The OFFICIAL STNG-R general discussion thread!
- Thread starter jefferiestubes8
- Start date
- Status
Re: The OFFICIAL STNG-R discussion thread!
The latter shot is wretched in both crops. Either it's placed the lead too close to the bottom of the frame or it cuts off Worf and the top of Riker's head. They're both compositionally bad.
I'll take your second one first. Riker was speaking therefore he was the center of attention:
As for your first one, it depends on who's currently talking...if Riker or Worf then this:
If Picard or Troi then this:
If all for are having a go at it then you're going to either use the Riker/Worf framing or do a vertical P&S.
The latter shot is wretched in both crops. Either it's placed the lead too close to the bottom of the frame or it cuts off Worf and the top of Riker's head. They're both compositionally bad.
Re: The OFFICIAL STNG-R discussion thread!
Yes sir, I certainly did, and would seek out the full letterboxed version when ever there was one available (Bless you Steven).
Yes sir, I certainly did, and would seek out the full letterboxed version when ever there was one available (Bless you Steven).
Re: The OFFICIAL STNG-R discussion thread!
While its true that rarely did you ever get the full cinemascope aspect ration for most films on home release (there are a couple, thank god).
But even when it isn't an exact match I prefer to get my home release to be as close as possible (ie best that's available) to the original aspect.
BUt there are two huge differences between tv and general films over the decades.
In many cases films (that I watched at the movies) weren't screened in full (ie partially cropped to fit the theatre screen). So when I got a film 16:9 it didn't seem so obvious.
And unlike most films, this is Trek. Meaning I have seen every single bloody episode many times. From episodes I hate maybe only viewed ten or so times over the decades to episodes that I have watched literally hundreds of times.
The more familiar you are the more noticeable any significant aspect changes will be in your viewing habits. And frankly nothing is more familiar to me then televised Trek.
While its true that rarely did you ever get the full cinemascope aspect ration for most films on home release (there are a couple, thank god).
But even when it isn't an exact match I prefer to get my home release to be as close as possible (ie best that's available) to the original aspect.
BUt there are two huge differences between tv and general films over the decades.
In many cases films (that I watched at the movies) weren't screened in full (ie partially cropped to fit the theatre screen). So when I got a film 16:9 it didn't seem so obvious.
And unlike most films, this is Trek. Meaning I have seen every single bloody episode many times. From episodes I hate maybe only viewed ten or so times over the decades to episodes that I have watched literally hundreds of times.
The more familiar you are the more noticeable any significant aspect changes will be in your viewing habits. And frankly nothing is more familiar to me then televised Trek.
Re: The OFFICIAL STNG-R discussion thread!
Maybe it wouldn't, but cropping the show in this way doesn't add anything either. Sure, there will always be people complaining about the pillar boxes at the sides of the screen. They're the exact same kind of people that don't understand why there are bars at the top and bottom of 2.35.1 movies. This project is about preserving this show for a next generation of fans. And IMO it should be preserved in its original aspect ratio, like TOS and classic movies like Citizen Kane and Gone With The Wind.
Tell me, who are gonna buy these episodes on BD? Trek fans and home theatre enthusiasts. They all know that TNG wasn't produced in widescreen. So I don't think that a lot of people expect or want their TNG full widescreen.
I made these a while back to show how cropping wouldn't negatively impact the show.
Here's the originally framed 4:3 shot
Another shot, old school:
And new hotness:
The "meat" of the action has been, and will always be in the center section of the screen. Losing the background on top and the foreground on the bottom wouldn't really negatively impact the plot, feel, or "director's vision".
Maybe it wouldn't, but cropping the show in this way doesn't add anything either. Sure, there will always be people complaining about the pillar boxes at the sides of the screen. They're the exact same kind of people that don't understand why there are bars at the top and bottom of 2.35.1 movies. This project is about preserving this show for a next generation of fans. And IMO it should be preserved in its original aspect ratio, like TOS and classic movies like Citizen Kane and Gone With The Wind.
Tell me, who are gonna buy these episodes on BD? Trek fans and home theatre enthusiasts. They all know that TNG wasn't produced in widescreen. So I don't think that a lot of people expect or want their TNG full widescreen.
Re: The OFFICIAL STNG-R discussion thread!
Meh, TNG was never intended to be watched in an HD format. They created, shot and edited the thing, knowing that everyone had 4:3 analogue tv's. Stereo sound was perhaps as advanced as they could be.
With that in mind, I just don't see the problem with cropping. They are creating something that was not intended to be viewed in this manner. If we are recreating it as new - we want to see the best picture, sound and the best viewing experience available for the current format (HDTV). As long as everything looks framed properly - I just can't see the problem. I honestly don't think you'll notice either.
You want to see it how it was originally intended? Buy a 20 year old TV and hook it up to a VHS player.
Meh, TNG was never intended to be watched in an HD format. They created, shot and edited the thing, knowing that everyone had 4:3 analogue tv's. Stereo sound was perhaps as advanced as they could be.
With that in mind, I just don't see the problem with cropping. They are creating something that was not intended to be viewed in this manner. If we are recreating it as new - we want to see the best picture, sound and the best viewing experience available for the current format (HDTV). As long as everything looks framed properly - I just can't see the problem. I honestly don't think you'll notice either.
