TOS-R question...

[Warped9]

I've got a question about the TOS-R episodes. If I understand correctly many of the new f/x sequences are shot in widescreen, right? So how is that reconciled with the original live-action footage shot in 4:3 ratio? Is the image jumping back and forth between 4:3 for the live-action footage and widescreen for the new f/x sequences? If so that strikes me as rather ridiculous and another reason why it's so obviously two separate productions spliced together. If this is the approach then it certainly wouldn't look seamless.

And you can't crop the original 4:3 live-action footage to be widescreen because you'd be losing a lot of the shot.

So how was it done?

 

[GNDN]

The entire episode is presented in 4:3, new VFX included.

A bonus feature of the full 16:9 fx would have been nice to see, since the work was done, but there is no option to view them that way.

 

[Warped9]

The entire episode is presented in 4:3, new VFX included.

A bonus feature of the full 16:9 fx would have been nice to see, since the work was done, but there is no option to view them that way.

Got it. Thanks.

 

[GNDN]

One of the more inventive matte painting extensions for TOS-R from Spock's Brain. Most of these types of enhancements were rather tastefully done and really do help to open up the planet exteriors in establishing shots

 

[plynch]

Boy, is that nice.

NO snarkiness intended here: IF there are lots of planetside mattes like that in TOS-R, it might compensate for the cartoony Enterprise.

As I don't have HD, I'll never know, but that shot sure makes the whole show look real-er than the same old soundstage look.

 

[GSchnitzer]

Boy, is that nice.

NO snarkiness intended here: IF there are lots of planetside mattes like that in TOS-R, it might compensate for the cartoony Enterprise.

As I don't have HD, I'll never know, but that shot sure makes the whole show look real-er than the same old soundstage look.

And this one from "By Any Other Name:"

 

[A beaker full of death]

These paintings are no more fantastic than the originals. They are just new. The originals were quite awesome in their own right.

 

[MANT!]

In HD, they do look fantastic...the poor originals often looked much less convincing at that resolution level.

 

[GSchnitzer]

These paintings are no more fantastic than the originals. They are just new. The originals were quite awesome in their own right.

Well, I think the selling point is supposed to be that the original episodes didn't have matte shots at all at these particular scenes (although I suppose these new shots are indeed no more fantastic than the few matte shots we did see in Star Trek originally). For these remastered episodes, the tight shots were lifted, "shrunk down" and deposited against a digital a painting to permit a wider view than was present in the episode originally.

Here's the *original* beam down from "By Any Other Name;"

 

[CorporalCaptain]

The By Any Other Name one is very nice.

 

[GNDN]

Really like this one:

and this:

 

[RAMA]

here's a comparison:

The remastered version aired on tv
http://trekmovie.com/wp-content/uploads/catspaw/new_castle_1.jpg

The paramount supplied original matte:
http://trekmovie.com/wp-content/uploads/catspawcastle43.jpg

 

[GNDN]

Some of the 16:9 FX work and set extensions of live action shots are gorgeous and I'm glad we've been able to see some of the completed work.

As much as I still love TOS blu-rays with the original VFX, I do find myself watching the versions with new FX from time to time to appreciate the work (however imperfect) that went into them.

And as one who has quickly gotten used to the 16:9 format, I would not even object to a compromise widescreen presentation of the entire episode (yes, blasphemy, cropping the top and bottom of the live action judiciously) if and only if, the original 4:3 framing, with the unmolested FX intact, were preserved as a viewing option. I am open to new interpretations and technical advancements (Bob Justman spoke highly of the new FX as well), but not at the expense of losing the originals for any reason.

To say that one is clearly superior to the other simply ignores the fact that people have different tastes.

 

[BillJ]

Some of the 16:9 FX work and set extensions of live action shots are gorgeous and I'm glad we've been able to see some of the completed work.

As much as I still love TOS blu-rays with the original VFX, I do find myself watching the versions with new FX from time to time to appreciate the work (however imperfect) that went into them.

