Star Trek: The Next Generation in HD

I think the people actually remastering these episodes in HD are going to be looking out for those kinds of gaffes, Scott...we're talking about anal-retentive Trekkies like ourselves, after all!!!

 

Just the same. speaking as a guy who stands behind the monitor you just don't want to mess with that. The shots are framed by the director and DP with some purpose and artistic intent. we actually used to tape off the monitor just to show what was in "TV" as we called it. These are not random choices but choices that are actually considered in the set up of any shot. Not a good idea to mess with it arbitrarily just cause you can.

 

Could be an excuse to introduce some lesser-known pieces of Star Trek technology. Make the boom mic a phase inducer, or something

 

Found this post on a message board on the subject. I can't assess how credible it is, but it's certainly interesting.

http://trekmovie.com/2011/05/09/rumor-cbs-moving-forward-with-star-trek-tng-in-hd-project/#comments

TV-Tastic - May 22, 2011
Take this for what it’s worth as I know without providing any specific names that my claims can’t be verified, however, last year, shortly after the Trek Con statement by the CBS rep., I spoke with three very well-known names involved in TNG production, post-production and VFX in an official, albeit off-the record, capacity for my blog about this issue of TNG on Blu-Ray. Here’s what they told me:

The idea of modern Trek in HD is not a new concept at all. It had been theorized and discussed going back to the initial production of TNG season 1. Although the concept of HD TV for a consumer market is a relatively new phenomenon, in the industry it’s not. Even though how it would reach the consumer was unknown at the time, all of the episodes were produced with the idea that whatever form it would take, the original filming elements would be, HD-Ready, as it were, meaning that they didn’t “lock it in” to being only available for SD viewing and wanted to make it easy as possible for those original filming elements to be produced in a future HD product.

That really needs to be pointed out for all of you folks who are suggesting that TNG was never meant to be seen in HD. That’s simply not true. SD was the standard at the time and the show was distributed based on that standard, however, the production folks were a lot more forward-thinking than the “purists” are. All three of my sources agreed that getting those originals 35 mm elements scanned for Blu-Ray release would not be nearly as complicated a process as CBS would like you to believe or as other, industry experts and lay people who weren’t involved in the original production of the series (yet all keep making these matter-of-fact statements about the difficulty of a project like this) like to suggest. Also, consider this: unlike the original 35 mm elements of TOS, TNG used a much more modern and higher quality 35 mm film that didn’t degrade like the TOS originals did and they have been taken care of meticulously over the years. This means that they are going to require a lot less cleaning up than TOS did.

As for the elephant in the room that everyone keeps bringing up, yes, the VFX shots involving miniatures were of course, filmed in 35 mm (which I have confirmed still do exist, by the way) but then composited on SD videotape. This is where the biggest cost will lie, according to everyone. Well, perhaps, but it’s not going to be nearly as expensive as you would be led to believe. Although it is possible to rescan the individual elements and re-composite them in HD, it’s not going to happen. The issue with that is that the technology available for modern VFX and the dramatically lower costs associated with modern CGI as opposed to the late 80’s into the mid-90’s just makes a complete CG replacement of the VFX composite shots far more cost-effective than it would be to re-composite the individual 35 mm miniature photography in HD. Yes, it’s going to cost some bucks but the estimation by some that it’s too expensive is greatly exaggerated. It needs to be kept in mind that although there were far more exterior shots on TNG than TOS, at least half of it was stock footage.

Looking further down the road, it’s even less work for DS9 and VOY as those two series involved far less miniature photography relying heavily on CG. I came to find out that all of the original CGI digital files for DS9 and VOY are not only still in existence but they were all created in HD to begin with. ENT was produced and distributed entirely in HD for all four seasons. The problem with a BD release of ENT is that if CBS released it before its predecessors they would lose their shirts due to the limited popularity of the series. TNG, DS9 and VOY have to be primers before a release of ENT can even be considered.

So, I would suggest that you not believe the exaggerated negative hype regarding the “intense difficulty” of producing a quality BD product of TNG and making it profitable. Star Trek is consistently one of CBS’ most profitable brands and if you haven’t noticed with video releases, it demands a premium price like no other franchise and of course is intensely popular with overseas markets as well as here in the US. For the record, all three of my sources agreed that they would LOVE to see TNG on BD with updated VFX.

As for will it happen anytime soon, we shall see, however any fan against this obviously is speaking from the ignorance of not having HD and BD because it’s pure madness not to want to see TNG in HD if you currently have HD capability and aren’t hooking all of your equipment up with RCA cables.

 

I treasure my Blu's of TOS, but I don't know if I could sit through all seven seasons of TNG again, even in HD. I'd go for some highlights of the later seasons, but the early stuff is just awful.

 

So, no TOS Blu-Rays for you? (p.s. totally not arguing for TNG in 16:9; if it wasn't filmed that way, why work so hard to force it to work that way?)

Re: the Trekmovie post,. I'm all in favor of new CGI, but I'm not sure how re-rendering EVERYTHING is somehow cheaper and/or better than using the 35mm miniature footage and then redoing everything else. Aren't large things like ships really timeconsuming to render? I would think!

Still:

Once again, it's the battle between "how it was", and "how it could be".

 

Wow, didn't know the effects were in HD already. I wonder if they filmed them as 16:9-safe too?

