Comments»

1. Oscar Benjamin - December 6, 2006

I believe this is the best revisualization yet!!! My initial skepticism is now starting to fade. Keep it up!! We will get more fans yet!

2. Laserlover2254 - December 6, 2006

Wow, great!

The Special Edition IS good for some things, after all!

3. MichaelT - December 6, 2006

OMG… an amazing shot. Texture, depth…. wow.
Not even Josh’s thesarus can do it justice.

4. Jordan - December 6, 2006

The new version is definitely better than the old. Wow!

5. MichaelT - December 6, 2006

oops… thesaurus….

6. Anthony Pascale - December 6, 2006

lets face it, the original shot was not their finest hour. I know the CBS guys were really excited to get a chance to make a great new shot and really improve the show (thats right all you purists…I said ‘improve’…so eat it)

7. Imrahil - December 6, 2006

Oh my GOD that looks cool….holy crap on a stick. The Fesarius doth rock my world.

8. Daniel Shock - December 6, 2006

Man…I didn’t think it would be possible to both stick so close to the original design AND make it look like a real alien craft. So very cool

9. Jim J - December 6, 2006

Good to see people feeling good about this. I think it looks great. Thanks for posting it, Anthony! ;-)

10. DB - December 6, 2006

Based on that single shot, I don’t like it.

The original had the virtue of being somewhat indistinct, at least. This image is pin-sharp, and the lack of any surface detail below a certain size on the thing defeats any attempt at persuasively establishing scale.

It simply looks like a small model enlarged relative to the Enterprise. In this case, for the reason stated above among others, I prefer the original.

11. Scott of the Morgites - December 6, 2006

Waaaaaaaaay Kewl !!!!!!!

12. Lti - December 6, 2006

I wrote a post here which was extremely full of praise for this new version of the Fesarius. But for some reason it didnt post properly and it was deleted. So I am writting a new post with a different tact.

I have noticed that a lot of these new shots have replaced smooth spheres with geodesic domes.

It was done with the new matte in Devil in the Dark and has also been done here with the Fesarius. Now, while i personally dont think this is a problem, i am wondering whether it is representing quite a different design aesthetic to the originals.

13. Lti - December 6, 2006

With all due respect, I completely disagree with post #10. How the hell are u supposed to show scale if not by seeing the size of something relative to something else!

14. Drew - December 6, 2006

HOLY SHIT!!! WOW!!!

15. DB - December 6, 2006

“With all due respect, I completely disagree with post #10. How the hell are u supposed to show scale if not by seeing the size of something relative to something else!”

If I take a photograph of a Ken doll and photoshop it into a picture with a grown man so that it’s bigger the human being, can you not tell by looking that it’s been rescaled?

There’s more to effective scale than simply relative size.

16. MichaelT - December 6, 2006

I’ll take the new shot any day… detail and structure make this far superior to the enlarged button factory picture from the original.

17. Nelson - December 6, 2006

This is a very cool preview of the new Fresarius. I have been eagerly waiting what they would come up with! And what has been shown here looks quite nice. The faceted spheres goes a long way to add realism and detail. I can see that just domes might not be as visually interesting, translucent domes with lighting effects internally can be rather pedestian.

Re: pst 13 and 10- The only place I can agree that scale looks “off” is the black areas behind the domes. The smooth surfacing on those areas appears scale-less, or as said above, something enlarged up. But this is a still, I think a true assessment can’t be made until we see the moving image.

What catches my eye more is how the Enterprise looks. The rendering of it looks very plasticky. Again, it’s hard to tell from this still, so I defer till we see it this weekend. What I like is that the Fresarius is so big, that it makes sense the light coming off the Fresarius would bath the Enterprise in it’s light. And that is what I am reacting to.

Looks great so far, can’t wait to see it this weekend! I believe we are at a point now where the new effects are becoming transparent. After Space Seed, I stopped looking at the effects with so close an eye and just watch the story. Which is both a good thing and also a sign that the novelty is wearing off and so thus we stop focusing on it.

18. Eric Augst - December 6, 2006

Beautiful!

19. RAMA - December 6, 2006

This might be production artwork or a concept sketch, whether it is or not I approve of the design! My only question…what is the SOURCE??

RAMA

20. Chris - December 6, 2006

It looks like a sketch to me. I don’t like the surface detail.

21. senya cartel - December 6, 2006

I consider myself somewhat of a purist, but I admit this looks great.

There were somethings in the original that were excellent in the original, like the artist conception of the mining station on Delta Vega in WNMHGB.

