TOS Remastered Producers On New HD-DVDs November 10, 2007
by Anthony Pascale , Filed under: TOS Remastered , trackback
The latest Starburst Magazine has an interview with the TOS Remastered producers David Rossi, Mike Okuda and Denise Okuda. They talk about the project and the new Season One HD-DVDs coming out November 20th. Rossi enthuses about one of the special features for the box set:
In many cases you’ll get the fun opportunity to have side – by – side references of the original shots and what we have done with the re-mastering process. I think that’s going to be very cool for people to watch.
Okuda sums up the project thusly
It’s about the storytelling. That’s why this 40 – year – old television show continues to thrive and to win new fans, because of the inherent strength of Gene Roddenberry’s vision and the vision of all those who worked on his team. So, right now, the digital visual effects may be, in some sense, state of the art, but, in fact, we’re working to not literally be state of the art, but use state – of – the – art technology to evoke the feeling of what was done in the 1960s.
Read more from the Starburst interview at SciFi Pulse.
Pre-order TOS-R Season One Box from Amazon for $132.95
Star Trek: The Original Series – The Complete First Season [HD DVD] — $132.95
Loading ...
Comments»
First!
“It’s about the storytelling. That’s why this 40 – year – old television show continues to thrive and to win new fans, because of the inherent strength of Gene Roddenberry’s vision and the vision of all those who worked on his team. So, right now, the digital visual effects may be, in some sense, state of the art, but, in fact, we’re working to not literally be state of the art, but use state – of – the – art technology to evoke the feeling of what was done in the 1960s.”
I see where he is coming from but the truth is they really DO NOT HAVE THE TALENT for making Enterprise-level SFX. They could not be state-of-the-art if they wanted to be. This level of digitally redoing what was done on the 60s is really all they can do; both out of respect for the original vision and lack of real FX horsepower like EdenFX and Digital Domain.
#2 I have to disagree. The talent is clearly there. Witness the Enterprise itself.
What they do not have is time and money.
And Paramount/CBS will still make out like a bandit for a rushed effort both on TV and dvd.
“So, right now, the digital visual effects may be, in some sense, state of the art, but, in fact, we’re working to not literally be state of the art, but use state – of – the – art technology to evoke the feeling of what was done in the 1960s.”
I have to agree with the essence of this approach, and–most notably in episodes like “The Doomsday Machine,” “Amok Time,” “The Menagerie,” etc., it’s worked out pretty well for CBS-D and the fans. On others, though, due artistic misjudgement, lack of time and resources, or all three, it’s been a mighty rough ride.
CBS has all of the money necessary. CBS went inhouse to save money and the end result is choppy work, They sacrificed obvious quality to save cash. Look at Eden and D2’s work. Now compare TOS-R to Nemesis and Enterprise. See what happens when you hire the right people? Their time constraint was born out of poor planning and lack of proper management.
All of the money in the world won’t get you water out of wine. They might have a few decent folks on the team but overall this is a halfassed job and should have been plnaned a lot better.
What we do have is influence. They did change the model after numerous emails and calls. Now, you can “witness” the 2 diferent digital Enterrises that CBS won’t even replace because of time and money.
Hey, half is better than none, right?
Sorry to throw a spanner in the works, but I just can’t get into these remastereds, I love the show as it was!
Sorry folks!
Mike, “rough ride” you said it! Doomsday and Amok were really good. Esp. the walking across the bridge scene!
Although I am kind of a spokes person for Eden here. lol, CBS-D didn’t have to completely rip of their Tholians.
Re: Sean4000′’s comments.
I agree that more time and effort should have been invested here. But the efforts put forth are quite an improvement — for the most part — over many of the orginal shots.
It is my hope that someone, CBS-D or Eden, prodcues extended or alternate versions of some of the episodes. Granted, by today’’s episodic TV structure, that could make for a 90-minute Trek. However, I think that’s where you put in the additional dollars.
…Just a thought.
Will these HD-DVD’s play back in 1080p on a compatible screen?.
Since they were made for broadcast I was thinking they might only be 1080i.
Any ideas?.
I’m pretty sure they are remastered in 1080p and will playback as such on a 1080p plasma or LCD display. I have noticed that the Toshiba HD-DVD players that are going for about $100 dollars playback in 1080i and not 1080p. You have to buy the “high end” Toshiba HD-DVD player to get a true 1080p feed to your TV. They are going for about $300 dollars.
I plan on buying one of these 1080p players as soon as the price comes down a little more.
I’m buying these b/c they will be in HD. And I won’t buy any other series unless it’s HD also (aside from my few seasons of TNG bought couple yrs ago).
