[starman]

Trek fans know what I'm talking about. This week, Star Trek's newest and most anticipated remastered show will be on.

Here's a pic of what CBS-Digital has done with the show:

Before:


After:


More info and video preview:

Trek Movie Report | Star Trek XI news, rumors, info and downloads

Here's a direct link to the video preview:
http://www.startrek.com/videouploads...35-hd/300k.mov

[Dakar²]

This is the one with Decker, correct? I believe I saw it aired a few months ago. The new Machine takes a little getting used to.

PS: 2 threads in 2 days... nice to see you back.

[Severed Hand of Skywalker]

Looks tight. Scary thing is much of TNG could use new effects also.

[Dakar²]

Originally Posted by Severed Hand of Skywalker 

Looks tight. Scary thing is much of TNG could use new effects also.

Yeah, such things happen when you start in '86. Those first two season were the worst.

[Severed Hand of Skywalker]

Originally Posted by Dakar² 

Yeah, such things happen when you start in '86. Those first two season were the worst.

From what I heard ILM did the effects for the pilot and then the same shots got re-used over and over for the first few seasons until they did it in-house or contracted it to someone else. Even then they stuck with physical models of ships until ST: Insurection (I think) when they made a digital Enterprise E.

You can tell which are ILM shots though as they are pretty blurry and bad.

[Dakar²]

Yeah, it was obvious they had about 10 stock shots they reused. I thin it was around the third or fourth season they built a new smaller more detailed model to create new shots with.

[Severed Hand of Skywalker]

Originally Posted by Dakar² 

Yeah, it was obvious they had about 10 stock shots they reused. I thin it was around the third or fourth season they built a new smaller more detailed model to create new shots with.

I remember even Voyager started off with models but in later seasons there were a number of shots that looked to good to be model so I think they began to mix models and CGI when needed.

AFAIK Enterprise was all digital.

Anyone know what BSG is? It must be all digital even though it doesn't look it (in a bad sense).

[goMac]

Originally Posted by Severed Hand of Skywalker 

Anyone know what BSG is? It must be all digital even though it doesn't look it (in a bad sense).

It's all digital. There was even a story on the podcast about how the digital effects department ran a "save the Pegasus campaign" when they were ordered to destroy it.

[mitchell_pgh]

wow, some of those shots on the video looked very bad... even for digital.

Why won't they use models. I was flipping through and found Star Wars on this past weekend... and some of the visuals from 1977 look great even today. You can't tell me that blending models and CGI is the way to go.

[ghporter]

The original "The Doomsday Machine" effects for the Constellation were done (literally) with an AMT Enterprise model kit and a lighter. I can't cite a specific page, but I think that's in "The World of Star Trek" by David Gerrold.

This might just get me to stay up Saturday night and watch the episode on SciFi!

[Dakar²]

Originally Posted by ghporter 

The original "The Doomsday Machine" effects for the Constellation were done (literally) with an AMT Enterprise model kit and a lighter.

Oh its confirmed in the Star Trek Encyclopedia. All their extra models were AMT miniatures. You'll also note their NCC numbers were variations of 1701 as well.

[Gossamer]

Originally Posted by Dakar² 

Oh its confirmed in the Star Trek Encyclopedia. All their extra models were AMT miniatures. You'll also note their NCC numbers were variations of 1701 as well.

Nerd.

[starman]

The AMT model kits had registry numbers and names for all 13 ships in the fleet.

So nyah.

[Dakar²]

Originally Posted by Gossamer 

Nerd.

The worst part is I watch a little bit or Trek very intermittently, so this all 10+ old info that stuck in my head.

[Dakar²]

Originally Posted by starman 

The AMT model kits had registry numbers and names for all 13 ships in the fleet.

So nyah.

Eh?

[ghporter]

Originally Posted by starman 

The AMT model kits had registry numbers and names for all 13 ships in the fleet.

So nyah.

The FIRST AMT model only had Enterprise and 1701. It wasn't until the second or third release that the BIG set of decals came out. There were a bunch of variations on that decal sheet too-typeface, size, density and so on changed from time to time. When they made "Doomsday Machine" they only had the very first model version.

Oh, and it looks like I CAN'T stay up and watch this on Sci Fi-it's not on their schedule and I don't have their premium service. Rats!

[Severed Hand of Skywalker]

Originally Posted by mitchell_pgh 

Why won't they use models.

It is like comparing film camera's to digital ones for the most part.

CG is faster, cheaper and more flexible.

Models are more realistic and detailed if done right. The best way to do it is combining the two as the new Star Wars', and Starship troopers did.

