Jump to content



Sign up for a free account to remove the pop-up ads

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests and remove the pop-up ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

Photo
- - - - -

Star Trek in HD - with revised special effects?


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
386 replies to this topic

#41 of 387 OFFLINE   John H Ross

John H Ross

    Screenwriter



  • 1,047 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 16 2000

Posted August 29 2006 - 05:46 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zack Gibbs
Or maybe you're changing reality to suit your own argument? Star Wars was a movie and was meant to be seen as large as possible (with as much resolution as possible), such is the nature of theatrical films. Star Trek was a tv show, produced for standard tv with the intention of it being seen that way. With DVDs you have it all, 100%, The End. In fact seeing as the show was never meant to be seen in HD, how dare you even want it at all in that format, shame on you!

I don't quite see your point...! It doesn't matter whether we're talking about a film or a TV show, the original content is the original content.

Using your argument Star Wars (or ANY movie) shouldn't be seen in the home at all since it was meant to be viewed in cinemas, so why release it on ANY home video format?

JR

#42 of 387 OFFLINE   Dave Scarpa

Dave Scarpa

    Producer



  • 5,287 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 08 1999

Posted August 29 2006 - 05:47 AM

See I Never found the effects in TOS cheesy
My DVD Collection

The Megaplex

#43 of 387 OFFLINE   Dave Scarpa

Dave Scarpa

    Producer



  • 5,287 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 08 1999

Posted August 29 2006 - 05:49 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonny P
How much are you people really willing to spend on these shows?

I loved the original ST. I liked TNG.

However, when these shows were released they cost around $100 a set. That's almost $3000 you'd have had to spend to get all of the ST shows on DVD (not to mention the movies).

If these eps are significantly remastered with new FX, you're going to be looking at a pretty penny to double-dip (probably in the $100 per season range again).

I guess I can understand redoing shows for the world of HD broadcasts.

Somehow...I don't think that HD-DVD or Blu-Ray will be the end. In about 7 years, there will be some new super-super-duper format that allows you to zoom in and see inside the windows on the Enterprise as it flies across space.


I'd Netflix them to check them out.
My DVD Collection

The Megaplex

#44 of 387 OFFLINE   John H Ross

John H Ross

    Screenwriter



  • 1,047 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 16 2000

Posted August 29 2006 - 05:54 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Scarpa
See I Never found the effects in TOS cheesy

Exactly. And they've been perfectly fine for 40 years. I can't believe there are so many people willing to just toss them out just because the technology dictates it.

Sigh...

JR

#45 of 387 OFFLINE   PeterTHX

PeterTHX

    Screenwriter



  • 2,034 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 30 2002

Posted August 29 2006 - 05:57 AM

Quote:
and I've yet to see ANY CGI ship that looks as good as a model, that I couldnt instantly tell was computer generated

Uh huh. Well watch the Star Wars prequels and tell me which ones are CG and which are models (hint: they are both mixed in together).

Star Trek: First Contact: all the other ships, save for the Ent-E, Borg Cube/Sphere, and the Phoenix are CG. Even the Defiant.

Poseidon: Completely CG. No models, no water, all shots.

#46 of 387 OFFLINE   PeterTHX

PeterTHX

    Screenwriter



  • 2,034 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 30 2002

Posted August 29 2006 - 06:02 AM

Sorry folks, but as a VFX fan from the day I saw Star Wars, I always thought the shots in the original Trek were rather dated looking.

What bothers me most is the stock footage. There were maybe 10 shots of the ship for the entire series. That alone warrants something new IMHO.
Roddenberry tried to do the same for TNG: have ILM shoot many ship shots and use those throughout. By the end of the second season they realized it wasn't going to work anymore and had Greg Jein build a new, smaller Enterprise D model and have Image G shoot a bunch of new ship shots based on what the new episodes called for and what they could afford (the new model & VFX debuted the third season).

#47 of 387 OFFLINE   Michael Rogers

Michael Rogers

    Supporting Actor



  • 732 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 31 2005

Posted August 29 2006 - 06:12 AM

I would enjoy new effects on Trek episodes (hope they put it out on regular DVD too) as long as it remains an option and not a replacement.

#48 of 387 OFFLINE   Gord Lacey

Gord Lacey

    Screenwriter



  • 2,447 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 03 2001

Posted August 29 2006 - 07:10 AM

I see a lot of people saying "we want the ORIGINAL stuff in HD too" but that's the problem with going to HD; you can't get the original episodes in HD because they were mastered to tape. You won't see any benefit going to HD, so you'd basically be tossing your money away. That's why they're talking about going back to the original material and redoing the special effects, because it's those effects shots that are holding it back.

