or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › Star Trek: The Original Motion Picture Collection comparison *PIX* + reviews
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Star Trek: The Original Motion Picture Collection comparison *PIX* + reviews - Page 42

post #1231 of 1334
Quote:
Originally Posted by cid67 View Post

I was just curious how we know for sure that the current color timings aren't representative of how the film originally looked?

I cant remember many film's color characteristics accurately after even a couple of months much less 25 to 30 years.

Ah the excuse trotted out for every botched BD.

Because in my Starlog magazine the movie stills did not have blue highlights on their faces for Khan. Not that I would need that to tell that it was an obviously digitally induced effect and when I saw Khan in theaters (at least twice) the uniforms were closer to burgundy then the purplish BD or the bright red like the DVD.

Not a deal breaker for many I am sure but a pet-peeve for me because it's so clearly wrong.

All burgundy, burgundy, burgundy:

http://www.moviepicturedb.com/movie/...h-Of-Khan.html
http://images2.fanpop.com/image/phot...1-1100-800.jpg
http://trekcore.com/specials/rare/ksm_twok.jpg
http://trekcore.com/specials/rare/saavik.jpg
http://trekcore.com/specials/rare/TWOK_Cast_HQ.jpg

Not sure if trekcore's will allow direct link:

http://trekcore.com/specials/rarephotos5.html
post #1232 of 1334
Production stills are not admissible evidence
post #1233 of 1334
Quote:
Originally Posted by wuther View Post

Ah the excuse trotted out for every botched BD.

Because in my Starlog magazine the movie stills did not have blue highlights on their faces for Khan. Not that I would need that to tell that it was an obviously digitally induced effect and when I saw Khan in theaters (at least twice) the uniforms were closer to burgundy then the purplish BD or the bright red like the DVD.

Not a deal breaker for many I am sure but a pet-peeve for me because it's so clearly wrong.

All burgundy, burgundy, burgundy:

I guess you're right...

post #1234 of 1334
Here is a better view how it should look (Filmcell to the right)
LL
post #1235 of 1334
That is interesting but how do you know the camera that took the picture isn't biasing the image, not to mention the inaccuracy of our own computer monitors.

I'm nit picking of course and I do agree that film cell images can be useful in calling out certain aspects of the film but I feel we still need more examples of the film cells to make any true conclusions on color timing. Besides, not all film is equal. That cell may not be from the finished product but could instead be some pre release answer print for example.
post #1236 of 1334
That "film cell" (whatever that means) is not from a release print of the film.
post #1237 of 1334
Quote:
Originally Posted by cid67 View Post

That is interesting but how do you know the camera that took the picture isn't biasing the image, not to mention the inaccuracy of our own computer monitors.

You don't. You don't know anything about it, much less how it was shot/scanned/whatever.
The only reliable reference for the accurate colors of the film is a good print accurate to what the DP/director/color timer approved. Not mystery film cells, not production stills (probably shot on Kodachrome or some other slide film that looks nothing like movie film, then printed in a magazine and scanned god knows how), not old DVDs.
post #1238 of 1334
Quote:
Originally Posted by cid67 View Post

That is interesting but how do you know the camera that took the picture isn't biasing the image, not to mention the inaccuracy of our own computer monitors.

We dont, but it does show us that the production photo differs from the filmcell. The production photo of spock is very red, while the filmcell is going more cold/blue. A scanner couldnt create that difference.

But the aspect ratio is wrong in the filmcell. I suspect they use a generic frame and cut and paste it on the image to show you an example. Ive seen other product like this showing the same frame, but each product should show us different frames.
post #1239 of 1334
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJPete View Post

That "film cell" (whatever that means) is not from a release print of the film.

Indeedy. There's no anamorphic squeeze, it's simply a photo printed out onto something that resembles a film strip. The only genuine one I've got is in the Phantom Menace VHS gift set, which actually has the anamorphic squeeze.
post #1240 of 1334
The Next Generation films are all ruined with DNR and EE as well, except for Nemesis- which looks wonderful.
post #1241 of 1334
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fanboyz View Post

The Next Generation films are all ruined with DNR and EE as well, except for Nemesis- which looks wonderful.

Yup. Generations and First Contact are bearable, but Insurrection is an absolute disaster.
post #1242 of 1334
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoff D View Post

Yup. Generations and First Contact are bearable, but Insurrection is an absolute disaster.

the DVD is a DNR disaster as well.
post #1243 of 1334
Looking back at the first page of Zylon's pics, those pre-DNR shots look so much better than the "remastered" shots from various films.
post #1244 of 1334
Quote:
Originally Posted by rexdigital View Post

the DVD is a DNR disaster as well.