I’m greatful for the remastering. I wish the effects team had been more daring, though. They would have been more daring in the 60s had they had the tech. Just give me one Enterprise barrel-roll. I’m sure the Great Bird himself wouldn’t have minded that…
I’m waiting for the format war to play itself out….no way I’m spending that cash until I know which format’s gonna become the standard.
former Prime Minister Paul Martin is a trekker?
I hope Paramount changes its mind and releases TOS-R on Blue Ray. Same thing if they remaster the other series and movies.
Hell yeah, I rule! After quitting I got a crappy job in the UK where I’ve been for what seems like 10 years… because it is?! Am I really the only person that likes the series the way it was? I can’t get into this CGI lark – I’ve tried!
I’m waiting for it to come on television.
“Hell yeah, I rule! After quitting I got a crappy job in the UK where I’ve been for what seems like 10 years… because it is?!”
Ah yes, I’ve seen you presenting “flog-it” on BBC2.
I’m going to have words with the parents now – they should have thought ahead… I am pretty proud of the fact I had to be told I was the star of a daytime tv show
Can’t wait to watch this set.
Why wait for the format war to be over? Players won’t suddenly stop working. Also it will be a long wait as the format war is going to last a long time.
#10 — Oh no they aren’t made for TV, remember TOS was shot on 35mm film. As such they were scanned in at 1080p/24fps. So we’ll get proper 1080p/24 on the disc.
As an aside I can’t wait to see the side by side, picture in picture of old versus new, it should make a nice demo for people.
I hate to sound un-educated, but I’m not up on this HD stuff, is this that blu-ray thing aswell?
Paramount has sided with Microsoft/Toshiba’s HD-DVD format. I am not convinced of it’s superiority over sony’s Blu-ray. I cannot see one going away because of the strong ties that each studio have to their format of choice.
Dust busted, 4K, 35mm film stock is the ultimate shooting meduim. Chemical film has a wider color gammut than digital and can resolve 32-bit pixels from a film scanner. So, this actually works out in favor of TOS-R because they had their work half done for them. It is a shame thay use HD-DUD which uses inferior compression algorithms. But hey, they love half-complete, so why not compress mediocrework even more and distribute on an inferior product. Sounds like a winner to me!
The Spider-man trilogy has just pushed me 3 spots over to sticking to Blu-ray.
I would love 11 reasons more……cough…..Trek…..cough…..cough
Hey, those full frame Academy scans at 2K may not do them full justice, but 60’s lenses and film stock/process may not warrent 4k at 32bpp and gain anything significant in res apart from extra film grain. But the CDSD don’t quite come up to the standards of Eden FX, although on a occasion they do come close. I just think many of us out here wonder what if Eden had been given the job…wish we could have seen the remaster project at 100% instead of 90%..?
Amazing detail can be gained from old film stock. Just look at John Lowry’s remaster job on Goldfinger. I was just talking 4K jargon in a modern day way. If CBS-D can scan at 4K that’s cool, all possible color data is surendered from 35mm at 4K according to Lowry. Downside is storage and what can be gained rom high res scan, you’re right it maybe nothing. Either way, a new scan couldn’t, and apparently didn’t, hurt classic Trek. Whatever res they used, Eden could have complimented it better with FX work.
I had to laugh at the viewscreen shot, it’s grainy as hell and WHAM there’s new CG on screen. Why not just make a clearer, CG viewscreen plate and light and insert accordingly. With any budget that can’t be hard to do.
You know what? Digital Domain did something amazing on Nemesis, they swapped out a guy or 2 from Eden FX because they liked their phase/disruptor style. In a consulting way they brought in different talent to make the process as good as it can be. CBS take note.
90%, that’s too generous. I say 75%.
If all episodes had the quality of In a Mirror Darkly, they could strap a sex toy to the digital bridge and I’d shell out for the box set.
Sean 4000
- I agree with you on all counts….and thanks for posting a little bit of info for folks who aren’t too savvy on HD yet. Folks need to understand that film will be the superior resolution format until a televised format comes along that matches it(which is most likely not happening anytime soon).
And I’ll take Blu Ray over HD-DVD anyday……just wish the damn war would end. Leave it to Paramount to muddy up something that was looking like it was about to see daylight. If Toshiba hadn’t kicked all those ducats Paramount’s way this war would be over.
I hope the CBS-D guys are checking in here, ’cause they need to hear this stuff as much as possible.
Too bad though, with the disc release, the toothpaste is sadly out of the tube already.
Looks like the HD-DVD vs BluRay war is far from over:
http://www.gamespot.com/news/6182612.html
http://asia.cnet.com/blogs/cyberpersia/post.htm?id=63001157
http://www.slipperybrick.com/2007/11/blu-ray-vs-hd-dvd-sony-ceo/
I remember a story from my local CompUSA in Metairie LA where the Sony rep had it out with a Toshiba rep over high-def formats. He (HD-DVD), walked up to the Sony rep while he was giving a sales pitch and tried his sale talk. Instead of shewing him away the Sony rep used all of his arguments against him. HD-DUD guy used the “we compress out audio more efficiently that Sony; to shich Sony said SO PERFECTLY “Why compress your audio at all”" and showed him the back of the box. Bottom line, HD got owned.
