›

Greetings!

Welcome to Scifi-Meshes.com! Click one of these buttons to join in on the fun.

Sign In Register

Quick Links

DS9 in High Definition... could it be one step closer?

Chris2005Chris2005678 Posts: 3,097Member
edited May 2013 in General Discussion #1
Original SD (DVD):
http://ds9.trekcore.com/images/waltz_002.jpg

Re-rendered in HD:
http://ds9.trekcore.com/images/NeblaClass_Honshu-DS9_HD_r24.jpg

Read More:
http://trekcore.com/blog/2013/05/deep-space-nine-in-high-definition-one-step-closer/
Post edited by Chris2005 on
AMD Ryzen 9 5900X
Gigabyte RTX 3080 Gaming OC 12GB
1TB NVMe SSD, 2 x 1GB SATA SSD, 4TB external HDD
32 GB RAM
Windows 11 Pro
Tagged:
«13

Posts

  • IRMLIRML253 Posts: 1,993Member
    #2
    I could not bear to see the cool vfx of ds9 get screwed up by people that don't know what they're doing
  • evil_genius_180evil_genius_1804256 Posts: 11,034Member
    #3
    DS9 has fantastic visual effects. If they do this, they need to leave those alone and just re-print the show as it was in HD format. But, they probably won't do that.
  • BCBC0 Posts: 0Member
    #4
    IRML wrote: »
    I could not bear to see the cool vfx of ds9 get screwed up by people that don't know what they're doing

    Considering the cheapest and most expedient way of doing in it this case is to use the original companies and the original digital assets instead of redoing them from scratch there are fewer opportunities for screwups like they had in the TOS remastering.

    The TOS episode with the mysterious ship that turned out to be Orion was the worst for interpretive gaffs I think, the dialog clearly showed that they were having trouble getting a good enough sensor read on the ship to identify it yet it is clearly visible on the screen in detail in the remastered version. The screen image was supposed to have an alias icon for the ship instead of the image of one and instead of doing an uprated version of that idea they just knee-jerk inserted a ship image.
  • spacefighterspacefighter2 Posts: 0Member
    #5
    never saw ds9, was there a lot of action and battles? i know there was something with klingons and dominion forces. being more modern i guess they used cgi effects.
  • Chris2005Chris2005678 Posts: 3,097Member
    #6
    IRML wrote: »
    I could not bear to see the cool vfx of ds9 get screwed up by people that don't know what they're doing

    Well, the first few season's should be alright, since it was mostly miniatures... but who are you referring to?
    AMD Ryzen 9 5900X
    Gigabyte RTX 3080 Gaming OC 12GB
    1TB NVMe SSD, 2 x 1GB SATA SSD, 4TB external HDD
    32 GB RAM
    Windows 11 Pro
  • IRMLIRML253 Posts: 1,993Member
    #7
    whoever it was on the TNG remastering who put bloom on everything, some of the engine glows even had the wrong blending mode, it was pretty silly

    I have some of the DS9 scene files, maybe I'll render up one in HD to see how it looks
  • LatosLatos335 Posts: 0Member
    #8
    Chris2005 wrote: »
    Original SD (DVD):
    waltz_002.jpg

    Re-rendered in HD:
    NeblaClass_Honshu-DS9_HD_r24.jpg

    Read More:
    http://trekcore.com/blog/2013/05/deep-space-nine-in-high-definition-one-step-closer/

    Can somebody please tell me how second image is better? Who the hell is "re-rendering" this? It's abomination...in my eyes.
  • Chris2005Chris2005678 Posts: 3,097Member
    #9
    IRML wrote: »
    whoever it was on the TNG remastering who put bloom on everything, some of the engine glows even had the wrong blending mode, it was pretty silly

    I have some of the DS9 scene files, maybe I'll render up one in HD to see how it looks

    Well, CBS Digital is doing Season's 1, 3, 5, 6 and 7...

    Wrong blending mode? Perhaps you can show an example of what you mean, so far, I've not had a single issue with CBS Digital's quality... I personally love what CBS Digital is doing...

    HTV Illuminate (now re-branded as illuminate Hollywood) did Season 2, however, Modern Videofilm is doing Season 4. Except for Redemption, I believe CBS Digital is doing both parts of it, to maintain consistency, as they did both parts of Best of Both Worlds...

    If you haven't seen the Season 4 trailer, here it is:

    Mind you, some shots aren't completed...
    Latos wrote: »
    Can somebody please tell me how second image is better? Who the hell is "re-rendering" this? It's abomination...in my eyes.

