Image From Remastered “All Our Yesterdays” | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

Image From Remastered “All Our Yesterdays” April 19, 2007

by Anthony Pascale , Filed under: TOS-R Preview , trackback

CBS have released an image of the nova from "All Our Yesterdays" 

 


Original

The supernova was one of the previews shown at the SciFi Summit last weekend, and it is spectacular.

From CBS’s description:

For the supernova explosion of Sarpeidon’s sun in "All Our Yesterdays," the Star Trek Remastered team was inspired by photos of the Crab Nebula from the Hubble Space Telescope.

 

Image courtesy of StarTrek.com. We expect s to get a higher res version of these from CBS, so keep an eye out for an update.

VIDEO: PREVIEW


Comments

1. CmdrR - April 19, 2007

Love that they’re mixing in Hubble tech. Woo-Hoo! This one’s gonna be fun… if we learn to respect our betters.

2. Dr. Image - April 19, 2007

Just shows that CBS-D’s approach adds just enough reality to the space shots to bring them into the realm of tangible believability.
Nice.

3. Josh T. (The Phantom Shatner both Returns AND Strikes Back as well as Attacks and has Revenge) Kirk Esquire' - April 19, 2007

Kirk likey much.

4. TOS Forever! - April 19, 2007

Of course the blinding brightness of a supernova would mean that we wouldn’t see the fine details, such as this new CBS-D f/x shot is displaying, hence the accuracy of the original TOS f/x shot, so…

Oh, forget it! It’s a GORGEOUS shot! Great job, CBS-D! I look forward to seeing it in true high-definition.

P.S. The Enterprise looks too dark for this scene. :P hehe

5. Crusade2267 - April 19, 2007

It looks really nice. Its always bothered me though that the Enterprise would be that close to the Super-nova though… I mean, don’t novas go pretty darn fast?

6. Mr. Atoz - April 19, 2007

I was wondering what CBS was going to do with that shot.
Looks pretty close to the original, which I like.

7. Mr. Atoz - April 19, 2007

Is Sarpeidon in the new shot?
I think I see it back there but I’m not sure.

8. Driver - April 19, 2007

Me likey likey. Sweet.

9. Greg Stamper - April 19, 2007

#7 – Magnify the image – – you will see what should be Sarpeidon above and between the Warp Nacelles in the background. Looks nice – -

10. Granger - April 19, 2007

#7: I think you’re right, looks like it is there near the supernova. Poor long-dead Zarabeth will finally have her remains cremated.

11. THEETrekMaster - April 19, 2007

Looks REAL good…except, why are those nacelle caps back to looking like Brach’s peppermints again??? GAH!!!

Why can’t they get it ALL right in these shots?

12. Ron Jon - April 19, 2007

What’s wrong with Brach’s peppermints? I hear they were Zefram Cochrane’s favorite candy!

13. Xai (one movie, one Kirk) - April 19, 2007

Good grief, not the nacelle cap thing again.

And is that a SHADOW on big E?…. that’s too dark.

teasing….

14. Alternative Factor anti-Chris - April 19, 2007

Looks great. Sometimes people just can’t say anything nice at all.

15. Kaaaahhhn - April 19, 2007

Because of those great shots of the Enterprise, it got me thinking of an idea for the CBS folks….

In the book “The Making of Star Trek,” there is a page that shows the scale of the Enterprise (in a cheesy line drawing) compared to the scale of an aircraft carrier. I remember being fascinated with that page as a kid. Now that I’m a baby boomer, I’d love to see that page recreated, but with the digital Enterprise placed next to a digital aircraft carrier, or some other earthy landmark (Empire State Building?) to show the real size and scale of the ship, if it were real.

How ’bout it CBS? How cool would that be!

16. Jon - April 19, 2007

15 I had the same experience as a kid with that book when I was first getting into trek and struggling to comprehend the proportions of the ship(never mind the fact that I didn’t even understand the scale of an aircraft carrier).Enterprise supposedly has a 400 plus member crew,which makes it rather small.there’s no way everyone could have had their own stateroom.I think the ship in the movie will have to be more realistically proportioned…And yeah ,I’d love to see it next to some earthly landmark for perspective.

17. Thorny - April 19, 2007

Next Generation’s writers guide had the Enterprise-D superimposed on the Paramount Studios complex, if memory serves.

18. Thorny - April 19, 2007

16. Jon…
Just to put things in perspective, the Aircraft Carrier Enterprise has a crew of around 5,000.

19. Jon - April 19, 2007

I meant the TV Enterprise.