However, both formats will have to co exist for a while due to “loyalties from royalties” That’s what will determine the winner. Microsoft and Sony will have to battle it out a little longer.
I have a dual format combo player. My BR library is planet earth, spider-man trilogy, Casino Royale, Ratatouille, Cars, and Pixar Shorts. My HD-DVD collection is________. Enough said.
If I come across as forceful, that’s just me. I’m not out to step on anyone’s toes, beliefs, or opinions. Please do not be offended by what I say as I do try to curb my forcefulness. I will have FIVE college degrees in the cinematic field along with already gained real-world experience. BAchelors in Photography and Film PostProduction. Three MAsters in Film Production, Visual Efects and Cinematography/Photography.
I carry just “a little” weight on this subject but ultimately Matt and Anthony have the delete button. :)
Sean4000, I have a degree in irritating salespeople in tv shops with my eyesight and the term ‘they look the same to me!’ thanks for clearing this up though, I really am lost in all this!!
It would be fun to have this set for the extra features, but I am just as happy watching my VHS episodes. I like most of the remastered effects, but it doesn’t really make that much difference to me when it comes to enjoying the show.
I’ll cite on scene in particular that aded so much awe and scope to TOS, and the was Amok Time’s Bridge crossing. That blew me away.
re: 34 Yes, when I think of the Remastered project, that is the first thing that comes to mind.
Personally, I thought the Defiant from “In a Mirror Darkly” was only a fair stab at duplicating the look of the original Enterprise, and far inferior to the best of CBS-D’s work. Obviously, YMMV. Zoic’s proof-of-concept stills were much more impressive and the ship generally has more “weight” than in CBS-D’s shots, but the nacelle caps are just as off as CBS-D’s earliest efforts and the textural details of the Enterprise don’t look anything like those of the original series. I don’t truthfully know if any one FX house could have met all of the sometimes conflicting aesthetic requirements of a project like this one, but in spite of some real disappointments (e.g. “Where No Man Has Gone Before”), on the whole I think they’ve done a reasonable job. I’d give them a B.
Fair enough. But there are a lot of different caps in Trek over the years. I’ll say I would have wanted to see the Enterprise portrayed with a mix of Eden’s Defiant with CBS-D’s latest nacelle incarnation. But the Defiant was another vessel all together. Just like Galaxy class vessels of TNG/DS9/VOY didn’t have the same design on all of them; there were variants.
Am I the only person that didn’t think much of the Eden FX test? It was far too modern looking to fit into the style of the show.
As for Remastered, we could nit pick all day long (well you guys could), but I still prefer these new effects to the old ones, which I always had a problem with.
I enjoy these remastered episodes but I still feel the price is outrageous. I don’t mind the studio making a fair profit but c’mon!
Mike :o
Ty, I needa link to that reel. Please post one.
On balance, I like the work. 95% of the time, I think Roddenberry’s ghost would give a ghastly thumbs up to the changes. I think as long as they offer a side-by-side, or if the original is available in a clean, modern format, then all is well. The only sin would be to hide or destroy the original (a la Star Wars or ET.) You’ll never make Casablanca a color movie (it was tried) and even if you make TOS into a 2007-kinda thing, it’ll look odd by 2017. TOS 1966-69 will always look its age.
I’m 45. There’s nothing wrong with looking your age!
Oh, and I look damn good and so does TOS.
I need to see this clip.
Check this one out:
http://www.livevideo.com/video/spockboy/4BA92B3AFCCC48D3B9516810127B5481/new-warp-effect.aspx
Paul Martin, just be thankfull your parents didn’t name you Ricky.
Sean4000–
Mr. Boy is very talented, but I’m very happy they left the original “warp effect” as is. No ret-cons, please.
Sean 4000 -
HD-DVD does not use “inferior” compression algorithims. Please stop spreading disinformation.
In fact, HD-DVD has primarily used VC-1 from day one, where Blu-ray came out the gate using the decade old MPEG-2 codec! It was only later that the BD studios starting using AVC MPEG-4 and VC-1, mainly because people starting complaining about the picture quality of some of the early discs released. Also, that PIP feature which is presently included in this Trek set so we can see the comparisons with the old shots can NOT be done on any existing BD player but the PS3. Blu-ray players with this capability should start appearing by early next year, but HD-DVD has had this capability since it launched, and you can pick up an HD-DVD player for well under $200. I have experience working on/with both formats and there is no clear cut superior format here. Both are capable of delivering lossless sound and superb 1080p picture quality.
