Star Trek TNG Remastered?

[Harvey]

The video masters were almost certainly encoded with timecode which links each frame of the master to the exact frame taken from the original negative. It's a relatively simple process, once the original negative has been re-scanned in HD, to use this timecode to exactly recreate the SD edit in HD.

Yes, but it's still a recreation of the original and a complete waste of time. The purists who want the originals preserved and included won't be getting it, and those of us who don't care wouldn't watch it anyway, so it would be a waste of time.

I have no idea what you're getting on about here. The only difference between the new version and the original would be an increase in picture quality. That's not a waste of time--that's the whole point!

Speaking of the "jarring" transition between HD video and SD visual effects, the visual effects will in the very least be upconverted. Watching the episodes wouldn't be outside of the experience of the new Babylon 5 transfers, which is problematic, but still quite watchable. And, if the film elements of the visual effects are recomposited rather than recreated digitally, they can be seen in true HD in their original form.

If they could indeed do that, it would negate the need to change any FX in the first place, which would for most people negate the need for the "original" episodes to be included alongside the "remastered" episodes.

Exactly my point. And they may very well do that, since it would be cheaper than creating new CGI effects.

As for calling Star Trek by its name, it's the academic in me. I'd never get away with "TOS" in a research paper of any sort.

 

[Prologic9]

Harvey, you're not getting it.

The show was shot on film, as was most* of the model footage I believe. But all of the post and FX work was done in video. ALL of the visual post production would have to be redone.

• So if someone fires a hand phaser, the phaser effect will have to be created newly from scratch.
• Transporter effects.
• Viewscreens, or any display readout.
• Holodeck effects.
• All of the post effects for model shots, even a simple flybye would require new engine glows.
• Any shot with a window that didn't feature the static star backdrop, even simple warp streaks.

All of this has to be created again, and that would in no way be the original show anymore.

 

[Harvey]

I thought all of those elements were film elements, and that they were only composited on video. If they were only created on NTSC video, then you're right, they can't simply be recomposited into HD. Send me in the direction of a link or reference book that settles the matter, if you have one. I'm curious to read more on the subject.

EDIT: http://www.dvdtown.com/messageboard/topic/8274/3/0

I've been falling back on this post as a source, which states, among other points, that the transporter effect was shot on film and just a video composite, as I've been saying.

 

[Tomalak]

All of this has to be created again, and that would in no way be the original show anymore.

Well yes, that's self-evident. It was designed to be seen on a small 525 line CRT television in very much standard definition.

Any attempts to make it available in HD will mean it is no longer the "original" version. However, does this actually matter? Are you damaging the original creative intent by rescanning it all in high definition, and very probably altering the visual effects?

I would argue that the important thing is that the story and the creative intent remains the same. As long as the episodes are edited in the same way, and have effects which help to tell that story, it doesn't matter if someone has had to redraw a 1989 phaser blast on a computer in 2009.

Does it make it a "different" show? Technically, yes, but to all intents and purposes, of course not.

 

[Prologic9]

Any attempts to make it available in HD will mean it is no longer the "original" version. However, does this actually matter? Are you damaging the original creative intent by rescanning it all in high definition, and very probably altering the visual effects?

Of course it matters, in as far as we're talking about preserving the history of the show in its original form.

I'm all for creating expansive new visual FX shots, as was done for TOS. But redoing them to match the originals just so some can pretend to have the existing show in HD is stupid.

---

Harvey, probably the only decent look into TNG's effects work is Cinefex #37;

http://www.cinefex.com/backissues/issue37.html

If I can find an 'online' version I'll point to it.

 

[3D Master]

All of this has to be created again, and that would in no way be the original show anymore.

Well yes, that's self-evident. It was designed to be seen on a small 525 line CRT television in very much standard definition.

Any attempts to make it available in HD will mean it is no longer the "original" version. However, does this actually matter? Are you damaging the original creative intent by rescanning it all in high definition, and very probably altering the visual effects?

I would argue that the important thing is that the story and the creative intent remains the same. As long as the episodes are edited in the same way, and have effects which help to tell that story, it doesn't matter if someone has had to redraw a 1989 phaser blast on a computer in 2009.

Does it make it a "different" show? Technically, yes, but to all intents and purposes, of course not.

Doesn't matter. The original episode, completely unaltered needs to remain available in the future.

I have no problem with newly created SFX, hell, I've wanted to see (proper, good) new SFX for some shows, like TOS myself for some time now.

