TOS in High-Def?

[Robert Comsol]

"Hence why I said "re-shooting with full-size replicas of the original filming models" and not "re-shooting the original filming models". "

Oops. I didn't pay proper attention, mea culpa. But yes, re-shooting with replicas of actual models has definitely a better authentic feel in the TOS context than CGI.

But what do you mean with "full-size"?

Bob

 

[Ssosmcin]

I rarely watch the Blu-Rays. Star Trek, or any show from that era, was never meant to be seen in Hi-Def. Many effects were made possible because of the limited broadcast resolution, providing them another layer to hide behind. Now, though, we can see threads hanging off uniforms, Spock's ear make up seams, Kirk's toupee line and other crap that pulls me out of the action.

No, I prefer the DVDs, but really mostly watch the laserdiscs. There everything is still hidden and you get the original sound mix to beet.

As for the quality of the effects, I grew up with them and they haven't changed. They're as good now as ever.

 

[Harvey]

I don't know if it's fair to say that these shows were never meant to be seen in anything but standard definition television broadcasts. Roddenberry tried to get Jeffrey Hunter to shoot extra footage so that "The Menagerie" (i.e. "The Cage") could be released theatrically, and many of the cast had clauses in their contracts covering theatrical exhibition.

Mission: Impossible, the Desilu series which premiered the same year as Star Trek, actually did cut together a pair of episodes for foreign theatrical distribution (the second season two-parter "The Council" became Mission Impossible vs. The Mob).

 

[Robert Comsol]

"No, I prefer the DVDs, but really mostly watch the laserdiscs. There everything is still hidden and you get the original sound mix to beet."

Unfortunately I have to concur. For my new TOS Enterprise deck plan thread I've constantly utilized my old TV and my LaserDiscs and I noticed intercom reports that are absent on Blu-Ray (and the Blu-Ray intercom reports are mixed into the center channel, thus isolation is impossible). Can somebody please direct me to a thread where this is / has been discussed? Thanx!

Bob

 

[Mr_Homn]

blu ray with original effects is my favorite way to watch it.

the crap cgi effects already seem more dated than the original effects to me

however, echoing others, the new matte work is nice

 

[marksound]

Technology is great and all, but sometimes the old way is best. I remember watching a behind the scenes special about History Of The World Part I. Albert Whitlock's matte paintings were amazing, and they turned ordinary scenery into magical places. The same with the old stop motion animation of Ray Harryhausen. CGI may "look" better but it doesn't have the same magic.

 

[TremblingBluStar]

As for the quality of the effects, I grew up with them and they haven't changed. They're as good now as ever.

I don't know about that. I grew up on TNG and DS9, and the effects on early 90's Trek blows today!

Seriously - I agree. I love watching older show or movies and think effects from that time period are awesome!

 

[marksound]

Speaking of matte work, here's how it was done before CGI.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=dZ3w6Awqk_4

 

[NewHorizon]

First, they would need a time machine to reshoot the original, untainted 11' model seen here http://www.cloudster.com/Sets&Vehicles/STEnterprise/ent01.jpg

Hehe. That's not the original, untainted, version of the model. The nacelle caps are replacements, as well as the deflector dish I believe. There are some studio sized replicas out there that look fantastic that could pull it off.

 

[Robert Comsol]

"Hehe. That's not the original, untainted, version of the model. The nacelle caps are replacements, as well as the deflector dish I believe. There are some studio sized replicas out there that look fantastic that could pull it off."

Well, it is the original and untainted version, where unfortunately the original nacelle caps, sensor dish and lower saucer dome (I believe upper one, too) had gone missing but I might even prefer this one over the CGI version.

Of course CGI has the advantage that you can seamlessly close in onto the ship like they tried to the old fashioned way in The Cage and beautifully fixed it for TOS-R (I presume the opening shot from TNG's Encounter at Farpoint will receive such a treatment for the special edition of TNG somewhere down the road).

http://tos.trekcore.com/hd/albums/1x00hd/thecagehd0041.jpg

In general I found the CGI close-ups in TOS-R rather boring giving us nothing else then sterile corridors behind the windows so I'm currently working on deck plans that may give you a little more interesting stuff behind these windows in case a future TOS-R Version 2.0 will also be done with CGI and is looking for some ideas: http://www.trekbbs.com/showthread.php?t=195496

Bob

 

[RAMA]

That Klingon ships still looks better than any single effect in TOS, hands down.

I love ya, RAMA! Don't ever change!

I don't want to get into this discussion again, but I figured someone new to the TOS-R bluray should know why it looks like it does.

RAMA

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

Which cretin is responsible for adding welding seam lines and weathering on the model? Our airplanes and even ships don't have such archaic welding lines and you could assume that by the 23rd Century you'd have welding techniques leaving no traces whatsoever.
Add to this that the Enterprise's creator Matt Jefferies deliberately designed the ship to keep whatever protruding elements to the absolute minimum - but somebody felt it necessary to inflict the worst retcon surgery you can think of to the most cherished, international icon of science fiction.

Agreed. Too many of those in modern ST (Berman-forward) are too influenced by Star Wars, so they think every spaceship is not realistic if it lacks the weathering and pieced-together look of the Lucas movies. If these hired hands paid attention, ST--unlike SW--is supposed to be a projection of our own reality, where with each generation, space vehicles lose the pieced together look once common during the Space Race.

Even conceptuals for the next wave of NASA (and other developer) spacecraft make the shuttle fleet look rather rough, so with that in mind, there's no way a 23rd century starship--the assumed technological best of the best--would look like a Navy carrier, Apollo rocket...or ship from a "galaxy far, far away."

The remastered CG was unprofessional enough, but the SW-ing of 1701 (including an unforgivably out of scale hangar deck) is the reason I only watch the original version on blu ray, where the miniuature actually appears to have scale and a sense of weight.

 

[Sector 7]

I love TOS-R. The newer CGI looks great. I think they achieved their goal of updating effects while keeping the spirit of the original TOS.

 

[Ssosmcin]

I don't know if it's fair to say that these shows were never meant to be seen in anything but standard definition television broadcasts. Roddenberry tried to get Jeffrey Hunter to shoot extra footage so that "The Menagerie" (i.e. "The Cage") could be released theatrically, and many of the cast had clauses in their contracts covering theatrical exhibition.

Mission: Impossible, the Desilu series which premiered the same year as Star Trek, actually did cut together a pair of episodes for foreign theatrical distribution (the second season two-parter "The Council" became Mission Impossible vs. The Mob).

That's a valid point, but I think even to audiences of the day, these were obviously not "feature films" in budget or scope. I thought The Cage would have been broadcast as a movie of the week with the additional footage to bring it to around 90 minutes.

And back then even movies were "one and done." See it in the theater and then that's it. Maybe it would be on TV once in a great while. Today, everyone watches stuff over and over on DVR and home video and with HD inches from your face, everything comes to light. Aside from a couple of space shots, all of the effects in The Cage are fine. Mostly laser effects, illusion dissolves and matte paintings. Generally, though, TV production at 5 or 6 days per episode on very small budgets, shortcuts had to be taken and a lot of them could be obscured by low resolution broadcasts. Even the amazing effects work on Space:1999 and Battlestar Galactica in the 70's is betrayed by hi-def.

The illusions are preserved in lower def. Do I really want to see the strings holding up the Flying Sub on Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea? I had never noticed the ear seams on Nimoy until the blu-rays. Now I can't unsee them.