20. Redshirt - April 19, 2007

Its a nice image. I was curios how they were going to pull this off. But I rather see it how they pull it off on screen in motion. if I really have too I might turn up the brightness on my TV just a bit. Otherwise not bad.

21. THEETrekMaster - April 19, 2007

#12 BWHAHAHAHAAHHA!!!!

Oh…and I DID say something nice. I just don’t understand why the nacelle caps are back to looking like crap again.

Someone esplain it to me!

They had it right for a while…or good enough for me. Now the lines in the caps are are hard edged and too wide again. At least in that shot.

TTM

22. Joe Burns - April 19, 2007

I’m sure the nova will look truly fantastic in motion, but…
a nova is a major light source, yes?
Ergo, the Enterprise ought to be lit with a rim-kicker effect, no? Sort of like a crescent/new moon? Consistency in lighting isn’t something I have religion on, but the blinding light of a nova will beg people to notice, methinks.

This is one of my favorite all-time episodes; the concept of escape to the past and the oblivious way Atoz seeks to incorporate Kirk and Co into his task, I love the Zarabeth and Atoz segments, and despite the “they’ll burn ya” tedium of the “Crucible” segment, a dramatic high point is in this part:

Kirk (puzzled): Prepared? I was not prepared.. your Mr Atoz did not prepare me in any way!

Magistrate (shocked): Then you must get back at once! If you were not prepared… you can survive only a few hours, here in the paaast!!

Plus you have to love the FX for the portal, both the neon strobe of the gate, and Kirk’s slow move into the brick wall, which utterly captivated me as a child. I’m sure that simply remastered the colors of the gate effect is going to put my eye out.

Favorite line:

McCoy: Spock! You’re reverting to your ancestors… Five Thousand YEARS before you were BORN!!!

23. Michael Hall - April 19, 2007

Very nice. . . the concluding shot of the Beta Niobe supernova and Mariette Hartley were always the best things about this otherwise pedestrian episode. With all due respect to #22, I’m always frankly puzzled by those around here who love to cite bad dialogue and hambone acting as if they were somehow endearing. I love TOS, but in spite of its flaws, not because of them! :-)

24. Josh T. ( The Shatnastic duotronic hairpeice removal kit) Kirk Esquire' - April 19, 2007

My Gods!

Is that a Red Star I see in the background??

CBS Digitals learning curve has jumped 300 percent this week.

25. Lao3D - April 19, 2007

Looks cool! I was afraid this one might just be reused ship shots again — not that the CBS-D folks haven’t earned a little respite.

And as far as the “real-life” scale of the 1701 referenced in a few of the above posts: this video someone put together on youtube does a pretty cool job of defining the ship’s proportions:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tq0wVRuUFLk

26. THEETrekMaster - April 19, 2007

Would be cool to have the screen go completely white with the Enterprise taking up a good part of the screen — the light washing it out…

Then have the white contract and fade to the nebula CBS created.

27. Josh T. ( The Shatnastic duotronic hairpeice removal kit) Kirk Esquire' - April 19, 2007

#23

Oh come now Micheael, when was TOS EVER Pulitzer prize winning in dialogue?

It’s hard to favor one episode over another, certainly an entire season, in terms of quality, when one closely considers exactly what is infact being compared. Leonard Nimoy emoting an Emmy worthy monologue over a styrofoam rock that lays eggs, is in no way superior to Leonard Nimoy pretending to be an automaton after having his brain removed.

Even when Star Trek “rocks”, it is still Kitsche childrens drama fluffed with thinly veiled morality plays and all the bells and whistles , production value of a XXX theatre on 1226 blue light district.
Even when Star Trek “sucks”, it is still powerfully theatrical and resonates boldly with inspired acting and genuine care for performance. (I refer only to TOS here, sorry Bermanites) ;)

It’s important to remember what we are talking about here, Trek as much as we love it will never move mountains or bring world peace, and for those that don’t “get it” fans of Trek will ALWAYS be viewed initially with a bit of a raised eyebrow, such is the perception that has been created by the general populace.

Trek will never have the mass appeal of say a Spider-man or Star Wars, it deals with entirely too radically different ideologies. It’s simply too high brow in concept.

Star Wars is a campfire tell, the lightsabers and blasters and spaceships easily interchangrable with swords, pistols, and automobiles. People relate far easier to Star Wars, the premise of Wars is not dependent on the technology the way Trek is. Trek is ABOUT a Starship. it’s exploits and adventures. Wars just happens to occur on starships.

