CW
Higher quality transfers are always welcome - there's no reason not to want to do them. Re-doing the soundtrack in stereo - if done properly and not just a tacky gimmick which moves sound from one channel to the other for no real reason - I would also support.
However, I would draw the line at think replacing the original effects. TOS is best viewed now as a programme of it's time and should be preserved, not changed - replacing the original effects work (which were actually pretty good for TV-level effects at the time - they weren't as shoestring produced as is often claimed) is as stupid an idea as applying filters to get rid of the gaudy red colour scheme on the bridge.
It's not that I don't support newer effects for TOS to see what could be done, but IMO they should be restricted to a branching feature on DVD releases, or used only on special screenings. Destroying the original work on what will presumably in time become the main distribution version of TOS is a terrible idea.
Apart from anything else, the people behind this seem to have totally missed the point behind criticisms that the original Star Trek is dated. The complaints on it's production aren't that the Enterprise looks like a small film model, or that when the ship moves faster the navigation lights flash more quickly because it's the same film played at a different speed (although my favourite glitch is on the side-shot of the ship when one of the model's lights fails in the engineering section - the very same shot that's used in the title sequence of every season 2 and 3 episode and is used within the series countless times!),
It's more to do with the tacky look of some of the aliens, the dated and decidedly un-futuristic design of the clothing and the sets, the computers which are less advanced than those we have today, and even some of the dialogue which now seems dated.
It's because it's a 1960's programme, and those who criticise or find it inaccessible do so because they clearly don't like 1960's TV! Replacing old model shots with CGI (which might represent hard work, but because they are essentially re-doing a model built 42 years ago into CGI, it still doesn't look any more realistic for all their efforts) is unlikely to attract any new viewers to the series who wouldn't be attracted by a suitably marketed re-run/DVD release of the existing programme.
Until 2000 most (all?) UK airings of TOS (certainly those on BBC2) were ultimately sourced from the copies the BBC received in the early 1970's (these are easily identifiable in that the Desilu/Paramount Television logo animation is removed from the end).
The BBC got 'remastered' tapes for a rerun in 2000 (they appeared just to be better VT transfers from the same film prints, rather than any actual restortation work having taken place). They restore the end logos and the Desilu-credited episodes have a modern Paramount logo added (that's as well as, not in place of the original Desilu animation). However, a few episodes in this 'remastered' set seem to be copies of the the masters made for the original UK video release (these have a Desliu logo on the end with a 1978 (yes, really!) copyright date tacked on the bottom).
Being that the original material hung around for 30 odd years, and some stations (such as Sci Fi) are only just running the current 2000 transfers for the first time, I can't see the re-mastered series making it over here for a while. We won't have to wait 30 years, but I can't seem them coming any time soon.
What is possible however is that standard-definition copies of the HD remastered series will be made available for a new DVD release of TOS.
cwathen
Founding member
Quote:
The news has been around for ages, but finally tomorrow they're syndicating the first episodes of the new re-mastered Star Trek. Re-transferred completely from the original 35mm in HD, the pictures i've seen look astounding. They're also replacing the visual effects/model shots to an extent too. Although i'm not a fan of those, mainly because they look like cheap CGI.
Higher quality transfers are always welcome - there's no reason not to want to do them. Re-doing the soundtrack in stereo - if done properly and not just a tacky gimmick which moves sound from one channel to the other for no real reason - I would also support.
However, I would draw the line at think replacing the original effects. TOS is best viewed now as a programme of it's time and should be preserved, not changed - replacing the original effects work (which were actually pretty good for TV-level effects at the time - they weren't as shoestring produced as is often claimed) is as stupid an idea as applying filters to get rid of the gaudy red colour scheme on the bridge.
It's not that I don't support newer effects for TOS to see what could be done, but IMO they should be restricted to a branching feature on DVD releases, or used only on special screenings. Destroying the original work on what will presumably in time become the main distribution version of TOS is a terrible idea.
Apart from anything else, the people behind this seem to have totally missed the point behind criticisms that the original Star Trek is dated. The complaints on it's production aren't that the Enterprise looks like a small film model, or that when the ship moves faster the navigation lights flash more quickly because it's the same film played at a different speed (although my favourite glitch is on the side-shot of the ship when one of the model's lights fails in the engineering section - the very same shot that's used in the title sequence of every season 2 and 3 episode and is used within the series countless times!),
It's more to do with the tacky look of some of the aliens, the dated and decidedly un-futuristic design of the clothing and the sets, the computers which are less advanced than those we have today, and even some of the dialogue which now seems dated.