So yes, while you’re watching the BD exclusive Spiderman trilogy, I’ll instead be watching Trek S1, Heroes S1, Forbidden Planet, Batman Begins, The Matrix & the forthcoming BSG S1.
Both sides have exclusives they can brag about.
45 Yes, I have read that before, technically speaking there’s a superiority with the much newer VC1 codec. But there’s another important factor in the HD mastering compression process. Some HD discs of whatever format may well look better than others. This is because of the care/time (and therefore cost) put into the compression process when mastering. If more is put into that, some skill is used in manually increasing the bit rate in scenes with a lot of motion where the auto process may not have allocated enough bandwidth, thus adding unwanted artifacts such as blocking. They may not always use full 3 pass analysis processing in compression which gives maximum quality for a given bitrate. There are so many more factors involved in the HD disc encoding process that need a lot of care that differences in picture quality are inevitable, whatever the format. Remember that although HD is 5 or 6 times the picture size as SD DVD PAL, the HD disc format has around only double the bitrate of SD DVD PAL (max PAL is 9.5mbps, HD max is around 18mbps).
#46. “the HD disc format has around only double the bitrate of SD DVD PAL (max PAL is 9.5mbps, HD max is around 18mbps). ”
That’s incorrect the bitrate for HD-DVD and Bluray can go up to something like 40mbps.
#47 you’re referring to the tech specs of the discs themselves and the max bandwith they are capable of. I’m talking about the bitrates used in the realworld encoding process to ensure smooth playback. After all, if you have, say, a single HDD technically capable of 3gbps, if you were to try streaming full bandwith HD off that it wouldn’t play!
#45 R.C. Williams “Both are capable of delivering lossless sound and superb 1080p picture quality.”
Too bad it can’t be said for the Transformers HD-DVD. They couldn’t deliver the lossless sound on that one because of “space issues”. You think an extra 20gig could have rectified that if it was released on BluRay 50gig disc?
And really, I’m not too big on this “video in video” feature as being the number one thing that HD-DVD has that BluRay doesn’t. What I want most of all in my High Def titles is the movie in the best quality presentation that it’s ever been seen in. And if they put all that space into the movie itself and not on these side videos that I can imagine take up a lot of space, well than I know they’re treating the film just right.
Oh, BluRay may be more expensive, but at least they got the studios support willingly and haven’t bought out any other studio like what Toshiba/Microsoft did with Paramount and Dreamworks Animation to go HD-DVD exclusive. Ya, that’s thinking about your customers alright. Transformers may have sold well on HD-DVD, but think of how many BluRay discs it would have sold if only it was made available.
#48.
True, but to be fair the majority of BD and HD-DVD movies are encoded with a higher bitrate than 18mbps. Much closer to 30.
9. Cezion – November 10, 2007
“Re: Sean4000′’s comments.
I agree that more time and effort should have been invested here. But the efforts put forth are quite an improvement — for the most part — over many of the orginal shots.”
That is the heart of the matter; if it is clear that more EFFORT and time were necessary, but tossed aside in favor of a rush job, then it was not worth it at all. Yesterday, “The Deadly Years” aired, and the appearance and movement of the Romulan ships were laughably bad–lacking any sense of solid objects, along with movement based on who knows what.
This far into the project, and there is no significant improvement, yet CBS desperately dumps this on the home video consumer.
Does anyone here take Okuda’s comments about trying to use state of the art CGI to “evoke the feeling” of the 60’s effects seriously? Or is this a convenient excuse for sub-par effects work?
I feel bad for the Okudas – it’s a tough job to pull off with limited resources (we are all assuming) and with thousands of nit-picky critics ready to rip your work week to week. But, if you can’t take the heat….
I would not brag about the Transformers HD-DUD. While the robots themselves were fantastic, the cinematography was horrible and the artificial grain was an eyesore. And where was the lossless audio?
Seangh: “Does anyone here take Okuda’s comments about trying to use state of the art CGI to “evoke the feeling” of the 60’s effects seriously? Or is this a convenient excuse for sub-par effects work?”
Good question, here’s what I said earlier up the chain”
Sean4000: “I see where he is coming from but the truth is they really DO NOT HAVE THE TALENT for making Enterprise-level SFX. They could not be state-of-the-art if they wanted to be. This level of digitally redoing what was done on the 60s is really all they can do; both out of respect for the original vision and lack of real FX horsepower like EdenFX and Digital Domain.”
It will be interesting if anyone from the remastering project comes clean on exactly what the situation there was. Was it really their vision to create sub-par effects? Did anyone there fight for a more extensive job?
I’m sure the Okudas and Rossi will keep things tight-lipped, since I’m sure they are hoping to be called back if and when Trek gets green lighted as a series again.
