• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

why another blu-ray of all Trek movies by 2016 will happen

From what I've heard, it's Daren Dochterman and his team who saved the CGI project files for TMP: DE, not paramount. If anyone should lead that project, it should be Daren and his team, they would be able to import the project files into the latest versions of maya or lightwave and get them looking just as perfect. The effects were created to be hi-def ready, so the models and textures should hold up.

I've read numerous post to the contrary, indicating that the DE effects were standard def only and would have to be completely redone for HD. Do you have a source for this?

Daren himself, from what I recall; I think it was somewhere buried on Trekmovie?
 
What he means is, the models/textures COULD hold up if rendered at 1080p, but at the time, for the DVD, they only rendered them in 480. Apparently nobody at Paramount thought ahead and asked/paid for a 1080p rendering as well.
 
What he means is, the models/textures COULD hold up if rendered at 1080p, but at the time, for the DVD, they only rendered them in 480. Apparently nobody at Paramount thought ahead and asked/paid for a 1080p rendering as well.


I'd be curious what it would have cost back then to render them in 1080p.

No doubt a lot less than they'd make now if they could put a TMP DC on Blu-ray
 
Many purchased the sets of the Trek movies on Blu-ray.

the amount of digital noise reduction on those video masters for Blu-ray left the HD image with waxy faces and little grain. Entirely too much DNR processing.

This article shows why Paramount needs to cash in and re-release on Blu-ray the Trek movies while the format still has some weight behind it.
Is the end near for physical media?
2 specific quotes: PricewaterhouseCoopers
the latest study saying that streaming video will surpass DVD rental by 2018 as on-demand takes off and DVD sales crater.
PricewaterhouseCoopers, predicts that electronic home video, which includes subscription video-on-demand services and cable on-demand offerings, will overtake the box office by 2017
All the films Original Camera Negatives can be rescanned to 4k (except ST:TMP was already mastered to 4k).
The 2009 & 2013 films were done digital intermediate at 2k so it is moot to remaster these at 4k but they may upscale the digital intermediate masters.
The new 4k masters will be good for 4 future new releases:
A new Blu-ray set, the standalone Blu-ray movies, and a future 4k streaming & 4k unknown future physical media set.
I believe that 2016 will be the year they get released so the sets can sell through 2018.


related:
this older thread discussed the Blu-ray sets:
Movies on BluRay: Worth it?

I'm interested in the whole "Is Physical Media Doomed?" debate more than anything, and its the end of that article that I agree the most with:

If UHD TVs come down in price – and they have already plunged from over $10,000 to about $3,000 in one year – then people will want content. There are some initial moves at 4k streaming, like Netflix's proposed 4k service, and the BBC is broadcasting the World Cup in UHD in England. They say users need speeds of around 20Mbps to watch 4K content without glitches. How many people have that?

So UHD might help revive Blu-ray DVD. And I don't believe DVD will ever fully go away. The advent of DVD has created a whole class of people who build libraries of movies so they can pull them out and watch when their whim hits. Netflix is often knocked for having a less-than-stellar selection of movies on-demand. If I want to watch some favorite old TV shows like "E.R." or "Star Trek: Deep Space Nine," my only option is DVD.

As for music media, there will likely be a return to CD or some kind of physical media, perhaps Blu-ray, which would be harder to rip. It's finally dawning on musicians that the promise of digital media and streaming audio is a load of bull. Nobody is making money right now, and the industry is going to react one way or another to make money.

I don't consider physical media doomed. The makers of it just need to lift a finger and make it special and thus worth the money. A lot of people are buying the Led Zeppelin album reissues because they come as a collection with a lot of content for the money. More and more DVDs come with the UltraViolet streaming option.

I think there's a genuine different in customer base between people who just want the product NOW and with no strings attached (which is what internet media gives you) and don't care about a trade-off in quality, versus those who wish to have movies in a good a presentation as is practicably possible. Only physical media can provide the latter at the moment. And as much as we talk about everyone being on the internet these days, the fact is this ISN'T true, there are large sections of the world and social classes where internet connectivity is patchy (sometimes even only dial-up) and that hasn't been solved, so any industry willing to let physical media die is basically cutting out a potential profit base in people who can't rely on internet streaming to provide them with entertainment. That Microsoft backtracked on their original plan to make XBone a console with games only available via download, something trumpeted in early press releases but quietly dropped before it went to market, indicates to me that someone had a thought-bubble about the future of media, but then saw market research on the subject and realized that the market simply isn't in a position (at the moment at least) to sustain it.

So while everybody proclaims doom and gloom about physical media, I feel the truth is that it still has a part to play.
 
