Star Trek TNG on BluRay confirmed ! — Page 3

Jay said:

Regarding the effects shots, it looks like they're going back to the original film elements for the models, but the CG is still a mystery. My hope is that they provide higher-res effects that are faithful to the original (same look, just rendered at 1080p). I don't see what else they could do; including the original effects isn't an option unless they take the same route Universal did with Firefly, and that didn't provide very good results in my opinion. It's painfully obvious when the uprezzed shots kick in.

I don't think updated effects that are faithful to the original CG are at odds with the purpose behind ot.com. In the case of Star Wars, all the original effects exist on film for remastering. Older TV shows shot on film but using CG effects rendered at 480i don't have a clear-cut path to HD, and certain compromises will have to be made.

This.

Warbler said:

bkev said:

Warb, the blu-rays would be useless unless Gaff already has a widescreen TV thanks to how blu-rays encode video information. Frankly it's absolutely atrocious compared to DVD, it's so awful I can't explain it other than by saying 4:3 picture is pillarboxed into a 16:9 frame on old TVs. So you get the full image, but it doesn't take up all the vertical space on your TV.

when did Gaff ever say he didn't have a widescreen tv?   If he doesn't have one, perhaps its time to get one.   The prices are coming down on them, I think.      As for the 4:3 picture being pllarboxed into the 16:9 frame on old tvs, I believe at least some blu-ray players have setting where you can have the sides of the 16:9 picture cut off instead of having the 4:3 picture pillarboxed.   Of course I could be all wrong about that.  I've never tried using a blu ray player with a standard 4:3 tv.  

Most TVs can do that too.  All it's doing is zooming in on the image, which now cuts off the top and bottom of the picture, so you're losing the tops of peoples heads and burned in subtitles.

Lesser of two evils.

Ironic that the film elements when scanned for star wars opticals yield a better quality image than the effects stuck at 1080P done in 2004.

Just think in the future Attack of the Clones and Revenge of the Sith will have to be uprezed from 1080P in terms of being shot on video and the effects as well.

You can have 4k projection for the 4 films, but Lucas shot the last 2 movies as videos.

Warbler said:

I thought he shot Attack of the Clones and Revenge of the sith at 4k resolution?

Not for long!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gGHbZIL7sTw&feature=related

Trekcore.com has got a article thingy about the blu-ray thing.

http://tng.trekcore.com/bluray/index.html

STAR TREK THE NEXT GENERATION REMASTERED COMPARISON

Click Here

I never thought it could look so good!  I think they may have overdone the new computer effects though.  Of course, I understand the need for them - true HD is important - but I can tell the difference.  I was hoping I wouldn't be able to.

What you're seeing is the clarity of the original film.  TNG was shot on film, FX and all, but edited on standard def 480p video.  They're not adding CG detail and FX, they're just getting back what was lost in the first place.

I was under the impression that the 480p computer effects were being redone... look at those effects and tell me they don't look retouched, specifically at 0:11 in FF's video.

The only computer FX they had then were mostly animated elements - phasers, shields, transporters, generally anything "electrical energy based" - and maybe an LCARS display here and there.  There were a couple of holographic map/planet elements used in "The Last Outpost" and "Contagion", but I don't remember too much beyond that.  Those would be the only other things that might have to be re-done with modern CG.

Remember, we're talking about 1986 to 1994 here.  The Genesis planet animation in Trek II and "The Last Starfighter" were state of the art only a couple of years before, and "T2" and "Jurassic Park" only showed up in 1991 to 1992 and at the time were way beyond a TV show budget and schedule.  In general, Trek TV didn't start to use CG on a regular basis until about halfway thru Voyager, around '98 or '99.

Meh.  Hate to keep raining on this parade, but I still don't see the point of redoing the effects for HD anyway.  And some of those have been altered significantly.  And then there were a few live action shots that looked like the color palette had been greatly altered.  I find myself very wary, especially in regards to what will become of the original effects shots.

Gaffer Tape said:

I find myself very wary, especially in regards to what will become of the original effects shots.

I'm just not sure I see how completely redoing the effects from the ground up is "restoration rather than alteration."  Certainly seems like the very definition of alteration to me.  And if the original work is only going to end up being relegated to old, eventually out-of-print DVDs that can only be found used, how is that any different from George's line of, "The originals are out there on VHS, if anyone wants them"?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't the TOS Blu-ray's contain both versions? Couldn't they do the same for TNG?

That's what I'm trying to find out.  The TOS Blu-rays do indeed.  If that's the case with TNG, then great, more power to them, not that I would probably ever bother to watch the redone stuff (although I'm still concerned about what looks like an altered color palette).