orbit of Eminiar 7.
Not to mention that all the film might not have been preserved as the film itself was not edited into an actual Master. I'm sure they had multiple final tape protection masters; but agaiin, since they were done with the film once a master was done, they may not have kept it all archived as space and cost are at a premium for most working studios.
Uh, I'm not going to get TNG on blu-ray if it has MORE stock shots than the original broadcast. If anything, it should have less.
The Star Trek negatives are kept in a salt mine in Utah, not at the studio.
Similar threads
