The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
I just watched Birthright, and I'm amazed that after watching all of DS9 and most of TNG, there's still an episode that can make me hate Klingon culture even more. And surely there's an easier way to make WMDs in the Star Trek universe than Starship Mine?
I just watched Birthright, and I'm amazed that after watching all of DS9 and most of TNG, there's still an episode that can make me hate Klingon culture even more. And surely there's an easier way to make WMDs in the Star Trek universe than Starship Mine?
Oh, surely. Just like if you have access to weapons-grade pathogens, or several pounds of plutonium or enriched uranium, or other highly-refined substances that governments try to keep very close tabs on...
If you don't have any of those, you're basically stuck with a truckload of fertilizer and gasoline siphoning the trilithium resin out of a warp engine.
(Though it still implies that most civilian vessels don't use antimatter to power their warp drives, as making a crude bomb out of an antideuterium container is trivial - just rig some way of cutting the power or making a small hole in it.)
Speaking of TNG remaster. Can anyone confirm which version is on Netflix in the US currently? I've toyed with the idea of a rewatch or at least revisit some of my favorite episodes but I'd probably only bother if I had access to the remastered versions as I'd kind of like to check those out.
I'm left to wonder is if what's holding DS9 back from a HD remaster is that the effects in the second half of the series are CG rather than practical, and re-compositing them would be cost prohibitive.
I'm left to wonder is if what's holding DS9 back from a HD remaster is that the effects in the second half of the series are CG rather than practical, and re-compositing them would be cost prohibitive.
The big thing is cost. TOS was done because there were "only" 78 episodes and they used it as a showcase. TNG got done because it is super popular and remains one of, if not the most successful first run syndicated show ever, and the fans constantly support it by continuing to buy it.
DS9 and Voyager will likely never see the remastered treatment because they didn't have the same following, and the likely sales on any remastered versions won't cover the costs to do it for the 150ish episodes of each.
I'm left to wonder is if what's holding DS9 back from a HD remaster is that the effects in the second half of the series are CG rather than practical, and re-compositing them would be cost prohibitive.
Yeah, they pretty much did everything with CG in DS9 while TNG was mostly models and they still had the green screen footage on original film.
I have always felt that Star Trek works better as a TV-Series than big movies. The themes of the setting deserve slow burns.
That aside, I loved Beyond. Got a little dust in my eyes at the end.
yea, Trek movies and Trek TV are two different Treks and really should be treated that way. Whenever they try to do a movie that feels like a longer episode of Trek it gets panned (Insurrection being the biggest notable here), and whenever they just do an action pew-pew-pew blockbuster type film, many people go "This isn't star trek!" hard to have it both ways.
And also, it's weird, my movie theatre was really dusty right by the end of the movie as well.
edit - to be fair I don't know why in the year of our lord 2016, with new vanilla forum technology, we can't just let threads go on for infinity pages
I'm not a mod nor would I dream of speaking for one, but I *believe* the answer is that it's kind of a forum tradition with pragmatic benefits. The New Thread start over is easier to approach and a bit less daunting to reset every so often than having people try to wade into 200-500+ page monstrosities that some would build into over time. It can be an opportunity to have some contentious matters from previous editions fade a little, and also a fresh start for users who might have been given a time out in this incarnations (again; not a mod, but presumably someone who has been banned from X thread would be permitted in the X2 thread, as long as they behaved themselves).
So there are a couple of benefits, and I don't think there are many massive detriments. If we're really concerned we could keep links to the old threads in the OP, as some multi-thread conversations do.
First they came for the Muslims, and we said NOT TODAY, MOTHERFUCKER!
Somewhere out there, there's an alternate dimension where DS9 got the Bluray/HD treatment.
Would that make it look particularly awesome? You're still dealing with standard-resolution source material.
it was filmed on film, as was TNG, hence TNG now looks amazing as would DS9
edit - remaster business:
TNG is INCREDIBLY popular and CBS thought the remasters would sell quite well
they did not sell nearly as well as they had hoped, DS9 will most likely never be remastered based on current sales projections, let alone voyager. (maybe if they weren't price so ludicrously high.....)
TNG was never shot in widescreen, it was always shot and framed for 4:3. In the season one remaster they talk about it, because it was shot on film the actual negative has a ton of more data in it, it would be easy to reframe the image to be widescreen but because it wasn't framed for it tons of stuff is in the edges that would show up on screen (camera equipment, mics, etc), and there would be things cut off from the top and bottom, again because of how it was framed. Also all the Effects were done for 4:3 so if a ship was flying by they wouldn't have the sides of it for all the practical effects, etc.
but man, as long as you are fine with 4:3 the remastered TNG episodes are glorious, the colours are so vibrant, it's amazing.