28. Nelson - April 19, 2007

Sweet! Cool image and the Enterprise looks very well rendered, good looking weathering on the hull.

29. Driver - April 19, 2007

Star Trek XI: It’s 160 years into the future and Star Trek is still loved by millions of people. For the 200th Year Celebration, a full size working Enterprise has been built. On its Maiden Voyage with 100’s of giddy fans………

30. Jim J (Jim...my name, is Jim) - April 19, 2007

WOW!

31. CmdrR - April 19, 2007

29… I think you’re off by a buck. TOS is somewhere around the 2260’s.

32. Michael Hall - April 19, 2007

“Leonard Nimoy emoting an Emmy worthy monologue over a styrofoam rock that lays eggs, is in no way superior to Leonard Nimoy pretending to be an automaton after having his brain removed.”

Are you fucking kidding me, dude?

From your contention that since neither was Pulitzer-worthy, “The Devil in the Dark” is essentially the same as “Spock’s Brain,” I can only assume that you don’t have much understanding of context, or logic, or what it means to have a sense of discrimination even within relatively narrow parameters. Yes, by now much of TOS could rightfully be termed kitsch. This was inevitable, and would have been so even had the show consistently featured the best scripts, acting talent and production values possible in the ’60s (and obviously, it mostly didn’t). The reason for that should be obvious: the means of telling stories, in any medium, tend to evolve over time. That’s why “Barry Lyndon” doesn’t read much like “The Corrections,” and why no modern director would allow his lead actress to play the character of Susan Alexander the way Orson Welles did in “Citizen Kane,” even though Welles is regarded as a genius and “Kane” still tops most critics’ all-time best lists. Because the film’s approach to telling the story of Charles Foster Kane’s life and the extraordinary finesse Welles brought to the project still shine, even as the acting and other storytelling conventions used in the film become dated. Similarly, Trek still draws an audience because of its optimistic take on the human future, the camaraderie of the principals (and the genuine chemistry of its actors–and not just those of TOS), the relative sophistication of its stories by SF-TV standards, and some pretty cool hardware and designs that continue in their essential elements to hold up even today. Those were the elements us “original” fans loved the show for, even as we cringed at and made fun of its many faults. But it was the Trek that won the Hugo two years running that earned our devotion and keeps fans watching forty years later, and definitely not its value as “kitsch.”

33. Trek-Inspired Astrophysicophile - April 20, 2007

5. Certain components of a nova or supernova are pretty darn fast – the fastest component, gamma rays, travels at the speed of light. However, since the Enterprise can travel at faster-than-light speeds and seems to be able to jump to faster-than-light speed in seconds, it should be able go close to a nova or supernova progenitor and still outrun the deadly rays.

What bothers me is that a nova or supernova progenitor like Beta Niobe can even have an Earthlike planet like Sarpeidon on which a humanoid species evolves. A nova or a Type 1a supernova progenitor consists of two stars, a white dwarf and a red giant; the white dwarf itself was also previously a red giant, which would have sterilized, ejected, or engulfed its planets. And a Type II supernova progenitor consists of a single supergiant star, which emits much more UV and X-ray radiation than the Sun does and has an extremely short lifetime.

34. Trek-Inspired Astrophysicophile - April 20, 2007

33. Of course, one could argue that some trilithium fell into Beta Niobe and destroyed the star.

35. Josh T. ( The Shatnastic duotronic hairpeice removal kit) Kirk Esquire' - April 20, 2007

#32

No Dude, I kid you not.

And yes, within the confines and CONTEXT of the series as presented, there is nary a difference between telepathically communicating with styrofoam, or having your brain removed and your body being gameboyed.

My point to your post was this- within the CONTEXT of the series and it’s framework, from one spectrum to the other along the continuum of utter ridiculousness, sometimes fans have a tendency to arbitrarily inflate and bloat certain episodes as somehow watershed events, and likewise, unfairly chastise and burn in effigy certain other episodes with some sort of half-ass internal barometer on what constitutes high art when in realiy, at the end of the day, what we are talking about here collectively is absolutely ridiculous and intended in the spirit of fun, not self-grandizement.

Star Trek is fun, it isn’t Neitzche. Although Thus Spoke ZaraKirkstra would make a damn fine episode.

36. Dom - April 20, 2007

Hi Josh (35) When I was a kid of the age of about four, watching Star Trek for the first time, I never felt there was a ‘heirarchy’ of episodes either.