They could of course do brand new model shots - Star Trek: Generations had a mix of new model shots and stock shots from the series (re-grabbed from the original film so not low-res) and the new shots looked so much nicer.

Doubt they'd bother though when they probably have a CGI model already, or at least the capacity to make one fairly quickly.

 

They'll probably go with 16x9. I would have preferred to see the Borg episodes rather than the pilot (which i always felt was somewhat weak compared to later episodes but was stellar compared to the rest of the first season stuff for the most part).

I'd prefer they do what they did with ST:TOS so it is possible that they might stay at 1.33

 

It seems incredulous to me that they would convert 4:3 to 16:9. Why chop off the top and bottom of the screen just to make it seem like it is wider. You're getting less picture, not more.

I don't see how it could work anyway. Some of those shots, the actos heads are awfully colse to the top of the screen. I can't see how they wouldn't be chopped off.

 

Like the vast majority of pre-widescreen productions, TOS should absolutely be 4:3. I'd really rather they didn't crop TNG but it's all but certain they are going to, so here's hoping it is done as mentioned above, without losing picture area seen in original broadcast.

 

I would think so too. In fact i would be very much against new CGI when the 35mm elements of actual models used in the original exist. I can't think of any advantage one would get with all new CGI. Those models are tough to beat with an all out feature film production budget and mind set much less a remastering for Blu ray mind set and budget.

 

Yes, actually I am surprised that they wouldnt simply rescan the 35 mm VFX elements for The Blu-Rays disks. Yes, I understand its cheaper to come up with new CG VFX, but if the film is THERE and in good shape, thats what should be used. Authenticity should count for something.

No doubt, some Marketing guru at CBS thinks that TNG needs to be "brought into the current age" by redoing the effects in CG. Thats always the way it is. Thats why classic technicolor movies get remastered and when you see them they no longer have that technicolor glow.....they have the new , modern "hard" look. Same ideology.

At any rate, while I wish they wouldnt mess too much with TNG, I'm VERY glad that we'll get the Blu disk with the 4 episodes, and if that sells at all (it will) I'm sure all 80 episodes will follow. It will be a must buy for all ST fans. I'm looking forward to it.

 

It may be cheaper to do really bad CGI. To do CGI that competes with 35mm prints of well made models costs way more than scanning the film. WAAAAAAAAAAY more.

 

I know people who are involved with the remastering project. My bet is that it'll be done both ways -- probably an original negative full-ap scan, and then a final transfer in 4x3 and a separate pass in 16x9 with a tilt & scan.

The real problem is going to be finding all the VFX elements. I suspect the 1980s material will be a real challenge to track down and organize...

I had the original negative up of pieces of a 1988 TNG episode for Paramount execs on a Spirit scanner for a demo at Technicolor about 5 years ago, and that was exactly what I suggested: pulling out and showing all the frame for the 4x3, then cropping for a 16x9 pass. The trick is... which would be released on Blu-ray. My guess is that they'll want to "future-proof" the show by making it 16x9, similar to what Sony Pictures TV did with the 1990s Seinfeld episodes. If you zoom out all the way and reframe to go right to the edge of the aperture plate left and right, the cut-off at the bottom won't be gigantic. It's basically what I call the "cut 'em off at the ankles" method.

BTW, Paramount just announced a $700 million studio expansion (!!!) this week, so they're apparently going to go through a major upgrade on the old Melrose lot -- including hiring thousands of new employees. Glad to see Viacom is spending some money on giving their facility a much-needed face-lift.

Star Trek: TNG never went to print -- it was strictly done in 525 NTSC, analog 1" tape for most of its run, and all the effects were done in video (using film elements). By the end of its run in 1994, they had switched to digital component mastering, but the CG effects were all of very limited resolution.

The negatives I looked at were stunning and will hold up extremely well in HD. It was a beautifully-shot show.

 

A slightly relevant example of remastered possibilities...

Original:


Fan-made CGI from 2010:


Studio CGI would (should) obviously be much better but it kinda highlights how bad the original effects shots would look next to 1080p live action if they didn't redo them all.

 

On Netflix it doesn't look quite as bad as that first screenshot, but all the effects shots look like carp due to really bad matte lining and movement is really "digital". It doesn't look realistic.

 

Seriously? I'm not watching that!!!

 

From the ST:TNG episode Manhunt:

 

Fuuny, I think the original is far superior with the exception of the lack of resolution which is inherent in a screen capture of that nature. With all due respect to the fan made artwork it looks entirely painted to my eye.

 

I agree. The original looks more realistic and the other like a cartoon.

 

Thanks Marc

I was glad to see Marc (vidiot) chime in, because this is his area of expertise!!

Great to hear that the negs for TNG will look good in HD. Thats really all that matters. If they really need to redo the effects, well, ok. I'd rather they didnt but lets all just be happy we're going to get a good looking transfer.

The only thing thats bothering me just a little is that apparantly they are using the transfers made in 2006? thats 5 years ago already. I would be a bit happier if they were doing them now, using todays scanners and codecs.
But, I imagine I'm nit picking with that.

 

As always, thanks for your thoughts on this.

 

Aren't people up in arms over the changes to the original "Star Wars" movies? Why are people okay with an altered aspect ratio and changed effects for "TNG" but outraged about "Star Wars"?

 

No, the original looks like a blur.

Like I said, it was simply a demonstration of clarity. Any CGI they do end up creating should look much better than that.