[Severed Hand of Skywalker]

Originally Posted by goMac 

It's all digital. There was even a story on the podcast about how the digital effects department ran a "save the Pegasus campaign" when they were ordered to destroy it.

So what was the outcome? They backed it up to a floppy?

[goMac]

Originally Posted by Severed Hand of Skywalker 

So what was the outcome? They backed it up to a floppy?

Hah.

Ronald Moore went over and talked to them after they put up a "Save Pegasus" banner in their windows and told them Pegasus had to go.

[climber]

I kind of liked the old cheesy special effects. Am I alone?

[Dakar²]

Originally Posted by climber 

I kind of liked the old cheesy special effects. Am I alone?

Somewhat. I like that Okuda took the time to make sure he didn't overslick them (like the Deathstars explosion in Star Wars).

He even went so far as to add film grain so they fit in with the rest of the show better.

[mitchell_pgh]

Originally Posted by Severed Hand of Skywalker 

It is like comparing film camera's to digital ones for the most part.

CG is faster, cheaper and more flexible.

Models are more realistic and detailed if done right. The best way to do it is combining the two as the new Star Wars', and Starship troopers did.

I thought the new Star Wars were of a poor quality. EVERYTHING looked CGI to me... way too clean, etc. etc.

Starship Troopers was AMAZING! Even now... 11 years later, they look solid.

[Dakar²]

Originally Posted by mitchell_pgh 

I thought the new Star Wars were of a poor quality. EVERYTHING looked CGI to me... way too clean, etc. etc.

This reminds me of their boasts that so much % of the movie was CGI, and all I could think is, "yeah, and it looks it, too."

[Severed Hand of Skywalker]

Originally Posted by climber 

I kind of liked the old cheesy special effects. Am I alone?

Yes. They make me feel barfy. Literally.

[mitchell_pgh]

Originally Posted by climber 

I kind of liked the old cheesy special effects. Am I alone?

Not at all, but there is always the "what if" factor that will probably make me watch the show.

Good special effects can withstand the test of time.

[Dakar²]

Originally Posted by starman 

T

I just realized something. Why is the second picture in 16:9?

[mitchell_pgh]

Originally Posted by Dakar² 

This reminds me of their boasts that so much % of the movie was CGI, and all I could think is, "yeah, and it looks it, too."

They weren't horrible, and there were some really good parts, but I think a few models would have gone a LONG way.

I just wonder how amazing the movies would have been if they would have gone back and shot them in the original late 1970's style... [I know, I know... Lucas would never do that].

Oh well...

[Dakar²]

Originally Posted by mitchell_pgh 

They weren't horrible, and there were some really good parts, but I think a few models would have gone a LONG way..

It's the infinite CG sets that killed me. The ending of Episode II was CG-rrific.

[mitchell_pgh]

Originally Posted by goMac 

It's all digital. There was even a story on the podcast about how the digital effects department ran a "save the Pegasus campaign" when they were ordered to destroy it.

Is "save the Pegasus campaign" a reference to Battlestar Galactica?

[climber]

Originally Posted by mitchell_pgh 

Is "save the Pegasus campaign" a reference to Battlestar Galactica?

Yes

[ort888]

Originally Posted by climber 

I kind of liked the old cheesy special effects. Am I alone?

No, you are not alone. I HATE it when things like this happen.

HATE HATE HATE

Give me the original any day. Flaws and all.

[mitchell_pgh]

Originally Posted by ort888 

No, you are not alone. I HATE it when things like this happen.

HATE HATE HATE

Give me the original any day. Flaws and all.

I have no problem with it... as long as you offer the original. I couldn't believe what Lucas did with Star Wars. Only giving a few versions... years after a new format was out...

[ort888]

I'll give you that. Offer easy access to either version and there is no reason to complain.

I guess the only person who has really screwed this up is George Lucas. Both with Star Wars and THX-1138.

Still, as a general rule, I don't like stuff like this. It seems sacrilegious. Should we go back and remake everything every 20 years? What will we be left with? Whitewashed, digitized and sanitized versions of classics. I'm much more interested in seeing what a previous generation was able to accomplish with their technology than seeing mine paint over history without any regard.

[Severed Hand of Skywalker]

Originally Posted by mitchell_pgh 

Is "save the Pegasus campaign" a reference to Battlestar Galactica?

No the flying horse.

[Dakar²]

Originally Posted by ort888 

Still, as a general rule, I don't like stuff like this. It seems sacrilegious. Should we go back and remake everything every 20 years?