My earliest memories of Trek are certain strong images and concepts: Balok, Vina in green make-up, Lazarus and Kirk hopping through universes, Spock’s body being remote-controlled because his brain has been removed and his brain talking through the communicators. The ‘quality’ never bothered the youthful me: the crazy ideas and images fascinated me.

Second time I watched Trek was between the ages of 9 and 11. Around the same time, I read James Blish’s novelisations. I loved TOS then, getting the hang of the plotlines and characters and enjoyed nearly all of the stories, no matter how ridiculous (although the hippie jam session in ‘The Way to Eden’ was too much for my 1980s sensibilities!)

But I will acknowledge that my core love of Trek comes from its penny-dreadful luridness, rather than its social conscience. TOS, for me, was about big dramatic concepts, larger than life characters and weird costumes and locations.

Yeah, Trek had a social conscience, but I think people read too much into its ‘positive future.’ I consider TOS positive in the sense that humans are still around, but humans were far from perfect in it.

Trek is wonderful, joyous, heroic pulp. I never saw it as ‘how to live your life’ series. I guess the makers of TNG did see it that way, which is why I never got with it as much!

37. Cervantes - April 20, 2007

What Dom said. ;D

38. Cervantes - April 20, 2007

Oh, and look forward to seeing how this shot pans out in motion.

39. Doug L. - April 20, 2007

I think that picture is great, but am I really the only one who thinks that looks more like art, than an effect???

Doug L

40. Holo J - April 20, 2007

I really like the fact that the new effects for the remastered episodes can be made as close to the real thing as possible.

They have done it before for the asteroids for “the world is hollow and I have touched the sky” and “Paradise Syndrome” where they made the asteroids designs from real life. Basing them on recent imaging from NASA.

And now they have done it again for the Sun going nova shot for this episode. Its as close to what the real thing might look like as possible because as mentioned above its inspired by photos of the Crab Nebula taken from Hubble. It’s truly amazing to see this happen. I wonder if we get time to see the Sarpeidon being destroyed from the blast?
Although it’s only a small globe in the distance on the shot shown above it would be cool to see it explode in the blast.

It’s a shame that the credits with obscure some of the shot as it’s at the very of the episode. Plus I don’t recall the whole sequence being on the screen very long a few seconds maybe but I am still looking forward to seeing this shot in motion

I have felt from the start of this project that it would be cool to update some of the display screens on the bridge, maybe animate the line graphs and place some more relevant images tied in with the episodes etc.. .

If they did ever do this It would be great if they placed some of the colorful shots from Hubble in the view screens. I am sure someone on the Enterprise wouldn’t of missed the chance to take a snap shot of the sun going nova as it flew away. It would be a good continuity to see this shot in one of the bridge view screen in one the episodes that follows this one in Season 3.

41. Windsor Bear - April 20, 2007

#25 – Thanks for the link to that video. Great CG rendering, in my opinion. And…. the nacelle caps look REAL!

42. Tom - April 20, 2007

Actually the original concept from 1968 is more realistic than the remastered version.

(Super) Novas brighten, very dramatically, some 10^5 times the Sun’s brightness and decay in brightness over days.

The “Crab Nebula” rendering above occurs after hundreds of years of expansion into the ambient medium.

We have images of the Super Nova that occurred in Large Magellanic Cloud,some 20 years ago, that doesn’t look like that

43. planettom - April 20, 2007

Nevermind the supernova, are they remastering Mariette Hartley naked as a jaybird?

44. Matt Wright - April 20, 2007

#42 — That’s basically what I kept thinking. I’m taking an Astronomy class right now (for some easy extra units) and we’re studying the life cycle of a star right now, and the stuff CBS-D has doesn’t seem to really fit.

45. Michael Hall - April 20, 2007

Jeez. How ironic that I can find myself, in this, of all places, admonished not to take Trek too seriously. Whatever. Of course, somehow I think it’s entirely possible to appreciate the series for its optimism, and visionary, literate approach to the challenge of presenting an adult-level SF series for television (even if it only occasionally really succeeded) without taking it seriously as a blueprint for the future, or as Great Literature, or as a guide on how to live your life. (In fact, I can assure you that if you attended any of the Great Bird’s college lectures during the ’70s and were tempted to do any of those things, or regard him as some sort of guru, he would quickly disabuse you of the very notion.) Still, there are all sorts of ways to take something too seriously, and for my money valuing Trek for its ethics, occasionally great storytelling, and the production values it did manage to achieve on a fairly limited budget beats the hell out of obsessing over whether CBS-D’s renderings of the Enterprise are more “real” than the original footage, or by playing up the show’s “kitsch” value for mostly grade school-level snark. But hey, whatever floats your boat.