Had Lucas released the original Star Wars on DVD before the special edition cuts I don't think we would have heard much about it. Fans would have enjoyed their original versions, and not cared too much about the special edition versions being released. This is a different situation because those original episodes exist on DVD, and the way their were finished is what's holding them back from being released in HD.

At least that's my take on it.

Gord
Want to see your favorite show on DVD?

#49 of 387 OFFLINE   Tony J Case

Tony J Case

    Screenwriter



  • 1,730 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 25 2002

Posted August 29 2006 - 07:12 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterTHX
Uh huh. Well watch the Star Wars prequels and tell me which ones are CG and which are models (hint: they are both mixed in together).

Yup - and I could easily spot them. After doing some reading, I was batting about an 80% correct. Mixing the two, I could spot it like a penguin that had been spraypainted Sea Rescue Orange. It didnt stop me from enjoying the movies, but it was like spotting the strings in a Flash Gordon episode - took me out of the moment.

Same thing here - it looked sloppy, like I was playing Star Trek: The Video Game on the X-Box or something. If thats the future, forget it. Give me the past.

#50 of 387 OFFLINE   Jake Yenor

Jake Yenor

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 188 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 13 2005

Posted August 29 2006 - 07:17 AM

The test on that TOS episode was jarring, it wasn't well done. But we have seen what Paramount can do. In 2005 they created a cgi verison of the original ship design and used it on ENT. It looked AMAZING and faaaar better than the TOS model:
Posted Image
Posted Image

#51 of 387 OFFLINE   Jonny P

Jonny P

    Supporting Actor



  • 649 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 05 2002

Posted August 29 2006 - 07:18 AM

Should we also go in and give Magnum, P.I. a new Ferrari and lengthen his shorts?? Posted Image

Part of the appeal of TOS were the cheesy effects shots. They portrayed the future as an amalgamation of painted styrofoam and cardboard...and that is part of the charm.

I am sure the concern is that some of the elements will look bad in a high-resolution format. However, I find new footage to be distracting and gimmicky most of the time.

I'd love to have Robert Duvall's original car chase intact in the "THX-1138" DVD rather than the Phantom Menace-ish CGI add-in.

The quandary with hi-def is how good is "too good."

Older shows -- such as Andy Griffith -- have stood the test of time.

Andy Griffith and I Love Lucy were made for black-and-white televisions with one speaker for sound.

The fact is that those shows have held up well through years of color televisions capable of handling stereo audio and the like. In fact, I'd argue that the b&w episodes of Andy Griffith are much more enjoyable than the later season that were in color.

I understand the obsession with "cool visuals" on the new breed of TV monitors. The fact is that good shows stand the test of time -- regardless of grain, scratches and low-brow special effects.

I'd rather see shows as they were -- not how someone thinks they ought to look on the new breed of televisions.

It is preferrable when they clean some of the shows (and films) up. However, there is a difference between remastering and redoing.

I know it doesn't seem this way now, but the day will come when the hi-def images of today will look "lo-def." Are we simply going to "scrap" created characters like Gollum in LOTR for a new and improved digital version (that might lack the quirks and nuances of the current version)?

#52 of 387 OFFLINE   RickER

RickER

    Producer



  • 5,130 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 04 2003
  • Real Name:Rick
  • LocationTulsa, Oklahoma

Posted August 29 2006 - 07:37 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gord Lacey
I see a lot of people saying "we want the ORIGINAL stuff in HD too" but that's the problem with going to HD; you can't get the original episodes in HD because they were mastered to tape. You won't see any benefit going to HD, so you'd basically be tossing your money away. That's why they're talking about going back to the original material and redoing the special effects, because it's those effects shots that are holding it back.

At least that's my take on it.

Gord

Gord your comments are right, but, they are right in regards to TNG, DS9, and VOY. those shows were edited on video, and the effects done on video. Even now you can see video jaggies on the Enterprise D saucer.
TOS was 100% film, even the effects. And as has been said earlier they reused shots over and over. By the time they got to the end of a season the original effect shot has been scratched to hell and back from being duped so many times.

Id take that seam out of Spocks ear too. Posted Image

#53 of 387 OFFLINE   Nelson Au

Nelson Au

    Executive Producer



  • 11,546 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 16 1999

Posted August 29 2006 - 07:54 AM

Gord- You must be referring to The Next Generation effects that were done on tape.

One more thought to post; are we forgetting that Star Trek TOS was made on film. It's already higher resolution then most HD equipment can recreate on a home monitor. That is if I understand the technical stuff. Film has a huge pixel count compared to video.