More like update. I'll take a SFX update over this stuff getting remade with new hi-tech sets, actors, etc.

Originally Posted by ort888 

What will we be left with? Whitewashed, digitized and sanitized versions of classics.

As someone else noted, no need to bury the old versions.

Originally Posted by ort888 

I'm much more interested in seeing what a previous generation was able to accomplish with their technology than seeing mine paint over history without any regard.

I can't say I'm all too interested in the technical achievements of the show. Its not like it was central to its charm. They merely were what they were capable of at the time.

[Dakar²]

dp.

[starman]

Originally Posted by Dakar² 

I just realized something. Why is the second picture in 16:9?

They're redoing the show in 16x9. That's the aspect ratio the show is in when you download it from Xbox Live.

[starman]

Originally Posted by ort888 

Still, as a general rule, I don't like stuff like this. It seems sacrilegious. Should we go back and remake everything every 20 years? What will we be left with? Whitewashed, digitized and sanitized versions of classics. I'm much more interested in seeing what a previous generation was able to accomplish with their technology than seeing mine paint over history without any regard.

When they remastered the 35mm print for HD they found that the special effects were terrible. You get pristine live action and dirty, grainy effects. So, what would you do? You have two choices: update the effects or keep them the way they were which will look SO bad on HDTVs that people won't buy them.

[Dakar²]

Originally Posted by starman 

They're redoing the show in 16x9. That's the aspect ratio the show is in when you download it from Xbox Live.

So does that mean they're cropping the frames?

[starman]

Originally Posted by Dakar² 

So does that mean they're cropping the frames?

Nobody knows for sure yet, but it seems like the only way to do it. Right now, when you downlodad the show, the effects are 16x9, the live action is 4x3 pillarboxed. There's talk that the HD-DVDs this year will have it all 16x9 with as little information cropped as they can manage, but who knows?

[Dakar²]

I can't say I'd be supportive of them cropping the frames. There's no real need to make it 16:9.

[starman]

I'd have to see how bad it is. It's too bad we don't have the technology to add info to the sides.

[ort888]

Call me a purist, but I still say leave it alone. The redone digital effects in the classic Star Wars movies stood out and were completely distracting. It's an insult to the work of the model masters and artists of yesteryear to replace their hard work with digital effects.

[Dakar²]

Originally Posted by ort888 

Call me a purist, but I still say leave it alone. The redone digital effects in the classic Star Wars movies stood out and were completely distracting.

As I noted, this was done with the mindset of not going Liberace on the special effects. Basically they had a little more detail, and a few ne angles, but I'll tell you, I've wathced a few episodes and they were conservative and true to the spirit of what was trying to be achieved.

Originally Posted by ort888 

It's an insult to the work of the model masters and artists of yesteryear to replace their hard work with digital effects.

I don't buy that at all.

[ort888]

So lets say that your dad always talks about his favorite movie as a kid. He tells you how amazing it was when he saw it and how it changed his life.

You are at the rental store and see two versions of the movie. The original, and one that has all of the special effects replaced with modern digital graphics.

Which version do you choose to watch and why?

[Dakar²]

Originally Posted by ort888 

So lets say that your dad always talks about his favorite movie as a kid. He tells you how amazing it was when he saw it and how it changed his life.

You are at the rental store and see two versions of the movie. The original, and one that has all of the special effects replaced with modern digital graphics.

Which version do you choose to watch and why?

I think it depends. I'm the kind of person who would love to see old Transformers cartoons re-rendered in CG. I'm the kind of person that can't watch some of my favorite old cartoons (Thundercats, He-Man) because the voice acting is horrific. I'm the kind of person who'd want to try both and decide.

[starman]

Originally Posted by ort888 

So lets say that your dad always talks about his favorite movie as a kid. He tells you how amazing it was when he saw it and how it changed his life.

You are at the rental store and see two versions of the movie. The original, and one that has all of the special effects replaced with modern digital graphics.

Which version do you choose to watch and why?

Neither, I show my 35mm print

[Severed Hand of Skywalker]

I remember back in early 2000 when HD was taking off I knew something like this would happen eventually.

In fact I was thinking that by 2015ish they will have some masterful way of taking TNG episodes and re-mastering them in HD 16:9 by either cropping out the actors from the background and having a CG set to make up the edges of the set that weren't seen. Years after that they will probably master it as a hologram or something.

[Dakar²]

I don't think it'd bring in enough money to offset the cost.

[Severed Hand of Skywalker]

Originally Posted by Dakar² 

I don't think it'd bring in enough money to offset the cost.

Heck in the future your iPod will do it for you on the fly