However, the originals need to remain intact and available, for so many, many reasons. Thus the original SD shows should simply be on those discs as well.

 

[CoveTom]

Okay, what I'm not getting here is why they simply can't include both the original, unenhanced, SD originals and the new, spiffy, HD, CGI-enhanced TNG-R versions and be done with it.

If you're going to do a release on DVD that includes both a new version and an old, you either have to go the 'seamless branching' route or you have to add alot of extra discs because of capacity issues.

But as has already been pointed out, a Blu-ray disc has plenty of capcity to hold 4 or 5 HD remastered enhanced episodes, the original versions of those same episodes in SD, and any extras they want to include, all on the same disc.

All Paramount has to do to placate those purists who want the originals is to toss the exact same versions as used on the DVD's onto the Blu-ray discs. No new editing, no new transfers, no new visual effects, not even extra discs. There is no economic disincentive what-so-ever to Paramount to include them.

 

[Tomalak]

However, the originals need to remain intact and available, for so many, many reasons. Thus the original SD shows should simply be on those discs as well.

They are available, intact, on DVD, on a thousand DVD Rips, and torrented around the world. They aren't going anywhere. They've had an official digital release, which in this day and age makes them immortal. I don't see what more you require. It's not as if all existing DVDs are wiped when the (hypothetical) Blu-ray release hits the shops.

 

[Harvey]

To be fair, the existing DVDs might be replaced with remastered DVDs in stores, just as Paramount did with the Star Trek remastered DVDs. Of course, if those discs (and I'm not sure on this count) included the same seamless branching episodes as the Blu-Ray release did, then fine. There's the originals and the new versions, both in glorious SD. And that's good enough for me. I'm not looking to buy Blu-Rays for old SD content.

Now, if Star Trek the Next Generation goes the same route as its predecessor on Blu-Ray and creates new CGI effects, just be sure to include both the original effects (upconverted) and the new effects (true HD) via seamless branching. And that's enough for me.

On the other hand, if they choose to recomposite the effects from the film elements, and are sometimes forced to recreate the odd effect that was created on video, it's not a big deal to me. If they're re-creating and odd effect here or there to look identical, only in HD, I don't mind or care. The Star Trek remastered project had a different approach, creating new visual effects, which is why the preservation of both old and new effects on that project was the way to go.

And thanks for the link to that magazine, Prologic9. If you ever find it online, send a copy my way. I'd rather note shell out the 4.50 + shipping for a photocopied back issue.

 

[CoveTom]

They are available, intact, on DVD, on a thousand DVD Rips, and torrented around the world. They aren't going anywhere. They've had an official digital release, which in this day and age makes them immortal. I don't see what more you require. It's not as if all existing DVDs are wiped when the (hypothetical) Blu-ray release hits the shops.

DVD will eventually become obsolete, just as VHS has. My argument is that the original episodes needs to be available in whatever the -current- format of choice is, regardless of what previous formats they are available in.

Again, I don't understand where the big point of contention is here. We've already established that Paramount could take the original, standard definition episodes and toss them onto the Blu-ray discs without in any way increasing their costs or affecting the enhanced HD releases. So why not do it?

 

[WHF]

Again, I don't understand where the big point of contention is here. We've already established that Paramount could take the original, standard definition episodes and toss them onto the Blu-ray discs without in any way increasing their costs or affecting the enhanced HD releases. So why not do it?

I don't believe that we've established that it won't increase costs. Blu-Ray currently has a capacity of 50 GB and DVD 9GB. If seamless branching isn't possible it's going to take at least one entire Blu-Ray disc for a single standard definition season. This means increased costs. I'm Ok with paying extra for this but I'd rather see them release this disc separately or maybe even as a complete series boxset of the unaltered versions.

 

[CoveTom]

^ I was referring to this:

Looking up the video that could fit on the disc, a Blu-Ray can hold 9 hours of HD video or 23 hours of SD video. Assuming 5 episodes per disc, which is the going rate on my Blu-Rays for the Prisoner, you could have roughly four hours of HD video (five episodes) and still have room for 10 hours of SD video.

So you could easily fit five HD episodes (pretty standard for Blu-ray releases) along with their 5 original SD counterparts and still have room for some special features, without needing to add so much as one extra disc. But even if it required adding, say, one more Blu-ray disc to the collection, that has to cost Paramount all of 10 cents. If the content is already there, and doesn't have to be edited or changed in any way, just sticking it on a disc costs virtually nothing.