But this was an example of something that needed improving. Another example of things that required improvement (badly) was anytime the Enterprise would encounter Klingons and we would never get to see the ***** ships!! Something else I enjoy about these remastered episodes.

22. RAMA - December 6, 2006

Being a “purist” is by no means something to be inherently proud of…the KKK and Nazis are also purists…however once we get past that nonsense we can get to the real crux of the matter…actual quality of these episodes. Glad to see senya is judging it on its own merits.

RAMA

23. Lti - December 6, 2006

in response to #15. There would be no way of knowing whether it was a giant Ken doll or a normal sized Ken doll that had just been enlarged and pasted into the picture.

24. RAMA - December 6, 2006

Just saw it on Startrek.com. It IS the digital version!

RAMA

25. An olde timey fan - December 6, 2006

See Olde Timey’s original Fessarius special effect clip at StarTrekHistory.com:

http://www.startrekhistory.com/restoration/SFX.html

In thirty years of owner that slide, I never noticed the technician’s image until I scanned it… Curt McAloney rescanned and processed the clip and was able to bring out a significant amount of detail from the darkness. He actually pulled out more, but did not want the tech’s image to look like a cut and paste job.

26. MichaelJohn - December 6, 2006

I always felt the original “christmas tree light” effect was one of the most fake looking from TOS. It probably looked fake to audiences in the mid sixties too!

Almost anything the guys and gals at CBS Digital would have done, including using colored balloons, would have been an improvement, but I’m glad that their final effect looks as good as it does.

Keep up the great work. I’m sold these on
“remastered” episodes!

Mike :o

27. Admiral Deem - December 6, 2006

I just hope the tranya looks like something besides OJ this time. Shaken, not stirred, of course.

28. MichaelJohn - December 6, 2006

Did anyone get to see the spoof of this episode on the Shatner Roast a few weeks back?

For the most part I found the roast to be more vulgar than funny, especially the incessant Sulu gay jokes, but it was hilarious to see Clint Howard revive the role of Balok- 40 years later! The guy looked creepy as a kid, and he still does as an adult! Pass the tranya…

Mike :o

29. darendoc - December 6, 2006

Well, it’s interesting. We’ll see when it moves. Isn’t there any color in space these days?

30. RAMA - December 6, 2006

Isn’t gold a color??

31. Norbert Steinert - December 6, 2006

Wonderful work. It looks fantastic!

32. Josh - December 7, 2006

I haven’t seen anyone mention it yet, but that looks HIGHLY alien.

Do my eyes decieve me or is that machinery visible beyond the plethora of geodesic domes on the surface?

Breathtakingly splendid and awe inspiring.

Dave Rossi did this one if memory serves.

You Sir are a DemiGod

33. Cranston - December 7, 2006

I’ve liked (and even loved) much of what’s been done in the Remastered project, but for some reason….I don’t particularly like this. I agree with DB — I prefer the original, at least based on this one image.

Don’t get me wrong — I think this picture looks fine — but it takes away the sort of “organic” feeling that the original did, by replacing something that’s all curves and spheres and replacing it with something that’s almost entirely straight lines. The original always felt like a big, pulsing, almost living thing. This looks more like Epcot Center.

I acknowledge that this is an aesthetic thing, and purely a matter of individual taste. At this stage, though, I’m a little disappointed.

I hope the episode changes my mind, though. One of my favorite eps.

34. Lti - December 7, 2006

old timey fan, you have been posting links to this page quite a lot now and ive been tricked into clicking on them almost every time tempted by the goodies you promise in side

http://www.startrekhistory.com/restoration/SFX.html

Well everytime i go there i am bombarded with pop ups to access my clip board and there is nothing to do to get away from it other than ctrl alt del or some very quick finger work to close the window before the next pop up appears.

This may just be my problem, in which case can someone offer advice? but if others also have this problem then maybe you should consider changing the code on the page so it isnt such a dick. Or stop posting links to pages which are just fuckin anoying.

Sorry for the strong words. If this is just my problem then no offense meant.

35. Adam Cohen - December 7, 2006

Y’all have been real testy with one another lately. Everybody ought to take a step back and relax a bit. This is Star Trek, we *must* survive this century so we can ward off the Borg, right?

BTW, that shot from the show is nothing less than “trippy.” Wowza. I love it.

36. FlyingTigress - December 7, 2006

One thing about the ep has always bothered me… So, indulge a short on-line vent…

I know that it wasn’t get corrected in the remastered ep, since the image of the Enterprise being dwarfed (in the money shot) by the Feserius has been burned into our minds. Now, I’ve never been looking for Trek to be a video version of Scientific American or the American Journal of Physics…

Nimoy’s line of dialog is “Must be a mile in diameter”, right?