The other aspect with physical media is that you have the version of a film that you want, and it isn't subject to any revision that should happen to get implemented, be it colorization, CG or a different sound mix, or even editorial censorship. If you look at VIDEO WATCHDOG it is easy to see that lots of films have various versions, many of which diminish the original significantly. I'm very happy now to have a version of CLOSE ENCOUNTERS that actually shows Roy & Jilllian and the other guy push out of the copter and escape towards Devil's Tower, as opposed to the 'they're just free and nobody is chasing them' version we've had to live with since 1980 (even the supposedly 'original' version on CAV laserdisc didn't put that back in.)

These things aren't a factor for most casual viewing (netflix doesn't have to lose any sleep over this unless they start editing films wholesale), but certainly on films that are important in some fashion, this will be a factor for some.
 
That's one of the advantages of Blu ray, having the ability to seamlessly branch and vastly more GB storage capacity.

Including the Director's Edition with the theatricals, shouldn't take up any more room than that previously devoted to Special Features transferred over from the earlier DVDs.
 
The other aspect with physical media is that you have the version of a film that you want, and it isn't subject to any revision that should happen to get implemented, be it colorization, CG or a different sound mix, or even editorial censorship. If you look at VIDEO WATCHDOG it is easy to see that lots of films have various versions, many of which diminish the original significantly.

I'm pretty much resigned to the fact that we'll never get a properly colored version of The Good, The Bad and the Ugly -- I think it's doomed to live forever on DVD. All the Blu-rays have been horrific.
 
They are pretty cheap, but it seems the last best chance for a better release of the movies is in 2016 for the 50th anniversary. If you can hold out till then---you can avoid buying them twice.

At this point, i'm so used to buying multiple formats of the same content, that if the mother of all TOS-movie blu-rays was on the horizon, I would be there.

After plunking down the dollars for TOS on Beta, VHS, laserdisc, standard DVD and blu-ray, I would have no problem doing the same for the TOS movies....if that video effect was not present.
 
Bill Hunt from the Digitalbits talked to the PHV people and advised them that demand exists for better editions of the original 6 movies.

The main focus of the article is how after he complained about the screwed-up release for STID they decided to come out with a set of both the JJ movies with all the various features combined into one set along with some new features.

It's not any kind of a big boost in the likelihood but at least they have been made aware and are "considering it".

http://www.thedigitalbits.com/columns/my-two-cents/062314_0600
 
The other aspect with physical media is that you have the version of a film that you want, and it isn't subject to any revision that should happen to get implemented, be it colorization, CG or a different sound mix, or even editorial censorship. If you look at VIDEO WATCHDOG it is easy to see that lots of films have various versions, many of which diminish the original significantly.

I'm pretty much resigned to the fact that we'll never get a properly colored version of The Good, The Bad and the Ugly -- I think it's doomed to live forever on DVD. All the Blu-rays have been horrific.

That's good to know. I usually look at blu-ray.com for their reviews before upgrading (which is why I still don't own the DePalma M:I, have been waiting for a BR after skipping the DVD) and they seem to think highly of two different versions of TGTB&TU, but I'll defer to you on this and just hang onto my DVD for now (wonder what color version is on the netflix streaming version?)

I don't know if this is a sign of my faculties eroding or not, but I actually watched about a half-hour of 5thELEMENT on netflix today without turning off the no-blur ... something about that movie actually seems to work better with the crazy clear look, though I think I'd rather go back to watching movies on AUDIO than ever watching ALIEN with the no-blur turned on (especially now that I really love it, after decades of rewatching it only for the art direction.)
 
From what I've heard, it's Daren Dochterman and his team who saved the CGI project files for TMP: DE, not paramount. If anyone should lead that project, it should be Daren and his team, they would be able to import the project files into the latest versions of maya or lightwave and get them looking just as perfect. The effects were created to be hi-def ready, so the models and textures should hold up.

I've read numerous post to the contrary, indicating that the DE effects were standard def only and would have to be completely redone for HD. Do you have a source for this?

Daren himself, from what I recall; I think it was somewhere buried on Trekmovie?

According to Daren's own comments to articles on TMP at his personal blog back circa 2009 when the disappointing BD release came out it wouldn't be hard to re-ender at 1080p.

What he means is, the models/textures COULD hold up if rendered at 1080p, but at the time, for the DVD, they only rendered them in 480. Apparently nobody at Paramount thought ahead and asked/paid for a 1080p rendering as well.

Yep, DVD was the target resolution, and that's all they paid for. The VFX team apparently repeatedly told Paramount Home Video that it was a shortsighted idea, but this was circa 2001, the majority of people didn't have HDTVs back then (it took another 5 years for mass market penetration of HDTVs), so they took the quick buck route, imagine that...