It's because it's a 1960's programme, and those who criticise or find it inaccessible do so because they clearly don't like 1960's TV! Replacing old model shots with CGI (which might represent hard work, but because they are essentially re-doing a model built 42 years ago into CGI, it still doesn't look any more realistic for all their efforts) is unlikely to attract any new viewers to the series who wouldn't be attracted by a suitably marketed re-run/DVD release of the existing programme.
Quote:
What do we think? Is this necessary? Which channel is likely to pick it up over here?
Until 2000 most (all?) UK airings of TOS (certainly those on BBC2) were ultimately sourced from the copies the BBC received in the early 1970's (these are easily identifiable in that the Desilu/Paramount Television logo animation is removed from the end).
The BBC got 'remastered' tapes for a rerun in 2000 (they appeared just to be better VT transfers from the same film prints, rather than any actual restortation work having taken place). They restore the end logos and the Desilu-credited episodes have a modern Paramount logo added (that's as well as, not in place of the original Desilu animation). However, a few episodes in this 'remastered' set seem to be copies of the the masters made for the original UK video release (these have a Desliu logo on the end with a 1978 (yes, really!) copyright date tacked on the bottom).
Being that the original material hung around for 30 odd years, and some stations (such as Sci Fi) are only just running the current 2000 transfers for the first time, I can't see the re-mastered series making it over here for a while. We won't have to wait 30 years, but I can't seem them coming any time soon.
What is possible however is that standard-definition copies of the HD remastered series will be made available for a new DVD release of TOS.
MS
The real problem I have with the CGI is that it will ultimately date even more so than the original model effects, which as you say aren't actually that bad to begin with!
A bad example i know but look at the re-mastered Red Dwarf tapes, they have dated so much now, that the original model shots look brilliant in comparison.
Unlike Doctor Who or Blake's 7 made here, the effects aren't laughable at all. They're very good mostly. Their only problem is that they are hugely grainy.
Anyway, we shall see what comes out. No doubt the new re-mastered episode will be on the torrent networks by the end of the week
A bad example i know but look at the re-mastered Red Dwarf tapes, they have dated so much now, that the original model shots look brilliant in comparison.
Unlike Doctor Who or Blake's 7 made here, the effects aren't laughable at all. They're very good mostly. Their only problem is that they are hugely grainy.
Anyway, we shall see what comes out. No doubt the new re-mastered episode will be on the torrent networks by the end of the week
IN
One thing to remember about the new visual effects is that, mostly, they will replicate the original effects exactly, even down to each star on the starfield. That means the Enterprise will not come speeding in, doing barrel rolls. They will just look much better.
Some things that might be different are those ships in the original versions which were represented on screen by a tiny dot of light on the viewscreen, or outside the Enterprise, may have new models designed and used. Again, a welcome improvement in my view.
Some things that might be different are those ships in the original versions which were represented on screen by a tiny dot of light on the viewscreen, or outside the Enterprise, may have new models designed and used. Again, a welcome improvement in my view.
MS
http://www.bpirozzolo.com/enterprise.jpg
An example of the CGI. As I mentioned in my previous post, i think it looks awful. Look at the severe lack of detailing in the nacelle. It looks too smooth!
An example of the CGI. As I mentioned in my previous post, i think it looks awful. Look at the severe lack of detailing in the nacelle. It looks too smooth!
OH
ohwhatanight
Founding member
Im all for getting more material to be HD but im not sure whether the results will warrant more series being re-transfer to HD.
35mm film is more than capable of supplying a HD picture but the problems that arise are from the studio set, props and costumes.
A HD version of these old programmes will show up how bad some of the makeup was, how poor some of the miniture craft were etcetc. I for one don't think it's a good idea.
It's going to make a 'just-about-getting-away-with-it' series into a totally mockery with everything looking like a set rather than believable pictures.
Or do they intend to CGI some of the exteriors etc?
35mm film is more than capable of supplying a HD picture but the problems that arise are from the studio set, props and costumes.
A HD version of these old programmes will show up how bad some of the makeup was, how poor some of the miniture craft were etcetc. I for one don't think it's a good idea.
It's going to make a 'just-about-getting-away-with-it' series into a totally mockery with everything looking like a set rather than believable pictures.
Or do they intend to CGI some of the exteriors etc?