    It should be noted, in the article it does say that the shot is unfinished... as the credit says in the bottom, the image was provided by Robert Bonchune.
    AMD Ryzen 9 5900X
    Gigabyte RTX 3080 Gaming OC 12GB
    1TB NVMe SSD, 2 x 1GB SATA SSD, 4TB external HDD
    32 GB RAM
    Windows 11 Pro
  • IRMLIRML253 Posts: 1,993Member
    #10
    http://tng.trekcore.com/bluray/exclusive_images/Farpoint/Farpoint04.jpg

    look at that and tell me the bloom on the warp grills is correct, because it's not, and I saw that in a few of the screenshots you posted, very shoddy and something I really wouldn't have expected from 'professionals'

    that and the general bloom all over, which makes it look like vaseline has been smeared on the lens, who honestly thinks that effect looks good?
  • evil_genius_180evil_genius_1804256 Posts: 11,034Member
    #11
    spacefighter wrote: »
    never saw ds9, was there a lot of action and battles? i know there was something with klingons and dominion forces. being more modern i guess they used cgi effects.

    Action wise, it varies like all of the Treks do. Star Trek has always been more story driven than action driven, though the last few seasons involved a couple wars, so there was more action. There weren't really any big enemies until they met the Dominion at the end of season 2. The action started to pick up there, though the really big battles started happening more in seasons 4, 5, 6 and 7.

    And yes, lots of CGI, especially in the later seasons. They had some really huge battles unlike any seen previously on a Star Trek TV series. Dozens of GCI ships doing battle. It's quite spectacular.
  • Chris2005Chris2005678 Posts: 3,097Member
    #12
    IRML wrote: »
    http://tng.trekcore.com/bluray/exclusive_images/Farpoint/Farpoint04.jpg

    look at that and tell me the bloom on the warp grills is correct, because it's not, and I saw that in a few of the screenshots you posted, very shoddy and something I really wouldn't have expected from 'professionals'

    that and the general bloom all over, which makes it look like vaseline has been smeared on the lens, who honestly thinks that effect looks good?

    Well, I'm not sure what you see wrong with them... Granted, in motion it looks a lot better...

    http://tng.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/s1/1x01/farpoint1_012.jpg

    http://tng.trekcore.com/hd/albums/1x01/farpoint_hd_040.jpg

    To you, what should they look like?

    As for the general bloom, it hasn't really bothered me... of course, watching it in motion, it's hardly noticeable...
    AMD Ryzen 9 5900X
    Gigabyte RTX 3080 Gaming OC 12GB
    1TB NVMe SSD, 2 x 1GB SATA SSD, 4TB external HDD
    32 GB RAM
    Windows 11 Pro
  • IRMLIRML253 Posts: 1,993Member
    #13
    with regards to bloom, top one every time
  • MadKoiFishMadKoiFish9797 Posts: 5,325Member
    #14
    Look to the left of that last image
    See the dark blue glow on the nacelle, that is completely wrong. See how the original lightens the nacelle where the remaster image darkens? This along with the heavy handed IMO heavy handed bloom on other scenes. Even the sample you have here it is too strong in the saturation, the bloom is adding colour to the hull which is ugly and wrong as well. Bloom should not saturate colour.

    That ds9 one is like welcome to 1995. Overlaid glows, aka maxpost glows. The materials on that ship are terrible no texture just a flat saucer with a diffuse map. I do not even want to go into the matted out details and the lighting on the nacelle and bussards. It is blown out, over saturated, and fake looking. The windows really irk me since light in space would likely be cooler in range thus resulting in HUMAN preferred lighting to appear yellow orange IE WARM toned in any colour corrected space scene.
    Each day we draw closer to the end.
  • Chris2005Chris2005678 Posts: 3,097Member
    #15
    IRML wrote: »
    with regards to bloom, top one every time

    All I can say is, each to their. :) I personally love the remastering. :D
    MadKoiFish wrote: »
    Look to the left of that last image
    See the dark blue glow on the nacelle, that is completely wrong. See how the original lightens the nacelle where the remaster image darkens? This along with the heavy handed IMO heavy handed bloom on other scenes. Even the sample you have here it is too strong in the saturation, the bloom is adding colour to the hull which is ugly and wrong as well. Bloom should not saturate colour.

    That ds9 one is like welcome to 1995. Overlaid glows, aka maxpost glows. The materials on that ship are terrible no texture just a flat saucer with a diffuse map. I do not even want to go into the matted out details and the lighting on the nacelle and bussards. It is blown out, over saturated, and fake looking. The windows really irk me since light in space would likely be cooler in range thus resulting in HUMAN preferred lighting to appear yellow orange IE WARM toned in any colour corrected space scene.