You want to see it how it was originally intended? Buy a 20 year old TV and hook it up to a VHS player.
Re: The OFFICIAL STNG-R discussion thread!
I'll be fine with 4:3, 5.1 sound, 1080p picture with updated FX. No need to crop and lose some of the original picture. Just fix up any seam lines, maybe show some additional ship flybys in lieu of stock footage, fix the planets to look more realistic, and better mattes and digitally extend the obvious soundstage planetside scenes.
I'll be fine with 4:3, 5.1 sound, 1080p picture with updated FX. No need to crop and lose some of the original picture. Just fix up any seam lines, maybe show some additional ship flybys in lieu of stock footage, fix the planets to look more realistic, and better mattes and digitally extend the obvious soundstage planetside scenes.
Re: The OFFICIAL STNG-R discussion thread!
I want to see as much of the picture as possible and as TNG was shot in 4:3 then 4:3 it will be.
I want to see as much of the picture as possible and as TNG was shot in 4:3 then 4:3 it will be.
Re: The OFFICIAL STNG-R discussion thread!
All the more reason for changes to the familiar to be welcomed!
All the more reason for changes to the familiar to be welcomed!
Re: The OFFICIAL STNG-R discussion thread!
Completely.
As somebody else remarked - i've watched every episode many times, most hundreds of times and (dare I say it?) bored of watching them over and over and over again.
Bring on something new!
Mess around with them all you want!
Completely.
As somebody else remarked - i've watched every episode many times, most hundreds of times and (dare I say it?) bored of watching them over and over and over again.
Bring on something new!
Mess around with them all you want!
Re: The OFFICIAL STNG-R discussion thread!
Robert Meyer Burnett just weighed in. Looks like he's seen some of the footage, too.
http://twitter.com/#!/BurnettRM
Robert Meyer Burnett just weighed in. Looks like he's seen some of the footage, too.
http://twitter.com/#!/BurnettRM
Re: The OFFICIAL STNG-R discussion thread!
Busy guy, he's done a lot in ST circles. I can see why he may be in "the know".
RAMA
Busy guy, he's done a lot in ST circles. I can see why he may be in "the know".
RAMA
Re: The OFFICIAL STNG-R discussion thread!
I must say that I truely hadn't expect the overwhelming support for a cropped 16:9 version. But if the producers of TNG-R decide to go down this route I do hope they'll offer viewers a choice on th BD discs between 4:3 and 16:9.
I must say that I truely hadn't expect the overwhelming support for a cropped 16:9 version. But if the producers of TNG-R decide to go down this route I do hope they'll offer viewers a choice on th BD discs between 4:3 and 16:9.
Re: The OFFICIAL STNG-R discussion thread!
Most people don't realize how much film and TV photography is based on the Rule of Thirds, and when you crop an existing frame you often end up drastically changing the composition, which was often chosen to show dominance or draw your eye to a particular place.
Most people don't realize how much film and TV photography is based on the Rule of Thirds, and when you crop an existing frame you often end up drastically changing the composition, which was often chosen to show dominance or draw your eye to a particular place.
Re: The OFFICIAL STNG-R discussion thread!
Darn, now I want to see this demo of which Burnett speaks.
Darn, now I want to see this demo of which Burnett speaks.
Re: The OFFICIAL STNG-R discussion thread!
Actually, it would add a hell of a lot of size.
To scale, this is what you'd be looking at
and
I made these a while back to show how cropping wouldn't negatively impact the show.
Here's the originally framed 4:3 shot
Another shot, old school:
And new hotness:
The "meat" of the action has been, and will always be in the center section of the screen. Losing the background on top and the foreground on the bottom wouldn't really negatively impact the plot, feel, or "director's vision".
Maybe it wouldn't, but cropping the show in this way doesn't add anything either...
Actually, it would add a hell of a lot of size.
To scale, this is what you'd be looking at
and
Re: The OFFICIAL STNG-R discussion thread!
Does it have to all or nothing? I mean must it only either be 4x3 or 16x9? Surely there is some exposed area of the film that wasn't used for the original 4x3 transfer to tape.
Couldn't they open it up a little, so there are some black bars on each side, just not a thick as they'd be with a straight 4x3 version?
If memory serves, Hogan's Heroes in HD looked like that. Not quite full 16x9, but more than 4x3.
Does it have to all or nothing? I mean must it only either be 4x3 or 16x9? Surely there is some exposed area of the film that wasn't used for the original 4x3 transfer to tape.
Couldn't they open it up a little, so there are some black bars on each side, just not a thick as they'd be with a straight 4x3 version?
If memory serves, Hogan's Heroes in HD looked like that. Not quite full 16x9, but more than 4x3.
Re: The OFFICIAL STNG-R discussion thread!
As I said, I don't think I ever have. Movies I watch on my 16:9 screen are letterboxed to their original cinema aspect ratio. I probably wouldn't buy them if they were cropped to fit 16:9.
Well, that is the problem. It's impossible to frame the whole show properly if it's cropped from how it was originally framed.
- Status
Similar threads