The Enterprise is listed as being approximately 1000 feet in length. That means that the diameter (the maximum lineal dimension visible on-screen, and the maximum aside from circumference of the nominal outer diameter of the Feserius outer hull sphere) Feserius is something greater than 5 times (1 mile, from the lower than the dialog-stated diameter), but presumably less than 10 times (2 miles, approximately) the length of the Enterprise itself. However, from an image scaling purpose, clearly the Fesarius (judging from that angular portion of the curve of the Feserius visible within the screen image), the implicit size of the Feserius is WAY larger than 5 – 10 times the overall length of the Enterprise. 10 miles in diameter? Probably an extremely lower limit of proper scaling between the two ships. Each of the larger spheres on the surface — unless the “E” were physically docked at the Feserius — are about the size of the Enterprise.

So, Science Officer… You can’t tell the difference between an object “More than a (1) mile in diameter” and (potentially) 10, 20, or more miles in diameter? Where’s that “probability to 4 decimal places” precision? Or, That depends upon your definition of “More than a mile in diameter” and referencing the surface “Bucky balls” (smile).

Now, pass me the bowl of popcorn and other snacks — and don’t interrupt me while one of my favorite TOS episodes: The Corbomite Maneuver, is being broadcast.

37. FlyingTigress - December 7, 2006

Of course, it could be that the Feserius’ tractor beam is also a shrink ray? Shades of The TAS episode “The Terratin Incident”, or Mermaidman’s (of Spongebob’s Bikini Bottom) utility belt?

“Balok…I Shrunk the Aliens!”

38. jonboc - December 7, 2006

Its a mixed bag, I love the detail of the humongus ship, but the Enterprise looks like a drawing or painting here. I cant wait to see that big orange ball in action!

39. John N - December 7, 2006

I love the shot… hopefully seeing it in motion will be even better!

#10 – Due to the fuzziness of the zoom, doesn’t the original shot look even MORE “like a small model enlarged relative to the Enterprise”?

#30 – I agree…. gold qualifies as a colour.. :)

40. John N - December 7, 2006

#34 – Lti

Just so you know, I’ve never had a problem going to that site…

41. Picardsucks - December 7, 2006

I likey!!!! Hope xbox360 get’s the HD version up quick so I can see the widescreen version

42. Lao3D - December 7, 2006

Wow. It’s Fesari-iffic!! Truly awesome!

43. Greg - December 7, 2006

That was Adam Corolla in the spoof as Tranyaholic Balok. You can see the clip on the comedy central site. It was the best part of the Shat roast IMO.

The new ship looks great. More awesome work by the CBS team. Thanks.

44. An olde timey fan - December 7, 2006

#34, Lti

Sorry about the problem you’re having. Unfortunately, it’s not my site so I can’t really explain what it’s doing. I’m running IE7.0 and it does provoke a security pop-up, but it goes away after clicking on “don’t allow”. I also run Mozilla Firefox (a super browser in my opinion) and I don’t get any problem at all at Curt’s site.

Keep in mind that Microsoft is forever pushing updates and patches on Windows users – my system has several dozen security patches and it’s only a few months after I installed SP2. Only Bill Gates knows what those things actually do!

Anyway, Curt’s site has some beautiful restoration work of many rare and fascinating clips, including several animated strips from folks lucky enough to get them from Lincoln Enterprises. Well worth the effort to browse it!

45. Mark 2000 - December 7, 2006

I think this looks like a step back compared to latest improvements. The shot looks like a production painting. Not real at all. I also think the fesarius Model looks way too modern. These guy don’t understand the 60’s era aesthetic at all.

46. Imrahil - December 7, 2006

#34 – Try running Firefox. I haven’t ever had a problem with this site, and it’s really got great info and fascinating pictures.

47. MichaelJohn - December 7, 2006

#36 Flying Tygress…

I had similar thoughts when I watched the preview yesterday and Spock said, “It must be a mile in diameter.” I almost wanted to laugh! A mile in diameter, no way! It dwarfed the Enterprise like a planet! Maybe 100 miles in diameter would be closer to true scale!

Maybe the script writers and the special effects dept weren’t on the same page on this one!

Mike :o

48. Robert Bernardo - December 7, 2006

Nelson wrote:

> What catches my eye more is how the Enterprise looks. The rendering
> of it looks very plasticky

Yes, I agree. The Enterprise does not look realistic; it seems to be more of a drawing/painting.