Hardtarget on
0
HardtargetThere Are Four LightsVancouverRegistered Userregular
I imagine also redoing the effects depends on how much of the source files were saved. I know B5 lost a lot of theirs so redoing effects (especially mixing actors and CGI) just didn't make sense when they did the DVD release.
specifially for the 4:3 to 16:9 stuff, there are a couple examples of things that were originally framed for 4:3 and then released later on in 16:9. It goes badly.
the best example I can remember is Buffy, where if you watch Seasons 1 or 2 in a widescreen presentation in some shots you can see part of the sets, things like lighting and scaffolding and marks where things/people are supposed to go. It actually hurts it a lot to the point that watching in 4:3 is so much better.
I imagine also redoing the effects depends on how much of the source files were saved. I know B5 lost a lot of theirs so redoing effects (especially mixing actors and CGI) just didn't make sense when they did the DVD release.
the nice thing about not having a HD release of B5 means that hopefully nobody ever has to watch that garbage and can instead just rewatch DS9 forever.
+1
HardtargetThere Are Four LightsVancouverRegistered Userregular
also, if you're curious about the difference the restoration actually made here's a great video showcasing it from All Good Things
I was surprised recently, watching TNG on Amazon Prime, that the set design from seasons 5-7 actually looks a lot similar to the "too clean" look I associate with Voyager. Seasons 1 and 2 look a lot like the original series. The design of the show really seems to peak in seasons 3-5, and I assume budget stuff probably started to cut into what they wanted to do later on. Maybe it was being a kid or the blurry CRT, but I actually remember a lot of detail that never existed apparently. My mind just kind of filled in the blanks. Every once in awhile you hit a scene they obviously couldn't remaster, and its jarring how blurry it looks in comparison to the rest of show. Its a testament to the effects artists that almost all the makeup holds up in HD 20-30 years later.
I really liked some of the early "lost human colony" plots that I think I missed back in the day. Towards the end of the run, the show treats the galaxy as a lot smaller and pedestrian, some of that wonder from the early seasons gets lost. I forget what critic I was watching review Beyond, but he said something like "I get it. Its a starship flying around the galaxy, there's only so much you can do with that." And I immediately thought, "what the hell are you talking about? Do you know how big the galaxy is? You can do ANYTHING with that." I think the movies follow well worn "Star Trek" plots because you just can't get too weird or you lose people and end up with The Motion Picture. Like Star Wars, people know what they want from Star Trek, and if you deviate from the formula you have to be very careful about how you do it, or you lose accessibility.
0
HardtargetThere Are Four LightsVancouverRegistered Userregular
Every once in awhile you hit a scene they obviously couldn't remaster, and its jarring how blurry it looks in comparison to the rest of show.
I believe at this point they've found all film footage of some of the scenes they were only able to find VHS masters for. Sadly the blu-rays will never been rerelease since that would be insane but apparently the netflix versions will have these couple of episodes fixed.
(we're talking like less than 30 minutes of footage total through throughout the run of 7 seasons, anything else you are noticing is just the way it is and not to do with the remaster)
specifially for the 4:3 to 16:9 stuff, there are a couple examples of things that were originally framed for 4:3 and then released later on in 16:9. It goes badly.
the best example I can remember is Buffy, where if you watch Seasons 1 or 2 in a widescreen presentation in some shots you can see part of the sets, things like lighting and scaffolding and marks where things/people are supposed to go. It actually hurts it a lot to the point that watching in 4:3 is so much better.
I'm happy they kept the original aspect ratio for the TNG remaster. I bet there was an exec or two who was like 'you gotta get rid of these black bars!' that they had to fight.
TNG was never shot in widescreen, it was always shot and framed for 4:3. In the season one remaster they talk about it, because it was shot on film the actual negative has a ton of more data in it, it would be easy to reframe the image to be widescreen but because it wasn't framed for it tons of stuff is in the edges that would show up on screen (camera equipment, mics, etc), and there would be things cut off from the top and bottom, again because of how it was framed. Also all the Effects were done for 4:3 so if a ship was flying by they wouldn't have the sides of it for all the practical effects, etc.
but man, as long as you are fine with 4:3 the remastered TNG episodes are glorious, the colours are so vibrant, it's amazing.
A lot of TNG, especially effects shots and panning shots were shot in Cinemascope which is 2:1 and later pan and scanned to 4:3
specifially for the 4:3 to 16:9 stuff, there are a couple examples of things that were originally framed for 4:3 and then released later on in 16:9. It goes badly.
the best example I can remember is Buffy, where if you watch Seasons 1 or 2 in a widescreen presentation in some shots you can see part of the sets, things like lighting and scaffolding and marks where things/people are supposed to go. It actually hurts it a lot to the point that watching in 4:3 is so much better.