And as one who has quickly gotten used to the 16:9 format, I would not even object to a compromise widescreen presentation of the entire episode (yes, blasphemy, cropping the top and bottom of the live action judiciously) if and only if, the original 4:3 framing, with the unmolested FX intact, were preserved as a viewing option. I am open to new interpretations and technical advancements (Bob Justman spoke highly of the new FX as well), but not at the expense of losing the originals for any reason.

To say that one is clearly superior to the other simply ignores the fact that people have different tastes.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Some of the 16:9 FX work and set extensions of live action shots are gorgeous and I'm glad we've been able to see some of the completed work.

As much as I still love TOS blu-rays with the original VFX, I do find myself watching the versions with new FX from time to time to appreciate the work (however imperfect) that went into them.

And as one who has quickly gotten used to the 16:9 format, I would not even object to a compromise widescreen presentation of the entire episode (yes, blasphemy, cropping the top and bottom of the live action judiciously) if and only if, the original 4:3 framing, with the unmolested FX intact, were preserved as a viewing option. I am open to new interpretations and technical advancements (Bob Justman spoke highly of the new FX as well), but not at the expense of losing the originals for any reason.

To say that one is clearly superior to the other simply ignores the fact that people have different tastes.

Work went into the original effects as well. I always wish to have the option of appreciating what the artists behind the original show produced.

 

[GNDN]

Some of the 16:9 FX work and set extensions of live action shots are gorgeous and I'm glad we've been able to see some of the completed work.

As much as I still love TOS blu-rays with the original VFX, I do find myself watching the versions with new FX from time to time to appreciate the work (however imperfect) that went into them.

And as one who has quickly gotten used to the 16:9 format, I would not even object to a compromise widescreen presentation of the entire episode (yes, blasphemy, cropping the top and bottom of the live action judiciously) if and only if, the original 4:3 framing, with the unmolested FX intact, were preserved as a viewing option. I am open to new interpretations and technical advancements (Bob Justman spoke highly of the new FX as well), but not at the expense of losing the originals for any reason.

To say that one is clearly superior to the other simply ignores the fact that people have different tastes.

Work went into the original effects as well. I always wish to have the option of appreciating what the artists behind the original show produced.

Exactly. Having the option to toggle VFX and Soundtrack options was what finally sold me on purchasing TOS on Blu-Ray.

A well considered choice to respect the originals as seen in the 1960's, and all the artists that contributed to their success, but also to include the CGI renderings to take advantage of the Hi-Def presentation and to attract new and interested viewers who were intrigued by the possibilities of VFX generated with today's technology.

 

[RAMA]

Some of the 16:9 FX work and set extensions of live action shots are gorgeous and I'm glad we've been able to see some of the completed work.

As much as I still love TOS blu-rays with the original VFX, I do find myself watching the versions with new FX from time to time to appreciate the work (however imperfect) that went into them.

And as one who has quickly gotten used to the 16:9 format, I would not even object to a compromise widescreen presentation of the entire episode (yes, blasphemy, cropping the top and bottom of the live action judiciously) if and only if, the original 4:3 framing, with the unmolested FX intact, were preserved as a viewing option. I am open to new interpretations and technical advancements (Bob Justman spoke highly of the new FX as well), but not at the expense of losing the originals for any reason.

To say that one is clearly superior to the other simply ignores the fact that people have different tastes.

http://www.trekbbs.com/showpost.php?p=4928941&postcount=217

I'd like to see you ask any VFX supervisor in the world or show comparison film clips on a street corner of both FX and see if you get more than 1% of the respondants say that the original, grainy, badly matted, bady lit FX are better. Even the good model that was built doesn't even show the detail when it was photographed because the analog printers lost so much resolution and the model was too brightly lit.

The ONLY taste issue is nostalgia and predisposition. The new FX and remastering as a whole is clearly superior. Its not even an issue anywhere else but here.