    I see what you mean, but overall, I still think the shot looks magnitudes better than the standard definition, that goes for all the shots (with the exception of much of Season 2, which was kind of a let down, but still look a lot crisper than their SD versions) ... of course, a lot of SD shots appear overblown... I guess, as a result of the technology of the time...

    Well, the DS9 shot he provided to TrekCore is not finished... it was just a quick render done by Robert Bonchune...

    However, comparing other shots of TNG...

    http://tng.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/s3/3x02/evolution000a.jpg

    http://tng.trekcore.com/bluray/images_s3review/review1.jpg

    http://tng.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/s3/3x18/allegiance216.jpg

    http://tng.trekcore.com/bluray/images_s3review/lonkacluster_full.jpg

    http://tng.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/s3/3x04/whowatchesthewatchers068.jpg

    http://tng.trekcore.com/bluray/images_s3review/review8.jpg

    http://tng.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/s3/3x06/boobytrap087.jpg

    http://tng.trekcore.com/bluray/images_s3review/review12.jpg
    AMD Ryzen 9 5900X
    Gigabyte RTX 3080 Gaming OC 12GB
    1TB NVMe SSD, 2 x 1GB SATA SSD, 4TB external HDD
    32 GB RAM
    Windows 11 Pro
  • IRMLIRML253 Posts: 1,993Member
    #16
    Chris2005 wrote: »
    All I can say is, each to their. :) I personally love the remastering. :D

    I see what you mean, but overall, I still think the shot looks magnitudes better than the standard definition, that goes for all the shots (with the exception of much of Season 2, which was kind of a let down, but still look a lot crisper than their SD versions) ... of course, a lot of SD shots appear overblown... I guess, as a result of the technology of the time...
    you're missing the point a bit

    of course the HD shots have their merits, I'm not denying that, what I'm talking about are the very sloppy errors and questionable judgement present - the CGI in DS9 was outstanding for its time and I would hate to see it spoiled with the same sloppyness
  • Chris2005Chris2005678 Posts: 3,097Member
    #17
    IRML wrote: »
    you're missing the point a bit

    of course the HD shots have their merits, I'm not denying that, what I'm talking about are the very sloppy errors and questionable judgement present - the CGI in DS9 was outstanding for its time and I would hate to see it spoiled with the same sloppyness

    Well, all I can say, is to me, it looks fine... sloppy errors to me, are like layers being misplaced or just way out of whack, but the blending mode for the warp engines doesn't really stick out to me as a horrendous problem... I'll continue to buy the TNG blu-ray releases... because sales largely depend on whether we'll even see the rest of the Trek TV series' remastered... granted, Enterprise Season 1 has already come out on blu-ray, but not much is required there, since they're just up-scaling the CG shots of Enterprise.

    Well, the CG shot that was provided wasn't finished, it was just a straight shot out of Lightwave, to my knowledge...
    AMD Ryzen 9 5900X
    Gigabyte RTX 3080 Gaming OC 12GB
    1TB NVMe SSD, 2 x 1GB SATA SSD, 4TB external HDD
    32 GB RAM
    Windows 11 Pro
  • MadKoiFishMadKoiFish9797 Posts: 5,325Member
    #18
    IRML wrote: »
    you're missing the point a bit

    of course the HD shots have their merits, I'm not denying that, what I'm talking about are the very sloppy errors and questionable judgement present - the CGI in DS9 was outstanding for its time and I would hate to see it spoiled with the same sloppyness

    Exactly that is like taking your car in for a respray to find the guy sprayed it with house latex.

    Yes, the context of these images is lacking if you do not read the article. Even if it is a out of LW I would have made some effort to fix up or remove the post glows.

    So, my welcome to 1995 fits cause well HAH. The models are from then.
    Hopefully over time they will cut down on the heavy handed post filters.
    Each day we draw closer to the end.
  • PixelMagicPixelMagic471 Posts: 663Member
    #19
    Chris2005 wrote: »
    Well, all I can say, is to me, it looks fine... sloppy errors to me, are like layers being misplaced or just way out of whack, but the blending mode for the warp engines doesn't really stick out to me as a horrendous problem...

    I have to agree with IRML here. The engine glows are composited with an incorrect blending mode such as Lighten or Unmult. It makes it look unnatural. Warp Grill glows should only be composited with Add blending mode in a linear colorspace. That is the only correct way to do it.