Truly,
Robert Bernardo

49. Orbitalic - December 7, 2006

48 and 45… please keep in mind you are looking at a single static shot.

O

50. Greg - December 7, 2006

The Firefox browser with the Adblock Plus plug-in easily solves pop up and many security issues. It is much better than the newest MSIE browser.

Again, thanks to the CBS digital team – being creative in what looks to be sweat shop working conditions can’t be much fun. You folks should be proud.

51. Dr. Image - December 7, 2006

I think the new rendering looks great.
At first I was worried about how they would interpolate and rationalize the appearance of the 60’s Fesarius and update it.

I can tell they’ve succeded. Congrats in advance– and, hey, those Bucky domes PREDATE the 60’s, so they’re a valid aesthetic in my book.

To those naysayers, I say wait ’till the episode, then criticize away.

52. CmdrR. - December 7, 2006

I agree with #47. But, consider: this was the first episode of regular series production to be shot. (Check the uniform collars and Uhura in gold.) Point being, it’s 1966 and writers and special effects people have barely heard of each other, much less learned to coordinate.

These little continuity gaffs don’t spoil the fun. In fact, sometimes you just want to squint to see Ben Hur’s sports car in the background or the Coke bottle in the kitchen at Tara. Or grin at Han bragging about the Millenium Falcon making the Kessell run in less than twelve parsecs!

Smile, enjoy, imagine.

53. DB - December 7, 2006

“in response to #15. There would be no way of knowing whether it was a giant Ken doll or a normal sized Ken doll that had just been enlarged and pasted into the picture.”

Yes, there would. Most anyone could easily tell immediately, unless a great deal of effort were made to match lighting, and scale up apparently insignificant details from the small doll – for example, the thickness, weight and texture of the doll’s clothing.

Relative size is only one aspect of scale, and all of the others are the reasons that optical effects people must be artists as well as craftspeople.

Fooling the eyes of *most* folks is a little more difficult than you credit. Now, you probably would understand this from your own experience if you tested it — in the absence of that, if you don’t understand the text explanation as given there’s not much to be added to it.

54. Kevin - December 7, 2006

I have seen most of the remasterd eps and this is the first which i’m going to consider “proof of concept”– most of the others had few effects or effects not organic to story– mostly. Looking at it the detail is jarring, but I’ll watch this one through to judge the whole thing. The trek universe is kind of smooth and stylized, which kind of fits the characters and themes, and this might be too much but I can’t tell. Yes, the E does look kind of toylike there.

55. DreamerOutThere - December 7, 2006

In response to #48. If you think that looks fake, then I challenge you do something better. Yea, that’s what I thought!!

56. Adam Cohen - December 7, 2006

My “proof of concept” episode is The Doomsday Machine.

But to be honest, this effort has already been proven worthwhile in my opinion. First, I think CBS-D is a fine outfit, putting out some exciting work and second, it’s got all of us excited about TOS again. The remastered episodes have revitalized Trek. I am grateful.

57. K P G - December 7, 2006

Star Trek Legacy is giving the following error message on startup:

Unhandled Exception, Access Violation. I’m a computer engineer and this game MAY be stillborn. Bethesda released a patch today which is Release Day, but the patch is not fixing the problem. We need Scotty on this one!

58. Mr. Scott - December 7, 2006

#57 oopsie!

I’ll be right over to fix the wee bairns…

59. MichaelJohn - December 7, 2006

#52 Cmdr

For the most part I still find the orginal special effects excellent. That’s why I will always want both the original episodes, along with these newly remastered episodes in my collection. Yes, some effects do look dated compared to today’s visual effects standards, but all in all they still hold up quite well- remarkably well in my opinion.

Maybe that’s why I’m such a big fan of “the cage” episode. I still find the special effects, sound effects, music and alien make up so amazing in that episode! It’s so unique and original that it doesn’t seem all that dated to me at all. (I’m sure my eight year old next door neighbor would beg to differ!)

As the original series ages, and the original effects look more and more dated, especially to the younger generation, I find that I’m MORE impressed with the original effects. It must have been very, very difficult for the artists from the original show to pull off the believable looking effects, that we all take for granted nowadays.

They didn’t quite pull off a believable effect in the “Corbonite Maneuver”, but this was one of the rare exceptions…

No matter how dated the effects on the original appear, the “fun factor” of watching Star Trek TOS hasn’t changed at all for me. And you’re right, the little gaffs and mess ups don’t spoil the fun at all, it’s part of the charm of the original series.

To me these newly remastered episodes are not improvements in the stories, just enhancements that will broaden the appeal of future audiences.

Mike:o

Love live Spock…and Quark!