MD
The effects are keeping true to the originals. Another company, EdenFX pitched for the job with visuals which added alot of details to the original, but CBS digital (in house) are doing it, and little has been changed, just made cleaner and at the higher resolution.
http://www.rp-networkservices.com/tvforum/uploads/small.jpg
Eden FX Proposal
http://www.rp-networkservices.com/tvforum/uploads/enter.jpg
HD Enterprise Shot
http://www.rp-networkservices.com/tvforum/uploads/untitled1.jpg
Original DVD Shot
http://www.rp-networkservices.com/tvforum/uploads/small.jpg
Eden FX Proposal
http://www.rp-networkservices.com/tvforum/uploads/enter.jpg
HD Enterprise Shot
http://www.rp-networkservices.com/tvforum/uploads/untitled1.jpg
Original DVD Shot
CW
To be fair, the original model didn't have much in the way of visible hull plating - the nacelles *were* that smooth.
I wonder just how exactly they will replicate the original effects work - remember that the model underwent modification after both pilot episodes and so has three distinct looks, yet to save on the cost of re-shooting footage combining all three was freely mixed together:
In the original pilot (The Cage), the warp nacelles terminated in red spikes at the front and vent slots on the back, whilst the model didn't have any lighting at all.
In the second pilot (Where no man has gone before), the model had lighting added behind the windows and flashing white navigation lights on the saucer.
After the second pilot, the warp nacelles were modified to have the familiar lit up spinny things on the front and the backs had rounded end caps, whilst the navigation lights were changed to red and green as on an ocean going ship.
In their 'totally faithful' reproduction, are they going to be true to this, or are they merely going to always show the ship in it's final incarnation in order to 'fix' the discrepancy? and once they start 'fixing' flaws, one does have to wonder what else they might consider necessary to modify.
The problem of course is that the bottom picture looks like a 1960's model shot from a 1960's TV series and so can and always will be accepted as such - no one will ever criticise it for not looking like cutting edge sci fi. Yet the top picture is a CGI recreation of a 1960's model shot from a 1960's TV series. The CGI might be state of the art now, but it will age. And being that the original Enterprise was not designed to be implemented as a CGI model, it will never have the 'it looks so real' factor that the CGI models of Voyager and the Enterprise-E do.
But if we want to talk about believability, the CGI you show has put lights - implying windows - in the nacelle pylons! The pylons which every licenced published work on TOS has always affirmed are merely structural supports and are not in any way habitable!
cwathen
Founding member
Quote:
An example of the CGI. As I mentioned in my previous post, i think it looks awful. Look at the severe lack of detailing in the nacelle. It looks too smooth!
To be fair, the original model didn't have much in the way of visible hull plating - the nacelles *were* that smooth.
Quote:
One thing to remember about the new visual effects is that, mostly, they will replicate the original effects exactly, even down to each star on the starfield. That means the Enterprise will not come speeding in, doing barrel rolls. They will just look much better.
I wonder just how exactly they will replicate the original effects work - remember that the model underwent modification after both pilot episodes and so has three distinct looks, yet to save on the cost of re-shooting footage combining all three was freely mixed together:
In the original pilot (The Cage), the warp nacelles terminated in red spikes at the front and vent slots on the back, whilst the model didn't have any lighting at all.
In the second pilot (Where no man has gone before), the model had lighting added behind the windows and flashing white navigation lights on the saucer.
After the second pilot, the warp nacelles were modified to have the familiar lit up spinny things on the front and the backs had rounded end caps, whilst the navigation lights were changed to red and green as on an ocean going ship.
In their 'totally faithful' reproduction, are they going to be true to this, or are they merely going to always show the ship in it's final incarnation in order to 'fix' the discrepancy? and once they start 'fixing' flaws, one does have to wonder what else they might consider necessary to modify.
Quote:
The effects are keeping true to the originals. Another company, EdenFX pitched for the job with visuals which added alot of details to the original, but CBS digital (in house) are doing it, and little has been changed, just made cleaner and at the higher resolution.
The problem of course is that the bottom picture looks like a 1960's model shot from a 1960's TV series and so can and always will be accepted as such - no one will ever criticise it for not looking like cutting edge sci fi. Yet the top picture is a CGI recreation of a 1960's model shot from a 1960's TV series. The CGI might be state of the art now, but it will age. And being that the original Enterprise was not designed to be implemented as a CGI model, it will never have the 'it looks so real' factor that the CGI models of Voyager and the Enterprise-E do.
But if we want to talk about believability, the CGI you show has put lights - implying windows - in the nacelle pylons! The pylons which every licenced published work on TOS has always affirmed are merely structural supports and are not in any way habitable!