Hopefully one day they will go back and give TOS a more extensive make over. The annoying thing is, if that does ever happen it will not be any time soon.
#55. “Was it really their vision to create sub-par effects? Did anyone there fight for a more extensive job?”
To be fair they aren’t really sub par effects, well they might be to a load of hyper critical nerds.
Ty, do you have a link to the Eden TOS FX reel you mentioned earlier by any chance? I can’t seem to find it.
http://trekmovie.com/2006/08/31/trek-movie-report-talks-to-edenfx-about-hdtv-treksee-their-test-footage/
#59 Yes that test footage does really say it all…if only. In the end money has won over quality. The original optical effects were Emmy nominated, and we could have had Emmy winning new VFX if Eden had got in. I’ll shut up now as I’m getting depressed!
#46- Definitely. In fact, MPEG 2 encodes can look every bit as good as the newer codecs in the hands of the right compressionist. This couldn’t be stressed enough.
#49- Let’s not turn this forum into a fanboy corral please? I stated that both formats delivered the goods, so lets just leave it at that. There’s really no reason to be discussing Blu-ray in this thread since this set WILL NOT be available on that format. Also, if you truly think incentives aren’t being offered to ALL studios then you’re kidding yourself. Too much time is wasted bickering about this “war.” Let’s just let the studios fight it out while we just enjoy the films and lower hardware/software prices the competition has generated!
To All:
I really don’t know what to say. If the set is too expensive or you don’t like the new effects, then simply don’t buy it and keep the original SD sets. Deep Discount DVD, an online retailer, will be having its 20% off sale, so you’ll probably be able to get the set for around $102 shipped. As someone who’s actually had the opportunity to see this set in HD, I can tell you that they look STELLAR. The over the air broadcasts or screencaps kindly placed here by Anthony simply don’t do these ep’s justice in their full 1080p glory. I didn’t think it was possible for a 40 year old tv show to look this good. HD-DVD players can be had in the $150 range, and those interested should keep their eyes peeled for specials in the days leading up to the sets release.
As a constant critic from some months ago, harping on inconsistent quality, flat effects, and more… I have to admit that season two effects are looking improved to my eye. The quality of the effects and the composition of the effects seem more fluid and interesting to me lately.
Season One just doesn’t have it as far as I’m concerned but since they came back from hiatus they are really shaping up nicely.
I’m off to see Menagarie in NYC on Tues, curious to see how the effects for an episode I complained about, translate on the big screen.
Doug L.
re 62:
Oh… part of my point being, that I would be unlikely to dole out money for teh season one set, but might consider a season two set since it’s looking better.
Doug L.
#57 – Well I was trying to be fair. I consider par the effects work Eden did for Enterprise back in 2004 for “In A Mirror Darkly .” From my perspective, nacelles aside, Eden’s work is still superior, so the current CGI from CBSD is sub-par.
57. Ty Webb – November 11, 2007
#55. “Was it really their vision to create sub-par effects? Did anyone there fight for a more extensive job?”
To be fair they aren’t really sub par effects, well they might be to a load of hyper critical nerds. ”
Flaming members prove absolutely nothing–other than the one posting flames very likely cannot stand the idea of others refusing to swallow whatever CBS tosses out on the street.
seangh is not alone in his comment by any stretch of the imagination: sub par fx in this era are inexcusble. The Enerprise (and other ships) do not look like solid objects–like it or not, and if budget or time was a problem, then what would motivate any company to issue work that has failed to appear even as solid as a miniature (read: NOT like a video game)?
Accepting inferior fx just because it happens to be Star Trek makes no sense, but hey, that is the choice of the people swallowing it. Just as it is the choice of the fans to reject fx work inferior to the true state of the art seen in this past decade of film/TV .
http://trekmovie.com/2006/09/08/more-images-from-edenfx/
“Well I was trying to be fair. I consider par the effects work Eden did for Enterprise back in 2004 for “In A Mirror Darkly .” From my perspective, nacelles aside, Eden’s work is still superior, so the current CGI from CBSD is sub-par.”
I don’t see how anyone coulld reasonably compare the best of CBS-D’s work unfavarably with the the stuff Eden did for “In a Mirrow Darkly.” Just check out the image at the top of the episode’s page at Memory Alpha, which to my mind just screams CGI:
http://images4.wikia.nocookie.net/memoryalpha/en/images/f/fd/Defiant-NCC1764.jpg
Of course, as I stated earlier, YMMV. Which is a polite way of suggesting the obvious: that in that natural course of things and for any number of reasons people wil have differing reactions to this kind of work. For some strange reason, the terminally obnoxious can’t seem to live with this, and must ascribe all sorts of nefarious motives to those who merely profess what they like. Why this should be, I can’t begin to imagine.