There is a blog somewhere of one of the VFX artists who was at Foundation back then, he did a render of some of the TMP elements at something approximating 1080p, it doesn't look spectacular, but it looks decent. The fact that it's not spectacular is more due more to it needing to have some updated/higher resolution textures here and there, than anything else. Which would be pretty darn easy to do. The meshes seem like they'd do fine.

EDIT: Found it, Lee Stringer's blog: http://www.leestringer.com/gal_sttmp1.html
 
Last edited:
I'm conflicted about Director's Cuts. While I appreciate the thinking behind them, the idea that sometimes a movie can be improved by recutting it years later, I am also of the belief that the theatrical versions not be lost to history as a result. I'm wary that Director's Cuts can sometimes be cases where the persons behind the camera have taken liberties with material that they personally have never been entirely happy with, but they've failed to take into account the subjective opinions of their audiences who might like the theatrical versions perfectly fine thank you very much.

I mean, for one example: Sam Raimi hates the theatrical ending of 'Army of Darkness', he makes no excuses for replacing it with his prefered ending on the Director's Cut because ultimately he feels he was shackled by the studios insistence that he give his movie a less bleak ending... but for me, as a viewer, I subjectively prefer the theatrical cut. I like the studio mandated ending better, I like Ash getting home and then getting kick ass on a Deadite, and I would be bitterly disappointed if somebody suddenly said to me "Actually, screw you, the Director's Cut is all we're gonna give you".

Of course as long as the theatrical versions remain available then I say "bring it on". :)
 
Of course as long as the theatrical versions remain available then I say "bring it on". :)

This should never be an issue going forward as the technology exists to give consumers multiple movies on a single disc/download. But it will.
 
Of course as long as the theatrical versions remain available then I say "bring it on". :)

This should never be an issue going forward as the technology exists to give consumers multiple movies on a single disc/download. But it will.

I love that we live at a time when multiple versions of films are offered in the same package. The prime examples being CLOSE ENCOUNTERS and BLADE RUNNER. I never even watched the Special Edition or Director's Cut of the former, but at least I have the option available. The handling of TMP in all formats has so far been underwhelming. There was no reason the theatrical and director's edition couldn't be on the DVD via seamless branching, and having that director's edition only mastered at 480i was short sighted. Didn't that actually get a limited screening in theaters? I know tons of flicks from that era that got a "director's cut" had something like that at least.
 
The other aspect with physical media is that you have the version of a film that you want, and it isn't subject to any revision that should happen to get implemented, be it colorization, CG or a different sound mix, or even editorial censorship. If you look at VIDEO WATCHDOG it is easy to see that lots of films have various versions, many of which diminish the original significantly.

I'm pretty much resigned to the fact that we'll never get a properly colored version of The Good, The Bad and the Ugly -- I think it's doomed to live forever on DVD. All the Blu-rays have been horrific.

That's good to know. I usually look at blu-ray.com for their reviews before upgrading (which is why I still don't own the DePalma M:I, have been waiting for a BR after skipping the DVD) and they seem to think highly of two different versions of TGTB&TU, but I'll defer to you on this and just hang onto my DVD for now (wonder what color version is on the netflix streaming version?)

For visual illustration:

Shitty 2009 US Blu-ray:
http://i.imgur.com/tYb1yKl.jpg

Italian Blu-ray:
http://i.imgur.com/Q34mNaX.jpg

New release:
http://i.imgur.com/3D68kih.jpg

Apparently because it's a Western, it must be yellow.
 
I agree that physical media still has life in it, although maybe not for more than another three to five years. I like to have my movies in hand. I don't want my movies in a cloud, where they're subject to the whim and moreover the survival of a company.

That CBS has done so well with TV Trek and PHV has been so inconsistent and questionable with their treatment of the feature films frustrates me. I do think we'll get another release on BluRay, as a 4K physical format won't be ready for prime time in 2016 (if ever), but I am not confident Paramount will give us the all-in, make-everyone-happy releases we're longing for.

When I die, I want Paramount to be my pall bearers, so that they can let me down one last time.
 
For visual illustration:

Shitty 2009 US Blu-ray:
http://i.imgur.com/tYb1yKl.jpg

Italian Blu-ray:
http://i.imgur.com/Q34mNaX.jpg

New release:
http://i.imgur.com/3D68kih.jpg

Apparently because it's a Western, it must be yellow.

It's so strange. Reading the review, it says they did a lot of referencing from original prints to get the colors right for the new release and that the previous blu-rays were all wrong. Is that just a lie by the studio or did it really look like that in the 1960s? It's not a look I'm used to, but if it IS accurate then I'd have to try to get used to it I guess.

No doubt this is sending the blu-ray.com forums to a frenzy. "It doesn't look like my old laserdisc!"
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top