    Although not a direct comparison, let's again look at the image that IRML was complaining about, look at the left nacelle specifically. The way the glow blends with the hull underneath looks odd, almost like someone took a blue paint brush and just painted the glow on. The glow isn't even transparent as it should be and is obscuring the hull underneath.

    http://tng.trekcore.com/bluray/exclusive_images/Farpoint/Farpoint04.jpg

    Now, let's look at a render of the D that I did (forgive the high resolution). Notice how my glow blends very naturally, and you can see the hull through it. It also has the rich nacelle blue I'm used to, as opposed to the washed out cyan of the TNG remastered shot.

    http://www.gldrush98.com/uploads/tng_ent_4k.png
  • Chris2005Chris2005678 Posts: 3,097Member
    #20
    PixelMagic wrote: »
    I have to agree with IRML here. The engine glows are composited with an incorrect blending mode such as Lighten or Unmult. It makes it look unnatural. Warp Grill glows should only be composited with Add blending mode in a linear colorspace. That is the only correct way to do it.

    Although not a direct comparison, let's again look at the image that IRML was complaining about, look at the left nacelle specifically. The way the glow blends with the hull underneath looks odd, almost like someone took a blue paint brush and just painted the glow on. The glow isn't even transparent as it should be and is obscuring the hull underneath.

    http://tng.trekcore.com/bluray/exclusive_images/Farpoint/Farpoint04.jpg

    Now, let's look at a render of the D that I did (forgive the high resolution). Notice how my glow blends very naturally, and you can see the hull through it. It also has the rich nacelle blue I'm used to, as opposed to the washed out cyan of the TNG remastered shot.

    http://www.gldrush98.com/uploads/tng_ent_4k.png

    I see what you both mean... but again it doesn't really stick out to me, at least when the shot is compared how it looked in Season 2, for some reason, HTV redid the compositing... in this case from "The Schizoid Man."

    http://tng.trekcore.com/hd/albums/2x06/theschizoidman_hd_053.jpg

    Same with a lot other shots...

    Beginning of Season 1 (CBS Digital):
    http://tng.trekcore.com/hd/albums/1x01/farpoint_hd_442.jpg

    End of in Season 1 (The Arsenal of Freedom):
    http://tng.trekcore.com/hd/albums/1x21/thearsenaloffreedom_hd_242.jpg

    Season 2 (HTV):
    http://tng.trekcore.com/hd/albums/2x16/qwho_hd_485.jpg

    Season 3 (CBS Digital):
    http://tng.trekcore.com/bluray/images_s3review/vulcan_full.jpg

    The early Season 1 shot was too blown out, the end of Season 1 was basically how it would also appear in Season 3, Season 2 was just way too bright...

    Some shots aren't as bad:
    http://tng.trekcore.com/hd/albums/1x07/lonelyamongus_hd_321.jpg
    AMD Ryzen 9 5900X
    Gigabyte RTX 3080 Gaming OC 12GB
    1TB NVMe SSD, 2 x 1GB SATA SSD, 4TB external HDD
    32 GB RAM
    Windows 11 Pro
  • evil_genius_180evil_genius_1804256 Posts: 11,034Member
    #21
    Issues like these are why I haven't gone for these "remasters." I want the entire show to look like it did 20 years ago, effects and all, but with a clearer picture. But that's not what they're selling. I was all excited about TNG remastered when they said they were going to use all original elements and recompose them. But, of course, that turned out to be a lie. It may have been OK if they could redo stuff without messing it up. But they can't even get an engine glow right. So, it's not the same. I grew up with TNG, it was for me what TOS was for '60s kids. So, to see them messing things up like this makes me unhappy. It's as bad as what George Lucas has done to the Star Wars trilogy. That's why I haven't bought TNG "remastered," to me it's no better than what they did to TOS. And I likely won't buy DS9 "remastered" for the same reason. I want the original stuff, not cheap knock offs. (thank goodness they released all of these on DVD with their original effects a long time ago)
  • Chris2005Chris2005678 Posts: 3,097Member
    #22
    evil_genius_180 wrote: »
    Issues like these are why I haven't gone for these "remasters." I want the entire show to look like it did 20 years ago, effects and all, but with a clearer picture. But that's not what they're selling. I was all excited about TNG remastered when they said they were going to use all original elements and recompose them. But, of course, that turned out to be a lie. It may have been OK if they could redo stuff without messing it up. But they can't even get an engine glow right. So, it's not the same. I grew up with TNG, it was for me what TOS was for '60s kids. So, to see them messing things up like this makes me unhappy. It's as bad as what George Lucas has done to the Star Wars trilogy. That's why I haven't bought TNG "remastered," to me it's no better than what they did to TOS. And I likely won't buy DS9 "remastered" for the same reason. I want the original stuff, not cheap knock offs. (thank goodness they released all of these on DVD with their original effects a long time ago)

    I about passed out when I saw the first remastered shots... I can't even watch the original SD versions anymore they bother my eyes so bad... and they are using the original elements... CG is only being used when it's necessary... say a certain pass can't be found or in the case of the Crystalline Entity, the original 3D files were lost...