So what we are discussing is really upgrading the visual effects. Here are things that I can see make more sense for upgrading the visual effects. If you want to fix stuff like when the blue screen effect sometimes didn't work out and caused the engine nacelles to fade in and out during a fly-by, I can see someone wanting to fix that. If they wanted to add a Klingon Scout ship that was nothing more then a yellow blip on the view screen, then I can see that too. And then there are ships we never see because there was no budget or time to build them. The Gorn ship is never seen, yet we buy that they are chasing it. I think less is more works here.

Those video clip posted above from Enterprise were very well done. But it's a modern Star Trek show, they have to do that because a modern audience expects it. I know we are talking about upgrading TOS for a modern new younger audience. It was posted eariler that Bill Hunt had hinted that the new effects will be branched so the viewer can toggle it on and off. I missed that, I hope that's true!

#54 of 387 OFFLINE   John H Ross

John H Ross

    Screenwriter



  • 1,047 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 16 2000

Posted August 29 2006 - 08:02 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gord Lacey
You won't see any benefit going to HD, so you'd basically be tossing your money away. That's why they're talking about going back to the original material and redoing the special effects, because it's those effects shots that are holding it back.

It's amazing the lengths that some people (read: Paramount) will go to when there's a chance they'll not be able to take us to the cleaners one more time! We've bought Trek on VHS, laserdisc and now DVD. And they STILL want more of our cash! Greedy b******ds!

If there's no benefit going to HD with Trek there's a simple solution: don't go to HD! Gosh, that was easy... and cheap! AND we get Trek as it was originally shown and the way we've enjoyed it for so, so, so many years. Integrity is retained. The galaxy is safe.

HD... PAH!!

JR

#55 of 387 OFFLINE   Jonathan_Clarke

Jonathan_Clarke

    Second Unit



  • 485 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 22 2004

Posted August 29 2006 - 08:02 AM

But what are they going to do about the drywall sets and the cheap costumes?

TOS is of its era. I'll keep the original run (all 40 discs of it!).
www.notinmybook.comWhere I can complain and complain and complain.

#56 of 387 OFFLINE   John H Ross

John H Ross

    Screenwriter



  • 1,047 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 16 2000

Posted August 29 2006 - 08:06 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nelson Au
It was posted eariler that Bill Hunt had hinted that the new effects will be branched so the viewer can toggle it on and off. I missed that, I hope that's true!

That's a LOT of branching.

I'm still waiting for Paramount to release the original and, in some ways, superior version of Star Trek: The Motion Picture on DVD. They're not big on giving us multiple versions are Paramount. Oh no. Unless, I guess, they see money in it in which case "how many would you like?"

Sigh...

JR

#57 of 387 OFFLINE   John H Ross

John H Ross

    Screenwriter



  • 1,047 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 16 2000

Posted August 29 2006 - 08:08 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonathan_Clarke
But what are they going to do about the drywall sets and the cheap costumes? TOS is of its era.

Exactly. And the shots which are flipped because the actor was facing the wrong way. And the music cues which were re-used again and again (it wasn't just the exterior effects shots that were re-used to save money you know!) and the rather silly looking monsters.

Gosh, has Star Trek been CRAP all these years? And nobody told me? Sob Sob.

JR

#58 of 387 OFFLINE   Jack Briggs

Jack Briggs

    Executive Producer



  • 16,725 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 03 1999

Posted August 29 2006 - 08:09 AM

Dave: For the record, even colorizing Citizen Cane would not help it out. If they went in and added color, new digital characters, and new sfx, then I might attempt to view it again. Otherwise I will never watch it again. That was not a good example for me.


You might try spelling the film's title correctly: Citizen Kane. You know, with a "k." And your unwillingness to watch black-and-white films says more about you than it does about the films.

#59 of 387 OFFLINE   Zack Gibbs

Zack Gibbs

    Screenwriter



  • 1,687 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 15 2005

Posted August 29 2006 - 09:10 AM

John H Ross wrote

"If there's no benefit going to HD with Trek there's a simple solution: don't go to HD! Gosh, that was easy... and cheap! AND we get Trek as it was originally shown and the way we've enjoyed it for so, so, so many years. Integrity is retained. The galaxy is safe."


Exactly, that's the point we're trying to make. If you don't want the new special effects you're in luck because you don't have to get them, and you've already got the original series in a pristine format fully preserving the original state of the show.

So why are you in here complaining about it?
"Because he's the hero that Gotham deserves, but not the one it needs right now... and so we'll hunt him... because he can take it... because he's not a hero... he's a silent guardian, a watchful protector... a DARK KNIGHT."

#60 of 387 OFFLINE   JoSAN

JoSAN

    Second Unit



  • 433 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 08 2004

Posted August 29 2006 - 09:46 AM

.


Back to TV on DVD and Blu-ray



Forum Nav Content I Follow