People have a personal right to expect professional, quality work and will comment when trumpeted work lacks any sort of industry standard some have come to expect.
#61 “I stated that both formats delivered the goods, so lets just leave it at that.”
Well, from what I’ve gathered on numerous sites the whole DVD/HD-DVD combo sets do have their fair share of issues, which this release is built on. Not my favorite thing to consider when the regular DVD alternative is built just right.
#66
A labor of love definitely triumphs over the labor of a short time and budget schedule.
Honestly, when the people who make the new FX shots come out and tell us not to criticise their work, I know for a fact I picked the wrong team to do the work.
“People have a personal right to expect professional, quality work and will comment when trumpeted work lacks any sort of industry standard some have come to expect. “
LOL. Since the creation of visual FX isn’t much like the manufacturing of bedposts or airframes there is no functional equivalent of “industry standards” that applies to evaluating the quality of the work done. Whether it be the visuals for RATATOULLE, Firefly, or a Britney Spears video, each group of professionals makes its judgements on how best to solve creative problems based on their own aesthetic criteria and the resources available to get the job done. Your statement might have some validity if you could convince us that your hyperbolically-expressed opinions actually reflect the majority of those who actually do this sort of work for a living, though. Good luck with that one.
“Honestly, when the people who make the new FX shots come out and tell us not to criticise their work, I know for a fact I picked the wrong team to do the work.”
Wow. Did someone from CBS-D actually come out and say that their work was beyond criticism? Must have missed that. (I sure hope not, since I’ve criticized a fair amount of it.)
#67 – said: “I don’t see how anyone coulld reasonably compare the best of CBS-D’s work unfavarably with the the stuff Eden did for “In a Mirrow Darkly.” Just check out the image at the top of the episode’s page at Memory Alpha, which to my mind just screams CGI:”
Remember, that model was rendered back in 04 for a single episode, with most likely a very short deadline, and to my eye I think Eden did a good job. That model has realistic definition and weight – though not perfect, I think it far exceeds the 1st season re-mastered Enterprise, which looked like it had a surface made up of low-fat milk and virtually no mass.
Look, to each his own. If you like the CBSD work – good for you. I think CBS / Paramount made a mistake doing the work in house, but their gonna make their money and most fans seem to be happy with the results – so all’s well that ends wells with lotsa dollars in the bank for CBS / Paramount. I personally thought TOS deserved better.
Sorry, I don’t think their model has realistic definition and weight at all. And citing Eden’s deadlines as an excuse for cartoony FX work is no different than doing the same for the remastered episodes. It’s an okay effort, but not, in my view, nearly as convincing as CBS-D’s best work. And please note that I mean just that: their best work. If it seems to you that I think evaluating their work fairly means accepting it uncritically, check out my comments in “The Deadly Years” thread.
#69 -
The regular dvd only alternative also won’t give you the episodes in HD.
There will be no separate SD-DVD release for this set as It’s being released as a combo only. True, combo’s have had their share of problems in the past, but the last few combo releases have been relatively problem free. Hopefully this set will add to the trend. I only have five combos and the only one I had a problem with was “Children of Men.” I did a firmware upgrade, now the disc plays fine.
re 62
I have to retract part of my post, as I just saw the effects reel for Deadly years. Back to goofy movements for the Enterprise. I don’t know. As long as they stick to orbiting planets, they’ve got that down at least.
d
71. Michael Hall – November 11, 2007
“People have a personal right to expect professional, quality work and will comment when trumpeted work lacks any sort of industry standard some have come to expect. “
LOL. Since the creation of visual FX isn’t much like the manufacturing of bedposts or airframes there is no functional equivalent of “industry standards” that applies to evaluating the quality of the work done. Whether it be the visuals for RATATOULLE, Firefly, or a Britney Spears video, each group of professionals makes its judgements on how best to solve creative problems based on their own aesthetic criteria and the resources available to get the job done. Your statement might have some validity if you could convince us that your hyperbolically-expressed opinions actually reflect the majority of those who actually do this sort of work for a living, though. Good luck with that one.”
Typical. The first sign of “arguments” without substance: poor defense (aka flames and rants) boiling down to a desire to silence critics.
Wonderful, wonderul, wonderful! LOL!!
Insdustry standards exist, however if different fx houses fail to meet the standards, that is their failing, hence the reason the non-ILM fx industry spent years attempting to mirror the quality of work in 1977’s “Star Wars” instead of inferior work later seen in 1980’s “Battle Beyond the Stars” Logically, a standard was established and acknowledged for quality and this continues to this day with fx recognized as the height of the form.