    However, this looks magnitudes better than the standard definition...

    HD
    http://tng.trekcore.com/bluray/images_s3review/review20.jpg
    SD
    http://tng.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/s3/3x10/thedefector280.jpg

    Well, Season 2 went that way, Dan Curry wanted to make the show appear as it did 20 years ago, just in high definition... and well, it didn't receive a warm welcome... especially after what people got with Season 1... and are now foaming at the mouth about with Season 3...

    For example, Season 1 (CBS Digital):
    ttp://tng.trekcore.com/hd/albums/1x21/thearsenaloffreedom_hd_123.jpg

    Season 2 (HTV with Dan Curry):
    http://tng.trekcore.com/hd/albums/2x12/theroyale_hd_031.jpg

    Original SD version:
    http://tng.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/s1/1x21/arsenal065.jpg
    AMD Ryzen 9 5900X
    Gigabyte RTX 3080 Gaming OC 12GB
    1TB NVMe SSD, 2 x 1GB SATA SSD, 4TB external HDD
    32 GB RAM
    Windows 11 Pro
  • evil_genius_180evil_genius_1804256 Posts: 11,034Member
    #23
    Well, it's a difference of opinion. You say it makes your eyes hurt, I say that's the way I've always watched it and it looks just fine, even on my HDTV.
    Chris2005 wrote: »
    and they are using the original elements... CG is only being used when it's necessary... say a certain pass can't be found or in the case of the Crystalline Entity, the original 3D files were lost...

    You just contradicted yourself.

    And I seriously doubt they're using CGI "only when necessary." I highly doubt that practically every planet shot has been "lost" and I know for a fact that the majority of the planets have been redone. Also, they use CGI to recreate a shot that's identical to one used in a different episode for which they used existing footage. They didn't have to use CGI, they could have used the footage from the other episode. That's how it go there in the first place. So, don't tell me they're using CGI "only when necessary." They're redoing stuff they don't have to do because they want to redo it. They're artists. I know a *few* artists and they tend to put their own mark on stuff.

    Season 2 does look closer to the mark, though it still doesn't look right. For one thing, the ship is all blown out. They made the model look like it's glowing. The "dark" side isn't even dark, it's almost as light as the side being hit by the light. It's not that way in the original version. The Season 1 version has correct lighting on the ship, but the starfield is clearly different, as is the planet. I like the way the planet looks better in the Season 2 version, though neither got the stars right. They're all white, for one thing, whereas there were colored stars in the original, as there should be.
  • IRMLIRML253 Posts: 1,993Member
    #24
    Chris2005 wrote: »
    I see what you both mean... but again it doesn't really stick out to me, at least when the shot is compared how it looked in Season 2, for some reason, HTV redid the compositing... in this case from "The Schizoid Man."

    Same with a lot other shots...

    Beginning of Season 1 (CBS Digital):
    farpoint_hd_442.jpg
    chris can you see here how the nacelle glow is darkening the planet behind? it's the same thing I'm talking about

    another thing I miss with the remasters is how everything used to be bright, when I used to watch TNG I thought it was a white ship, everything was nice and bright and popped out from the background clearly, if look at your example here everything in the new one is kind of grey and dark and not as clear (resolution aside), the BoPs are particularly hard to see compared to the old one
    Chris2005 wrote: »
    I about passed out when I saw the first remastered shots... I can't even watch the original SD versions anymore they bother my eyes so bad... and they are using the original elements... CG is only being used when it's necessary... say a certain pass can't be found or in the case of the Crystalline Entity, the original 3D files were lost...

    However, this looks magnitudes better than the standard definition...