 

[Harvey]

There's the cost of authoring the discs, of course, but after doing the math, it seems you're right. Paramount could throw the episodes on the discs in SD with little cost. But I doubt it will happen. Just as DVD is becoming obsolete, so is SD. For better or worse.

 

[Prologic9]

Just as DVD is becoming obsolete, so is SD. For better or worse.

This you really don't have to worry about IMO. They aren't putting out Bluray's with SD content right now because they need to distinguish it as a format. But if in the future Bluray sales are strong and DVD has diminished significantly then it would be almost a forgone conclusion to see SD content released on blu, television especially.

It wouldn't be straight ports of DVD content either, there's more to HD than just resolution. They would be able to take advantage of newer compression technologies and higher bitrates, giving us nearly perfect reproductions of the video masters of all those 80s and 90s shows.

 

[3D Master]

However, the originals need to remain intact and available, for so many, many reasons. Thus the original SD shows should simply be on those discs as well.

They are available, intact, on DVD, on a thousand DVD Rips, and torrented around the world. They aren't going anywhere. They've had an official digital release, which in this day and age makes them immortal. I don't see what more you require. It's not as if all existing DVDs are wiped when the (hypothetical) Blu-ray release hits the shops.

:sighs:

AGAIN, for the THIRD time, it isn't whether they are available NOW that's the concern, the concern is whether they CONTINUE to be available in the decades and centuries TO COME. In whatever format that is functioning at the time.

And don't think it'll be disc systems that are backward compatible for eternity.

And seriously, are you actually arguing, that if you break the law you can still get a hold of them, really?

 

[ALF]

Isn't it a reality that eventually they'll be released on Blu ray? They would have to be, right?

 

[3D Master]

Isn't it a reality that eventually they'll be released on Blu ray? They would have to be, right?

Yes, and we're discussing HOW they should be released in HD.

 

[ALF]

Isn't it a reality that eventually they'll be released on Blu ray? They would have to be, right?

Yes, and we're discussing HOW they should be released in HD.

Okay, good luck with this serious discussion. TNG doesn't seem to be Paramount's breadwinner these days. It might be a long wait.

 

[Tomalak]

:sighs:

AGAIN, for the THIRD time, it isn't whether they are available NOW that's the concern, the concern is whether they CONTINUE to be available in the decades and centuries TO COME. In whatever format that is functioning at the time.

And don't think it'll be disc systems that are backward compatible for eternity.

And seriously, are you actually arguing, that if you break the law you can still get a hold of them, really?

Yes, I am. The fact is anyone can make a digital image of their DVDs, and keep it for the foreseeable future. Blu-ray is a red herring, the future is in downloads. This information is not going to go "out of print" because there will always be copies floating around in the ether. You are still thinking about it in a very 20th century way, but the same goes for the industry. They still don't really understand this because the people in charge haven't caught up with the new reality. It's like Rupert Murdoch talking about charging for News Corp content online. The man simply does not understand the nature of the internet.

If (that's a massive if) a HD version of TNG is produced, this will become the default, which CBS/Paramount/Whoever will wish to push, because otherwise what's the point in doing the HD transfer? Why bother to offer an SD alternative, which will require more disc authoring costs, disc space and time? They didn't include the original SD broadcasts of TOS, they simply used seamless branching for certain scenes. They may decide to do it, but there's no reason we should expect it.

 

[WHF]

^ I was referring to this:

Looking up the video that could fit on the disc, a Blu-Ray can hold 9 hours of HD video or 23 hours of SD video. Assuming 5 episodes per disc, which is the going rate on my Blu-Rays for the Prisoner, you could have roughly four hours of HD video (five episodes) and still have room for 10 hours of SD video.

So you could easily fit five HD episodes (pretty standard for Blu-ray releases) along with their 5 original SD counterparts and still have room for some special features, without needing to add so much as one extra disc. But even if it required adding, say, one more Blu-ray disc to the collection, that has to cost Paramount all of 10 cents. If the content is already there, and doesn't have to be edited or changed in any way, just sticking it on a disc costs virtually nothing.

10 cents for an extra disc? I hope you're right but I'm doubtful. I've noticed some multi-blu-ray sets that include a DVD, such as the Blade Runner set. If it's that cheap why wasn't every disc Blu-ray?