Furthermore, CBS has no rational defense; their fx “house” is not some fly-by-night, amateur operation, therefore no excuse can be created to justify the approval of video-game-esque fx on one of their most successful properties–IF packaging it to a new generation with more sophisticated views of fx was the goal. No excuse at all, and any attempted defense appears to be the result of fan hyper-defensive behavior born out of the inability to see obvious faults in their subject of interest.
The Eden FX stuff looks very CG, and their Enterprise is far too detailed for TOS. If they’d done the new shots for TOS stylistically they would have stuck out a mile and not blended with the tone of the show at all. People need to start realising this. Eden FX pointed out the stylistic differences between their approach and CBSDs approach themselves FFS. I’m firmly in the CBSd camp for what they are doing, which is keeping things as close in feel to the original style as possible. It’s not sub par effects as such but it’s keeping things simple to keep the tone of the original shots and to blend in with the style.
Thank God (COMPASSIONATE GOD) that ILM was awarded the VFX contract for TrekXI.
#77 – I’m not sure how less detail in your ENterprise model would blend in better with the “tone” of the show. Are you saying because the interior sets of the Enterprise lack detail that the outside surface of the ship should also?
Don’t forget, detail is also in lighting and shadows, which the show had in abundance.
I think Eden could have delivered a more “cinematic” Enterprise versus the cartoony, video gamey Enterprise that CBSD delivered initially (and has reverted back to for the “Deadly Years” it would seem)
I wonder if anyone from CBS Digital or any of the Suits listens to the feed back from the fans on this site anymore? I have always said I would like to see a lot more being updated. The effects are always an improvement over the originals but it’s very rare that I stop and think “that was awesome”
This project has been rushed and made on the cheap and that I am afraid comes down to the Suits at CBS Paramount not caring enough about TOS and just turning this out as quickly as possible.
It is a real shame. I do enjoy seeing what CBS Digital comes up with each week but I always come away feeling it’s not always looking quite right. This has obviously been a learning curve for the guys at CBS Digital. If the people in charge of this project had given CBS digital the time to go back over the work after the TV run was over, then with what CBS D have learnt they could have fine tuned it and replaced some of the earlier work all together.
If they did get that extra time, It would be nice if they would listen to some of the fans suggestion for other improvements that may have been too time consuming first time around because of the tight deadlines.
But that’s not going to happen now as we know, I just really hope that one day in the near future we do get a more complete version.
#80 – I think at one point after the first few shows aired, folks over at CBSD did look at these boards and actually used the feedback to improve the Enterprise, especially the nacelle caps.
But by the look of things, I doubt they are taking cues from postings on these boards anymore.
I thought Anthony had some contacts at CBSD, so I’m a little disappointed we have not had any exclusive updates about the project. The only things I have seen are from other sites and magazines.
Has CBSD snubbed Anthony because of the relative negative reaction to the remaster project from the members here at trekmovie.com? Wonder…
“The Eden FX stuff looks very CG, and their Enterprise is far too detailed for TOS. If they’d done the new shots for TOS stylistically they would have stuck out a mile and not blended with the tone of the show at all.”
Essentially, I agree with this. I think the crew at CBS-D initially considered their mandate to be little more then “cleaning up” the original FX work so the episodes would be suitable for HD broadcast, and have progressively gotten more “adventurous” with the work as their knowledge and assets have increased. At times that’s worked out quite well, as with the land bridge in “Amok Time” or the satellite deployment in “Operation, Annihalate!” Others, such as this week’s “The Deadly Years,” not so much. But even when they’ve extrapolated from the work of the original FX artists, there’s usually been an effort to keep things–especially the iconic look of the Enterprise–consistent with the ’60s aesthetic of TOS, which overall I think was the correct decision. Eden’s images may be more “cinematic” in their way, but no, I don’t think they’d cut together well with the live action portion of the show. I also don’t think it’s the place of Eden’s art department to establish, after all these years, that the original Enterprise actually looked like it was assembled from mismatched pieces of sheet metal. But that’s just me.
Star Trek is only on HD-DVD, the set will be awesome and use HD-DVDs potential to the max, and had this set come to Blu-Ray it would be seriously lacking in features or if it did have the features they wouldn’t work on most of the Blu-Ray players. Time to get over it.
#82: “I think the crew at CBS-D initially considered their mandate to be little more then “cleaning up” the original FX work so the episodes would be suitable for HD broadcast… ”
Actually, from the beginning, Rossi and company made clear that part of the remastering was an effort to draw in younger viewers that dismissed the show because of out-dated effects. He appeared on an interview somewhere (I think G4) where he debated TOS purists who wanted the show to remain untouched FX wise.
I just find it ironic that now, 2 years into the effort, it’s all about respecting the original “look” of the show (which is a laudable goal) but this seems to be used as an excuse for poorly executed visuals by CBSD.