    HD
    review20.jpg
    SD
    thedefector280.jpg
  • spacefighterspacefighter2 Posts: 0Member
    #25
    from the comparison shots, HD every time. it's kind of shocking to think how bad the quality is in some of those images but the series only came out 1990s. babylon 5 is from the same era but the dvds are probably remastered and they look much better. it is very rare i worry about HD on television and dvds but when the difference is that great it is noticeable. surely the remastering process just improves the picture quality(and allows them to boost the prices extortionately) and does not change anything important such as what happens, what is said and what the things look like(short of changes to the brightness or lighting). then again when you watch it in motion the poor quality shown in some of those shots might not be so noticable. as for the image with the BOPs, romulans and galaxy class the new one is better because you can see the details even if it is darker. the only real difference between it and the old one is that in the old one everything is blurred and hence appears enlarged.
  • evil_genius_180evil_genius_1804256 Posts: 11,034Member
    #26
    Comparing TNG and Bablyon 5 isn't really fair because TNG started 7 years before Babylon 5 and was wrapping up by the time Bablyon 5 even hit the airways. Though, for me, TNG still wins. They used real models, so the effects look more real. By the time Babylon 5 came out, the movie Generations was hitting theaters. If you want a more fair comparison, compare Babylon 5 with Voyager. Both started in 1994 and both relied more heavily on CGI. Now, Voyager still used some physical models, but most everything else was done in CGI, whereas Babylon 5 was all CGI and their CGI is less realistic looking than what was done on Voyager, in my humble opinion. Compare the opening credits sequence of Voyager with any first season Babylon 5 effects sequence and you'll see a clear winner.

    Back to TNG "HD" effects, I approve of this:

    SD:

    02-shadesofgray.jpg

    HD:

    02-shadesofgray-r.jpg

    The lighting is excellent, the glows look pretty good and they clearly used the same planet. If they'd done more of the series just like that, I'd like it. Yes, that is from season 2, the finale episode Shades of Gray.

    That's how TNG in HD should look, in my humble opinion. But, that's not how most of it looks. And, since that company isn't allowed to do any more, none of the rest of it is going to look that good.
    101493.jpg101494.jpg
  • Chris2005Chris2005678 Posts: 3,097Member
    #27
    evil_genius_180 wrote: »
    Well, it's a difference of opinion. You say it makes your eyes hurt, I say that's the way I've always watched it and it looks just fine, even on my HDTV.

    You just contradicted yourself.

    And I seriously doubt they're using CGI "only when necessary." I highly doubt that practically every planet shot has been "lost" and I know for a fact that the majority of the planets have been redone. Also, they use CGI to recreate a shot that's identical to one used in a different episode for which they used existing footage. They didn't have to use CGI, they could have used the footage from the other episode. That's how it go there in the first place. So, don't tell me they're using CGI "only when necessary." They're redoing stuff they don't have to do because they want to redo it. They're artists. I know a *few* artists and they tend to put their own mark on stuff.

    Season 2 does look closer to the mark, though it still doesn't look right. For one thing, the ship is all blown out. They made the model look like it's glowing. The "dark" side isn't even dark, it's almost as light as the side being hit by the light. It's not that way in the original version. The Season 1 version has correct lighting on the ship, but the starfield is clearly different, as is the planet. I like the way the planet looks better in the Season 2 version, though neither got the stars right. They're all white, for one thing, whereas there were colored stars in the original, as there should be.

    Well, after watching the clarity of the show in HD, with the better color timings, watching it in SD does hurt my eyes... because it's so blurry, etc. When I saw the remastering, it was like watching the show for the first time again... not to mention, the time, money and work that's gone into this project.

    I didn't contradict myself, because, yes, I know CG is being used, but it's not being used on everything, short of planets, phasers, etc. the only time CG is being used for a ship, etc. is when original film elements can't be found or in the case of the opening shot of "Sins of the Father," they changed the bird of prey to a CG model so it matched the angle and lighting better with the Enterprise...

    But, obviously most of the planets have to be redone, as well as any effects that were created on tape and have no original film elements, since some of the planets were very primitive CG models and wouldn't stand up to HD...

    In 11001001, the original matte painting was used, albeit punched up a little:
    http://tng.trekcore.com/hd/albums/1x15/11001001_hd_008.jpg

    But shots like this, I believe had rudimentary CG planets:
    http://tng.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/s1/1x21/arsenal000.jpg

    So, the planet has to be recreated in CG:
    http://tng.trekcore.com/hd/albums/1x21/thearsenaloffreedom_hd_007.jpg

    Which I think looks absolutely amazing.

    However, when it comes to the miniature shots, it's all original film elements unless a pass for a shot can't be found... and when the pass is found, all later shots are done with the now found original elements... for example... in Encounter at Farpoint, some of the original passes for the energy beam shot couldn't be found, so they had created a hybrid of CG and the original passes, to create this:
    http://tng.trekcore.com/hd/albums/1x01/farpoint_hd_862.jpg

    However, the rest of the layers were found later, so they were able to use them in "Heart of Glory:"
    http://tng.trekcore.com/hd/albums/1x20/heartofglory_hd_414.jpg

    As well as in later shots that use it, "Booby Trap" for example:
    http://tng.trekcore.com/bluray/images_s3review/review11.jpg

    I personally prefer the stars in CBS Digital's seasons, the stars are in fact original ILM digital stars, according to the (I think) VFX supervisor in the Season 1 blu-ray bonus features... the stars in Season 2 were often too big and blurry...