60. Robert Bernardo - December 8, 2006

Orbitalic wrote:

> 48 and 45…

Ooo, I’m a number. :-)

> please keep in mind you are looking at a single static shot.

Obviously.

Truly,
Robert Bernardo

61. Robert Bernardo - December 8, 2006

DreamerOutThere wrote:

> In response to #48. If you think that looks fake, then I challenge you do
> something better.

If you are referring to the Enterprise in that shot, it’s already been done. Think Starship Exeter.

Truly,
Robert Bernardo

62. Old School Trek Nerd - December 8, 2006

It looks much better in the promo. I would’nt worry.

63. TomBot2006 - December 9, 2006

Interesting… it almost looks like a book illustration… the Enterprise itself almost looks faceted. But as usual,will wait to see actual episode. :-)

64. Steve Moss - December 9, 2006

Just a few things to consider:

In looking at the new image, I was immediately delighted – I always hoped that a “Remastered” version of this episode would correct a few things, particularly in regard to this composite:

In the original 1966 shot, the Fesarius clearly over-filled the frame, but the composition of the shot allowed you to see the horizon of the Fesarious falling off the left side of the screen… and the falling off horizon was in sharp focus (you can see it in the comparative shot, or at http://images.wikia.com/memoryalpha/en/images/0/0f/Fesarius_Enterprise.jpg)... Now, think about principles of photography: if something in the background of the shot is in crisper focus than something in the foreground of the shot, then anything closer to the camera should also be out of focus. In this case, the distant horizon of the Fesarius is out of focus, the foerground of the Fesarius is out of focus, and the Enterprise was in crisp focus. That’s poor execution.

Irregardless of what the proper diameter of the Fesarius is, compared with the figure quoted in that Spockservation, the Fesarious is significantly larger than the E (one site estimates it at 4 miles). If anything, the Enterprise would be in crisp focus, the closest elements of the Fesarius (depending on exactly how far off the E’s bow it sits) and falling off in distance should be proportionately less focused.

Whether or not the visual effects artists at CBS Digital employ an aesthetic of variable focus, or use infinity focus, one thing is clear: to expect a 4-mile dimameter ship of unrecognizeable and unencountered technology to have NO surface detail is unlikely. The 1000-meter Enterprise, after all, has surface detail down to and below a meter’s width.

Also, consider that the CBS Digital folks may be visually re-scaling the Fesarius to better coincide with the in-episode Spockservation of size.

While the Fesarius will likely still be a pulsing complex of domes on a sphere (remember, it’s hard for all of us to judge in full from a single still photo), it’s extremely reasonable for both the domes and the macrosphere of the ship to have some visual indication of scale. Some cluster of these surface domes will end up detaching from the macrosphere and moving autonomously as Balok’s pilot ship, so again having detail on the ship (which to me almost resembles docking clamps reaching for the domes) is a logical decision. Without demonstration of surface detail/scale beyond “hey, this ship doesn’t fill the screen while this other one overflows the screen”, the believability of the two existing in the same visual space just isn’t there.

The other thing about this re-take that, again, I find improved is something that I’m noticing many people disliking – that being the lighting of the Enterprise in relation to the Fesarius.

Look again at the original shot, where we have a massive alien ship blotting out all visible space (and clearly extending well out of frame) and pulsing with light and activity… looking dim in relation to the grey Federation starship that appears in the 1966 composite to be radiating heavenly light.

Compare this with what I feel to be a far more believable lighting scenario in the new CGI version – a 4-mile spherical alien ship blotting out not just visible space but logically eclipsing 180-degrees’ worth of starlight from illuminating the Enterprise. As a result, you’ve got the Enterprise largely getting bathed in golden radiating light from the Fesarius. The Enterprise looks “plastic”-like only because rather than being largely called out by strategic point-sources of light, the Fesarius’ glow is overall non-specific in source because of its size and distance relative to the Enterprise.

The Enterprise is not a light-source (and won’t be until its refit, in 5+ years), so it’s at the mercy of its environment for that light – I assume you guys have noticed that already from some of the new shots in other episodes.

I have every expectation that in motion, this will look eactly as it should – my hope is that in the money shot of the Fesarius rolling right up onto the Enterprise’s bow you’ll see the lighting dynamically change as it gets closer. Overall space light from the Enterprise’s fore will fade and be replaced with the rippling lighting from the Fesarius. And all will be right in the world.

65. spockboy - December 9, 2006

Well said Mr. Moss

66. DIL - December 10, 2006

Like the updates, clairity, but hate the edits. They’re taking a little bit out of every episode.