46. Kelvington - April 20, 2007

I’m sure it’s been mentioned before, but it’s worth mentioning again, this is the ONLY episode in TOS History that show ZERO shots of the interior of the Enterprise. This is exactly the opposite of a “standing sets” episode, which is very curious. It’s almost never done. If you take the communicator and uniforms out this could have been a Twilight Zone or Outer Limits episode.

47. Sleeper Agent X - April 20, 2007

Well, as long as I don’t see a “Star Wars: Special Edition” style ring around the supernova (like the one that got added to the Death Star blowing up) I think I’ll be happy.

You hear me, special effects dudes and dudettes? No frakkin’ ring! It’s just too Nineties and fake…

48. Visual FX blog: for all your visual effects news and reviews » Posting » TOS remastered image - April 20, 2007

[…] Thanks to the guys at TrekMovie.com for the images. […]

49. Spock's Brain - April 20, 2007

#43: “Nevermind the supernova, are they remastering Mariette Hartley naked as a jaybird?”

Finally, somebody who has his priorities straight!!

50. dm - April 20, 2007

If the nova is supposed to be superbright, (which I assume…) the shadow on the E saucer is off…

51. Driver - April 20, 2007

No ring? How about a destructive force bubble, ala Generations.
When the supernova first explodes, maybe it’s more like TOS, then fragments as shown.

52. SPOCKBOY - April 21, 2007

I think it looks like a cartoon…………………………….again.

53. SPOCKBOY - April 21, 2007

Actually guys,
Do any of you remember that shot in the Voyager credits where that intense light gleams through the edges of the ship?

THAT’S what it should look like.

54. Sleeper Agent X - April 21, 2007

Destructive bubble of doom is fine. A ring makes absolutely no sense.

55. Doug L. - April 21, 2007

re 52,

yes exactly. to me also. it looks like a cover painting for a book or something more than an effect. I hate to make comparisons because it really generates a backlash on this site…, but I’m so confused that so many people aren’t seeing what I’m seeing…

You can look at old still shots from Star Wars or Empire which are over 25 years old, and these look like they could be ships in space (to my aesthetic at least), where as this looks like a painting or cartoon, and it translates that way in motion for the most part. These are very pretty 3D Cartoons… not because they are computer generated, but because they are not good enough to translate any other way.

Doug L.

56. Michael Hall - April 22, 2007

Nope, I don’t see it at all. Looking at those two images side-by-side, the only thing “distinguishing” the older image from my POV is film grain and matte lines. Otherwise, the Enterprise is both images (allowing for the different angle) isn’t all that different. I just don’t believe that there would be all this talk of cartoons if people didn’t know going in that these images were created with computers instead of models.

(I do agree, though, about the original effect probably being more what a supernova would actually look like. The modern version looks more like the long-aftermath.)

57. Doug L. - April 22, 2007

re 56…

You’re comment is a little insulting. I don’t think the effects from Galactica look cartoony. I and I’m sure others are perfectly capable of making their own decisions regarding the subjective quality of special effects regardless of whether they are made with computers or models.

I do however give up on the subject.

Doug L.

58. Doug L. - April 23, 2007

re: 56

Also not commenting on the quality of the old effects. I don’t like to be lumped in with the purists who can’t accept any form of change to classic Trek.

dl

59. Doug J - April 24, 2007

I’ve got to be honest..I prefer the old nova effect over the new one in “All Our Yesterdays.” Like most Trek episodes, this one is thought provoking. It is also one of the most emotionally gripping ones as well. When I watch it, I find myself moved and heartbroken by the terrible fate of Zarabeth. The sorrow one feels for Zarabeth is then——————–with the sorrow one feels when in the last scene, the sun flares up and Sarpeidon, Zarabeth, Atoz, and the entirety of Sarpeidon’s culture and history are erased from existence. The old nova special effect did this quickly and cleanly. The new special effect (which I knew would use that “ring” explosion from so many other films) I found distracted me from what I would normally be feeling at that moment. Newer is not always better!

TrekMovie.com is represented by Gorilla Nation. Please contact Gorilla Nation for ad rates, packages and general advertising information.