    I mean, comparing these 2 shots:

    HTV (Season 2, The Child):
    http://tng.trekcore.com/hd/albums/2x01/thechild_hd_152.jpg

    CBS Digital (Season 3, The Best of Both Worlds, Part I):
    http://tng.trekcore.com/bluray/images_bobwreview/review8.jpg

    I clearly prefer CBS Digital's version of the shot...

    The Crystalline Entity was also recreated, since the original 3D files for it couldn't be found and I must say the new CG model looks amazing...
    http://tng.trekcore.com/hd/albums/1x13/datalore_hd_399.jpg
    IRML wrote: »
    chris can you see here how the nacelle glow is darkening the planet behind? it's the same thing I'm talking about

    another thing I miss with the remasters is how everything used to be bright, when I used to watch TNG I thought it was a white ship, everything was nice and bright and popped out from the background clearly, if look at your example here everything in the new one is kind of grey and dark and not as clear (resolution aside), the BoPs are particularly hard to see compared to the old one

    I see what you mean. However, I wouldn't consider that a complete turn off from the remastering.

    As for the bright deal, I've been told it's because of the technology then, blew out everything... so everything was overblown, etc. and the remastering is how it should've looked back then.
    evil_genius_180 wrote: »
    Back to TNG "HD" effects, I approve of this:

    SD:

    02-shadesofgray.jpg

    02-shadesofgray-r.jpg

    The lighting is excellent, the glows look pretty good and they clearly used the same planet. If they'd done more of the series just like that, I'd like it. Yes, that is from season 2, the finale episode Shades of Gray.

    That's how TNG in HD should look, in my humble opinion. But, that's not how most of it looks. And, since that company isn't allowed to do any more, none of the rest of it is going to look that good.

    Aside from the wrong aspect ratio of the Enterprise, for some reason HTV forgot to fix it in that shot, which is weird, because it's right in one shot and wrong in another...

    Well, Season 2 got mostly negative feedback over on TrekCore and elsewhere I've been with how Season 2 turned out, where the ship wasn't blended into the shot, etc. everything is flat looking, low contrast, etc.

    As for the planet, if it was originally a CG planet, it's most likely not the same planet elements that were used in the original shot, but rather a really similar replica, because like CBS Digital, HTV also created new planet elements, it's just theirs are lower resolution, hence why they look a lot blurrier than CBS Digital's... Max Gabl has done all the planets for CBS Digital, and he's also lending his talents for Season 4 with Modern Videofilm... they've also been tailored with guidance from Mike and Denise Okuda.

    Instead of the same reused planet footage for say, Risa, he created a new planet, which I think looks gorgeous.
    http://tng.trekcore.com/bluray/images_s3review/review38.jpg
    AMD Ryzen 9 5900X
    Gigabyte RTX 3080 Gaming OC 12GB
    1TB NVMe SSD, 2 x 1GB SATA SSD, 4TB external HDD
    32 GB RAM
    Windows 11 Pro
  • spacefighterspacefighter2 Posts: 0Member
    #28
    evil_genius_180 wrote: »
    Comparing TNG and Bablyon 5 isn't really fair because TNG started 7 years before Babylon 5 and was wrapping up by the time Bablyon 5 even hit the airways. Though, for me, TNG still wins. They used real models, so the effects look more real. By the time Babylon 5 came out, the movie Generations was hitting theaters. If you want a more fair comparison, compare Babylon 5 with Voyager. Both started in 1994 and both relied more heavily on CGI. Now, Voyager still used some physical models, but most everything else was done in CGI, whereas Babylon 5 was all CGI and their CGI is less realistic looking than what was done on Voyager, in my humble opinion. Compare the opening credits sequence of Voyager with any first season Babylon 5 effects sequence and you'll see a clear winner.

    Back to TNG "HD" effects, I approve of this:

    SD:

    02-shadesofgray.jpg

    HD:

    02-shadesofgray-r.jpg

    The lighting is excellent, the glows look pretty good and they clearly used the same planet. If they'd done more of the series just like that, I'd like it. Yes, that is from season 2, the finale episode Shades of Gray.