Heh. The original anamorphic DVD had some nasty aliasing too, it's like Paramount were never too bothered about getting Insurrection looking half-decent. I wonder why?
post #1245 of 1334
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoff D View Post

Yup. Generations and First Contact are bearable, but Insurrection is an absolute disaster.

All three films never had a good digital master because of their age. Hopefully the TNG Blu-Ray sales will be good enough to get them to go back and re-master the movies, hopefully with replacements for all the CGI shots in Generations, First Contact, and especially Insurrection, which was the worst I've ever seen.
post #1246 of 1334
Quote:
Originally Posted by LexInVA View Post

All three films never had a good digital master because of their age. Hopefully the TNG Blu-Ray sales will be good enough to get them to go back and re-master the movies, hopefully with replacements for all the CGI shots in Generations, First Contact, and especially Insurrection, which was the worst I've ever seen.

Sadly, it's not the same people, and I can't see that being done. TNG (as well as TOS) was done by CBS, and the Trek movies are Paramount. And we've seen the difference in quality from both, so I doubt Paramount is going to change.

At best, we might be able to get the director's cuts of ST:TMP and ST6, which should require new masters. Dunno if the 1080i cable version of ST6 which was used for the BD was the extended cut, which was later shortened and cropped.

I can't see Paramount ever bothering to remaster 3-5, and 7-9 for any reason.
post #1247 of 1334
Neither can I.
post #1248 of 1334
I can: money. Paramount love to gazillion-dip on the Trek franchise. They've got the "trilogy" release, the single releases, the TOS and TNG film releases and the complete 1-10 set. Seeing that the special features for each of the films are pretty much as thorough as they're likely to get there's not a whole lot of room for improvement in that department. The sound for each of the films is also likely as good as it will get. All that remains is the picture quality, the previously mentioned director's cuts (which doesn't apply for all films) or the prospect of some limited packaging. Limited packaging may get some Trek fans to buy again but for those who've either bought them already or refuse to due to the picture quality issues the main selling point which would enable another round of releases for the entire franchise would be remastering the picture properly.

I personally wouldn't be surprised if they didn't do it and I think that a project like this would be ideally released next year to coincide with either the theatrical or retail release of the next Trek film.

Considering Star Trek is one of Paramount's most lucrative franchises they're going to need a way to keep it selling in the future. The DVD releases are about as good as they're going to get so that leaves Blu-ray and as they're obviously the releases with the most room for improvement I suspect that will be where they focus. After all, complete remasters would not only be usable for Blu-ray but also provide them with something fresh to sell for TV/streaming.
post #1249 of 1334
Ah, the optimism of youth.
post #1250 of 1334
Quote:
Originally Posted by raoul_duke View Post

Ah, the optimism of youth.

Sorry, not young and none of what I said was optimistic. Paramount's always had the same approach: release it as cheaply as possible, repackage in as many ways possible to make the most of the product and only then put the $$$ in as a last resort. Universal's approach is the same.
post #1251 of 1334
Blue Trek:

Thank goodness for Xylon!
Was going too buy the R2 version on amazon.fr's 3 for 30 euro deal.
Who thought it was such a good idea too turn Star Trek blue on Blu?!?!
Was it one scene, oh this lOOks good way-blu, & the whole thing gets a blu tint?!?!
Or, was the telecine operator color blind???
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimbotron View Post


Sadly, it's not the same people, and I can't see that being done. TNG (as well as TOS) was done by CBS, and the Trek movies are Paramount. And we've seen the difference in quality from both, so I doubt Paramount is going to change.


At best, we might be able to get the director's cuts of ST:TMP and ST6, which should require new masters. Dunno if the 1080i cable version of ST6 which was used for the BD was the extended cut, which was later shortened and cropped.


I can't see Paramount ever bothering to remaster 3-5, and 7-9 for any reason.
All's I care bout is 1 (TMP).
It's at least got too come out as an extended edition, right?!?!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fanboyz View Post

Neither can I.
I can, only for $$$ tho.
Quote:
Originally Posted by atexp80 View Post


Sorry, not young and none of what I said was optimistic. Paramount's always had the same approach: release it as cheaply as possible, repackage in as many ways possible to make the most of the product and only then put the $$$ in as a last resort. Universal's approach is the same.
How often does Paramount re-release a title w/better A/V (on the same format); that's the question!
Not simply will they re-release ST titles, cause we all know they'll do that!!!
Or, when do you see a "last resort" money grab for these titles mentioned in this thread?
post #1252 of 1334
For those interested there's HD clips of Star Trek VI on the Breakfast at Tiffany's Blu-ray in the "An Asian Perspective" featurette.