I'm happy they kept the original aspect ratio for the TNG remaster. I bet there was an exec or two who was like 'you gotta get rid of these black bars!' that they had to fight.
And I've seen some posts on /r/startrek from people starting it on Netflix and complaining about the aspect ratio, which I guess is why HBO fucked up The Wire Blu-rays.
I imagine also redoing the effects depends on how much of the source files were saved. I know B5 lost a lot of theirs so redoing effects (especially mixing actors and CGI) just didn't make sense when they did the DVD release.
the nice thing about not having a HD release of B5 means that hopefully nobody ever has to watch that garbage and can instead just rewatch DS9 forever.
Both are fine shows. B5 is not garbage. I think it sticks its landing better than DS9 but both are immensely enjoyable shows with more good episodes than bad and large overarching plots that weren't previously done on television. B5 certainly did more with what small limited budget they had. I may be feeling overly defensive of B5 since I just found out Jerry Doyle passed away a few days ago.
B5 never had any of those terrible Ferengi episodes, and DS9 didn't have "Grey 17 Is Missing".
Both did great things with their very talented cast that even made some of the clunkier scenes still worth watching.
Yeah what the fuck.. I LOVE DS9, but Babylon 5 is an amazing show that does an overarching plot line in a time TV really didn't do that.
B5 deservey to be watched, it's one of the really good SF Series brought on TV. Kinda like farscape, people dismiss it nowadays because of the effects- Farscape because of the "puppets". B5 because of the "Cheap 3D graphics"
But both are amazing series that any SF fan really should watch
+14
Mr_Rose83 Blue Ridge Protects the HolyRegistered Userregular
Yeah, I kinda really want a HD Farscape. Because that show was awesome. Perfect blend of Star Trek, Star Wars, and Doctor Who, unfortunately released upon a world that was not yet ready for it.
Yeah, I kinda really want a HD Farscape. Because that show was awesome. Perfect blend of Star Trek, Star Wars, and Doctor Who, unfortunately released upon a world that was not yet ready for it.
Well yeah, but at least was finished nicely with those 4 movies. I also was guilty of underappreciating the series when it was new.. I only watched it years later and boy was my face red
Yeah, I kinda really want a HD Farscape. Because that show was awesome. Perfect blend of Star Trek, Star Wars, and Doctor Who, unfortunately released upon a world that was not yet ready for it.
Yeah, I kinda really want a HD Farscape. Because that show was awesome. Perfect blend of Star Trek, Star Wars, and Doctor Who, unfortunately released upon a world that was not yet ready for it.
yes please.
Ah, good ol' Harvey. I'd say its more Fifth Element than Star Wars personally. Parts of Season 1 are hella rough, but if you get through that, it is a ride.
Posts
also these:
and these:
and yes, even these:
T'Pol's expression is priceless.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f0Rm0x73oD4
Oh, surely. Just like if you have access to weapons-grade pathogens, or several pounds of plutonium or enriched uranium, or other highly-refined substances that governments try to keep very close tabs on...
If you don't have any of those, you're basically stuck with a truckload of fertilizer and gasoline siphoning the trilithium resin out of a warp engine.
(Though it still implies that most civilian vessels don't use antimatter to power their warp drives, as making a crude bomb out of an antideuterium container is trivial - just rig some way of cutting the power or making a small hole in it.)
I'm sure there was a price tag on those lips
Would that make it look particularly awesome? You're still dealing with standard-resolution source material.
From what I've seen of the TNG Bluray, it looks appreciably better.
Yeah, wasn't TNG originally shot in wide screen then cut down to 4:3 later? Pretty sure I read something to that effect.
Well they also re-did a lot of the starship/planet bits with new graphics, that goes a long way.
PSN : Bolthorn
I never finish anyth
The big thing is cost. TOS was done because there were "only" 78 episodes and they used it as a showcase. TNG got done because it is super popular and remains one of, if not the most successful first run syndicated show ever, and the fans constantly support it by continuing to buy it.
DS9 and Voyager will likely never see the remastered treatment because they didn't have the same following, and the likely sales on any remastered versions won't cover the costs to do it for the 150ish episodes of each.
That aside, I loved Beyond. Got a little dust in my eyes at the end.
Critical Failures - Havenhold Campaign • August St. Cloud (Human Ranger)
Yeah, they pretty much did everything with CG in DS9 while TNG was mostly models and they still had the green screen footage on original film.
yea, Trek movies and Trek TV are two different Treks and really should be treated that way. Whenever they try to do a movie that feels like a longer episode of Trek it gets panned (Insurrection being the biggest notable here), and whenever they just do an action pew-pew-pew blockbuster type film, many people go "This isn't star trek!" hard to have it both ways.