#83
I could care less about Special Features when it comes to choosing a format. I’d rather they spend more time restoring the episodes (Not changing the visual effects mind you) rather than spend all the time coming up with these special features. The only thing I do differently when I watch a movie is a tricia track or a commentary track. All those DVDs out there they require you to press select at a certain point is just boring.
Have a look at the work that lowry digital did for the James Bond series when Sony asked them to restore all 20 films for BluRay. Sure, it hasn’t come out for BluRay yet, but when it does, I have a feeling that it will look great.
As for this HD-DVD release, they should have put the un-touched remastered versions as well. After all, they did state they weren’t going to replace the old ones, didn’t they?
#84. “Actually, from the beginning, Rossi and company made clear that part of the remastering was an effort to draw in younger viewers that dismissed the show because of out-dated effects.”
And they have done that. Their work is much more appealing than the half a dozen mucky stock shots of the Enterprise that were used all the time in the series.
“I just find it ironic that now, 2 years into the effort, it’s all about respecting the original “look” of the show (which is a laudable goal) but this seems to be used as an excuse for poorly executed visuals by CBSD.”
Nope, respecting the tone of the show and not taking things too far were always in the mandate. “We’re not going to be doing barrel roles”. Remember?
I have an 11 year old daughter who puts the effects by CBSD on par with “Jimmy Neutron” – that’s one young viewer they have not drawn in.
Honestly, this past episode tells the tale, with very marginal Birds of Prey models with flat lighting and awkward motion and yes – the Enterprise almost does a barrel roll….
#85 -
Do you seriously think this release won’t look great? I think you’re in for a shock, that is, if you intend on buying the set.
I’m sure that the Bond films will look great If they should ever make it to BD. I am equally certain the Godfather films, which just underwent a massive film restoration, will also look splendid when Paramount releases them on HD-DVD as will Universal’s Hitchcock Collection.
You may not care for certain features, but you are speaking for yourself. The PIP commentary/fx comparison will only be on seven episodes in S1. All of the episodes will have lossless Dolby True HD tracks. The video I’ve seen of a few of the episodes in 1080p have been flawless (this couldn’t be stressed enough). Everyone will not be satisfied. Afterall, this is Trek, and fans will always take issue with something. If you like the original FX shots, keep the original dvd set, as I’m told from CBS that all three seasons will remain in print.
#87. “I have an 11 year old daughter who puts the effects by CBSD on par with “Jimmy Neutron” – that’s one young viewer they have not drawn in.”
Frankly if your daughter isn’t drawn in by the show on it’s own merits, old or new effects aren’t going to make much difference. The effects shots make up probably less than 7% of each show.
The effects are part of the “merits” of Star Trek, always have been. It’s the sizzle on the steak and was what drew me to the show all those years ago as a kid.
#89 – Please, my daughter seems to understand the genre better than you. Part of delivering a space based science fiction show are the special effects that help maintain the illusion. Star Trek is not Playhouse 90, despite many well written shows, the show was firing on all cylinders when special effects played a role.
I am very proud of my fellow Seans.
Thank you – proud of you too my brother, and thank you for spelling your name the correct way.
If anyone is reading above threads the Enterprise apparently has been completely redesigned and initial opinions are that it looks HORRIBLE.
We cannot take it out too much on ILM because they probably had no input on what JJAbrams had cooked up in his head.
Pathetic that it has been redesigned when IT HAS BEEN PROVEN that the Classic TOS looks beautiful in CG.
Seans, this is a dark day!
Well Sean, let’s not get too carried away. I read the Cawley thread and James is a TOS purist, so any slight change to the old E he would take issue with I believe.
I certainly do not want to see a completely different ship, but a respectful upgrade would be OK by me.
But it’s supposed to be slightly downgraded. This is a prequel, isn’t it? Or is this a remake?
#91. It sounds like you and your daughter just don’t understand Star Trek (TOS) and think it should look like some modern sci-fi series. Oh well. There’s always one. or two.
Seans there is anoteh thread a little higher up that needs our attention. Let’s get to it.
BREAKING NEWS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
CBS-D HAS BEEN AWARDED THE CONTRACT TO REMASTER ALL OF STAR TREK THE NEXT GENERATION!!!!!!!!!!
HERE IS THEIR DEMO SHOT THAT AWARDED THEM THE CONTRACT:
http://www.thelogbook.com/phosphor/nes/2007/s1.gif
LIKEWISE, EDEN FX IS SCRATCHING THEIR HEADS WONDERING WHY THEIR FX CLIP WAS NOT SELECTED AS THE NEW STANDARD:
http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/memoryalpha/en/images/e/e7/Galaxy_class_aft.jpg
http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/memoryalpha/en/images/0/07/USS_Enterprise_%28N
OWvS7D hi! hice site!