It didn't look too hot but it there wasn't as much DNR as there are in the caps here show and they were presented in the opened up home video ratio (2.00:1?) rather than the 2..35:1 scope version on the Blu-ray.
post #1253 of 1334
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordAwesome View Post

It didn't look too hot but it there wasn't as much DNR as there are in the caps here show and they were presented in the opened up home video ratio (2.00:1?) rather than the 2..35:1 scope version on the Blu-ray.

I assume that the ST6 Blu-ray is the 1080i cable master of the extended cut, which was then deinterlaced, cropped to 2.35:1, and added scenes removed.

That worries me. If we ever see a director's edition of Star Trek VI, it may very well be the same master. Did you see any jaggies in the clip?
post #1254 of 1334
It's a different transfer, while it may be a 1080i master there are differences.

In any case you just can't cut out the extended scenes because there are audio overlaps in the soundtrack.
post #1255 of 1334
Kinda surprised this thread wasn't bumped in light of last week's news.

So yeah, the movies are finally being released individually on 4/30, but they'll be the exact same discs. I don't even particularly care about the extended cuts of 1, 2 and 6 still not being available, it's the lack of proper remasters that really irks me. With Undiscovered Country, that 1080i master might've simply been the only readily available source for the theatrical cut (even then, they still should've spent the money on a new transfer from the film elements), but there's really no excuse for 3, 4 and 5 looking the way they do. Maybe they're waiting for the inevitable 2K re-build of The Motion Picture: Director's Edition to spend any money whatsoever on that movie, but it's frustrating to see proof that Paramount had at least half-decent transfers of 1, 3 and 4 lying around but chose to make them look even worse with horrid contrast-boosting and dnr.

At least we got a nice restoration of 2, but again, it's this attitude that annoys me. "Wrath of Khan is the only one anyone cares about, lets not bother with the others." So, what, now Paramount's gonna keep using the sales of these horrible transfers to fund a proper remastering job that may never happen? They should take one look at CBS' work on TOS and TNG and feel utter shame. There's one last window I see for them to roll out new transfers, and that's when they get around to the TMP director's edition in HD. They should do 4K scans / 2K finishes, minimum.
post #1256 of 1334
Inevitable TMP director's version? Let's not get ahead of ourselves and cause even more indecision.

I see this as an opportunity to pick up individual titles that are definite upgrades from than their DVD counterparts. I have held off getting the box set so far but I did get 2 & 6. The question is are there any besides 1, 2 & 6 that are tolerable? I read that the sound in 5 is very good.
post #1257 of 1334
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fang Zei View Post

... but they'll be the exact same discs.
A "Paramount" badd decision!

Sure they'll sell some discs; butt the fanboys already have the box set.
It may be interesting only too see how well these sell on Amazon.

EDitEDbyED:
from last yr:
Quote:
Originally Posted by BIG ED View Post

How often does Paramount re-release a title w/better A/V (on the same format); that's the question!
Not simply will they re-release "ST" titles, cause we all know they'll do that!!!

Edited by BIG ED - 2/9/13 at 11:27am
post #1258 of 1334
MGM has a beautiful motto if its Bond we'll pay for it. Paramount no matter the title we'll release it without efficient restoration.
post #1259 of 1334
Quote:
Originally Posted by homogenic View Post

MGM has a beautiful motto if its Bond we'll pay for it. Paramount no matter the title we'll release it without efficient restoration.

MGM will pay for Bond except, apparently, when it's GoldenEye. It's like MGM got their hands on Paramount's patented "Search for Spock" filter. It was one of the most long-awaited blu-rays and that's what they finally spat out? What's their excuse?!

You're right about the Paramount part, though. If it's not a Spielberg-directed movie from the dreamworks catalogue or a restoration job specifically requested by Spielberg on behalf of the guy who directed it (*cough* Godfather *cough*) there's no guarantee it's gonna look good on blu-ray.

Like I said, CBS is making tv shows look better than actual movies from the same franchise. Someone at Viacom needs to sort all of this out!
post #1260 of 1334
Yeah I was going to post in here last week when Paramount's Press site listed the re-release of TMP as the Director's Cut. I got excited, but then I thought that has got to be to good to be true and sure enough it was a typo on their press site.

I am really looking forward to the TNG Best of Both Worlds Blu-Ray release.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Blu-ray Software
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › Star Trek: The Original Motion Picture Collection comparison *PIX* + reviews