And also, it's weird, my movie theatre was really dusty right by the end of the movie as well.
I'm not a mod nor would I dream of speaking for one, but I *believe* the answer is that it's kind of a forum tradition with pragmatic benefits. The New Thread start over is easier to approach and a bit less daunting to reset every so often than having people try to wade into 200-500+ page monstrosities that some would build into over time. It can be an opportunity to have some contentious matters from previous editions fade a little, and also a fresh start for users who might have been given a time out in this incarnations (again; not a mod, but presumably someone who has been banned from X thread would be permitted in the X2 thread, as long as they behaved themselves).
So there are a couple of benefits, and I don't think there are many massive detriments. If we're really concerned we could keep links to the old threads in the OP, as some multi-thread conversations do.
Have to wait until September for the Chicago one. I'm super stoked to meet Andy Robinson.
it was filmed on film, as was TNG, hence TNG now looks amazing as would DS9
edit - remaster business:
TNG is INCREDIBLY popular and CBS thought the remasters would sell quite well
they did not sell nearly as well as they had hoped, DS9 will most likely never be remastered based on current sales projections, let alone voyager. (maybe if they weren't price so ludicrously high.....)
TNG was never shot in widescreen, it was always shot and framed for 4:3. In the season one remaster they talk about it, because it was shot on film the actual negative has a ton of more data in it, it would be easy to reframe the image to be widescreen but because it wasn't framed for it tons of stuff is in the edges that would show up on screen (camera equipment, mics, etc), and there would be things cut off from the top and bottom, again because of how it was framed. Also all the Effects were done for 4:3 so if a ship was flying by they wouldn't have the sides of it for all the practical effects, etc.
but man, as long as you are fine with 4:3 the remastered TNG episodes are glorious, the colours are so vibrant, it's amazing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m6xkXGZSdWE
the best example I can remember is Buffy, where if you watch Seasons 1 or 2 in a widescreen presentation in some shots you can see part of the sets, things like lighting and scaffolding and marks where things/people are supposed to go. It actually hurts it a lot to the point that watching in 4:3 is so much better.
the nice thing about not having a HD release of B5 means that hopefully nobody ever has to watch that garbage and can instead just rewatch DS9 forever.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U8vS72uk8GM
This is the very last episode of TNG, the one in which it would have looked "best" on broadcast. The different is still staggering.
The only negative thing I can say is that you really notice how some of the make up work was probably meant for SD :P
Data looks like a painted human rather than an android more often than in SD..
I really liked some of the early "lost human colony" plots that I think I missed back in the day. Towards the end of the run, the show treats the galaxy as a lot smaller and pedestrian, some of that wonder from the early seasons gets lost. I forget what critic I was watching review Beyond, but he said something like "I get it. Its a starship flying around the galaxy, there's only so much you can do with that." And I immediately thought, "what the hell are you talking about? Do you know how big the galaxy is? You can do ANYTHING with that." I think the movies follow well worn "Star Trek" plots because you just can't get too weird or you lose people and end up with The Motion Picture. Like Star Wars, people know what they want from Star Trek, and if you deviate from the formula you have to be very careful about how you do it, or you lose accessibility.
(we're talking like less than 30 minutes of footage total through throughout the run of 7 seasons, anything else you are noticing is just the way it is and not to do with the remaster)
A lot of TNG, especially effects shots and panning shots were shot in Cinemascope which is 2:1 and later pan and scanned to 4:3
Both are fine shows. B5 is not garbage. I think it sticks its landing better than DS9 but both are immensely enjoyable shows with more good episodes than bad and large overarching plots that weren't previously done on television. B5 certainly did more with what small limited budget they had. I may be feeling overly defensive of B5 since I just found out Jerry Doyle passed away a few days ago.
B5 never had any of those terrible Ferengi episodes, and DS9 didn't have "Grey 17 Is Missing".
Both did great things with their very talented cast that even made some of the clunkier scenes still worth watching.
PSN : Bolthorn
B5 deservey to be watched, it's one of the really good SF Series brought on TV. Kinda like farscape, people dismiss it nowadays because of the effects- Farscape because of the "puppets". B5 because of the "Cheap 3D graphics"
But both are amazing series that any SF fan really should watch
Nintendo Network ID: AzraelRose
DropBox invite link - get 500MB extra free.
Well yeah, but at least was finished nicely with those 4 movies. I also was guilty of underappreciating the series when it was new.. I only watched it years later and boy was my face red
Ah, good ol' Harvey. I'd say its more Fifth Element than Star Wars personally. Parts of Season 1 are hella rough, but if you get through that, it is a ride.