RAMA

 

[RAMA]

Moved from TOS revisit thread

I've never heard of this happening and I find it impossible to believe. My experiences have been 180 degrees opposite of this. My 10 year old nephew only watched TOS when it was remastered...he NEVER expressed interest in them before, for example.

RAMA

You do know that different people do have different experiences? Shocking, but true! Both of my children have grown up watching The Original Series with the original effects with me. So they have a base of reference.

I actually have a great deal of pride in them for respecting the historical significance of things past. My daughter, for example, at 17 is a huge I Love Lucy fan.

I'll never forget the day that The Doomsday Machine Remastered came on... my daughter comes running in with the VHS copy we own, pointing to the back. "That's not the Doomsday Machine" she said pointing to the TV, then showed me the back of the box, "This is the Doomsday Machine".

Got to be honest here... I'd question the intelligence of anyone who can't enjoy The Original Series without the updated effects. Does the dated effects from Star Trek: The Next Generation somehow detract from your enjoyment of that series?

Actually no, I don't think you can't enjoy the series without the new FX, but in my case, I'm spoiled by the superiority of the new TOS-R, which is in HD and is clearer and brighter, on top of the new FX. I have no need or interest in seeing the old versions now...which by definition are an inferior viewing experience.

I do respect the creators of TOS, I admire what they could do back in the 60s, but time moves on. I am ecstatic that the preservation and improvement of TOS means fans will appreciate it when their frame of reference to TOS is/will be 40-50-60 years more advanced in technology than when it aired. Remember I watched TOS when there was no other Trek around...TOS was my first love of Trek, but I'm always looking forward, not back. In almost every case, those who worked on TOS do not have the same reaction that some purist fans do, and often support the new FX...Bob Justman was rather vocal on the subject as the last remaining of the 3 major producers on the show.

My main qualm here was your claim that the non-indoctrinated or non-Trekker young fan would find the new FX jarring. I've asked a few younger kids as well as many adults (as I mentioned before 90% of these were not "trekkers") and I have never gotten the reaction that you did. The caveat here is also almost 100% of the kids I asked have seen minimal or no TOS to begin with. So if I ask them if the FX are different from the rest of the scenes they have nothing to compare it to. I find this to be a very honest answer...it eliminates nostalgia or familiarity (as in your kid's case) with the previous FX.

RAMA

 

[RAMA]

Some of the 16:9 FX work and set extensions of live action shots are gorgeous and I'm glad we've been able to see some of the completed work.

As much as I still love TOS blu-rays with the original VFX, I do find myself watching the versions with new FX from time to time to appreciate the work (however imperfect) that went into them.

And as one who has quickly gotten used to the 16:9 format, I would not even object to a compromise widescreen presentation of the entire episode (yes, blasphemy, cropping the top and bottom of the live action judiciously) if and only if, the original 4:3 framing, with the unmolested FX intact, were preserved as a viewing option. I am open to new interpretations and technical advancements (Bob Justman spoke highly of the new FX as well), but not at the expense of losing the originals for any reason.

To say that one is clearly superior to the other simply ignores the fact that people have different tastes.

Work went into the original effects as well. I always wish to have the option of appreciating what the artists behind the original show produced.

Exactly. Having the option to toggle VFX and Soundtrack options was what finally sold me on purchasing TOS on Blu-Ray.

A well considered choice to respect the originals as seen in the 1960's, and all the artists that contributed to their success, but also to include the CGI renderings to take advantage of the Hi-Def presentation and to attract new and interested viewers who were intrigued by the possibilities of VFX generated with today's technology.

This is an awesome way to preserve the originals.

RAMA

 

[BillJ]

My main qualm here was your claim that the non-indoctrinated or non-Trekker young fan would find the new FX jarring.

Where did I say that?

By the by... if two and a half minutes of effects footage destroys your ability to enjoy a fifty minute story, then something is wrong with you.