    That's how TNG in HD should look, in my humble opinion. But, that's not how most of it looks. And, since that company isn't allowed to do any more, none of the rest of it is going to look that good.

    sorry i was comparing DS9 to babylon 5, purely on image quality.
  • evil_genius_180evil_genius_1804256 Posts: 11,034Member
    #29
    @spacefighter: I see what you're saying, I misunderstood. I have to agree and I think Babylon 5 was ahead of a lot of shows of the time as far as image quality.

    @Chris: I knew all along that they'd have to redo the CGI planets. In fact, I have probably been too harsh on them in that regard. Both companies are doing great with those. What I mostly don't like about the CBS Digital versions are how much darker the ships are and what Dave mentioned about the glows.

    For the pictures I posted, both the SD and HD used Earth maps, the contours of the land prove this. What I like about the HD version is that the planet looks very close to the original. If they used new maps, they're very similar. Also, things like the clouds and atmosphere are a close match. Though, what I like is how well the ship came out. They probably intentionally didn't fix the aspect ratio on the ship because they were recreating the original shot.

    For that shot from 11001001, I believe the original was done with stock footage of the Enterprise approaching Spacedock in Star Trek III and they simply changed Enterprises. That's why it looks so fantastic, even in SD. So, CBS Digital just had to use the same footage, since Star Trek III has already been remastered in HD.
  • Chris2005Chris2005678 Posts: 3,097Member
    #30
    evil_genius_180 wrote: »
    @Chris: I knew all along that they'd have to redo the CGI planets. In fact, I have probably been too harsh on them in that regard. Both companies are doing great with those. What I mostly don't like about the CBS Digital versions are how much darker the ships are and what Dave mentioned about the glows.

    For the pictures I posted, both the SD and HD used Earth maps, the contours of the land prove this. What I like about the HD version is that the planet looks very close to the original. If they used new maps, they're very similar. Also, things like the clouds and atmosphere are a close match. Though, what I like is how well the ship came out. They probably intentionally didn't fix the aspect ratio on the ship because they were recreating the original shot.

    For that shot from 11001001, I believe the original was done with stock footage of the Enterprise approaching Spacedock in Star Trek III and they simply changed Enterprises. That's why it looks so fantastic, even in SD. So, CBS Digital just had to use the same footage, since Star Trek III has already been remastered in HD.

    Yea, it may match the original, but at least it could've been a little sharper, it's too blurry... and people really didn't like how the planets looked in Season 2, well, how Season 2 looked in general, for the planets, they pretty much said they just look like the originals stretched to HD...

    The aspect ratio of the ship is even off compared to the SD version... this is how it should look:

    Season 2 (Unnatural Selection):
    http://tng.trekcore.com/hd/albums/2x07/unnaturalselection_hd_176.jpg

    I mean, even from episode to episode it's not consistent, at least in Season 2.

    Season 2 (Up The Long Ladder):
    http://tng.trekcore.com/hd/albums/2x18/upthelongladder_hd_145.jpg

    If you compare the 2 shots you posted, the HD shot, the Enterprise is squashed horizontally compared to the SD shot...

    As opposed to CBS Digital, whose effects shots are consistent more or less... the ship itself looks different because they actually went the extra mile and help incorporate the Enterprise into the shot...

    Season 1 (When The Bough Breaks):
    http://tng.trekcore.com/hd/albums/1x17/whentheboughbreaks_hd_050.jpg

    Season 1 (Conspiracy):
    http://tng.trekcore.com/hd/albums/1x25/conspiracy_hd_386.jpg

    Yes, most of the elements are from Star Trek III, but the remastered shot in 11001001 was re-composited from scratch... as are all the exterior shots...

    http://tng.trekcore.com/hd/albums/bonus_s1/energized/tng1_energized_191.jpg

    Going back to the shot from the credits about the glows, here is a shot where the elements are used in an episode:

    http://tng.trekcore.com/hd/albums/1x25/conspiracy_hd_089.jpg
    AMD Ryzen 9 5900X
    Gigabyte RTX 3080 Gaming OC 12GB
    1TB NVMe SSD, 2 x 1GB SATA SSD, 4TB external HDD
    32 GB RAM
    Windows 11 Pro
  • evil_genius_180evil_genius_1804256 Posts: 11,034Member
    #31
    Chris2005 wrote: »
    Season 2 (Up The Long Ladder):
    upthelongladder_hd_145.jpg

    I know it's not related to why you posted this image, but I can see why people complained about season 2. The planet looks like crap. The maps are a lower quality than they should be for a 1080p image and you can clearly see segmentation on the planet's edge. Whether or not I agree with the HD overhaul, if you're going to do something, you might as well do it correctly. That's not doing it correctly, in my opinion.
Sign In or Register to comment.