AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › Star Trek TNG Seasons Remastered on Blu-Ray
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Star Trek TNG Seasons Remastered on Blu-Ray - Page 20

post #571 of 2378
10/3/11 at 11:43pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr.D View Post

No to everything.... in a nutshell.

And your point would be what ? Just because there are some other films out there that you think have worse VFX you are using that to refute that the vfx in Nemesis handled by DD are better than the previous films?

Whoa, whoa... hold up. You're inferring a statement that I didn't make. I never said anything about the VFX in Nemesis. But I suppose I might as well now.

They are perhaps technically superior by virtue of the fact that Nemesis came along nearly a decade after one of the films you're criticizing -- on the shoulders of giants and all that. I was just responding to your opinion that the VFX in Generations and First Contact were, "about the worst work ILM have done." I happen to not share that opinion, hence my examples.
Reply
Reply

Gear mentioned in this thread:

post #572 of 2378
10/4/11 at 12:27am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghostface1701 View Post

Hm, personally, I found the 3 minute battle scene in First Contact (especially the 20-second final barrage) to be more exciting than anything in Nemesis. To each his own...

Its quite poorly executed though. The scaling speed and lighting on the ships is very arbitrary and there is no real sense of space with regard to the blocking its just a bunch of ships zipping about and dumped into the frame on a shot by shot basis. No real sense of place. ( also has the worst matte painting of the earth I've ever seen...looks like some graphic from the weather channel). I actually think Generations is better from a VFX standpoint than FC.

Star Trek and Nemesis have much better blocked out shots that make much more consistent sense spacially and much more attention paid to making it look as if the action was actually in front of and photographed by a real camera whch is the goal of good vfx. Very highly crafted shots from DD on Nemesis.

Insurrection is frankly dire from a VFX perspective , I can't think of a well executed shot in the entire film....very very second rate ; ILM didn't do this one though.
Reply
Reply
post #573 of 2378
10/4/11 at 12:35am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr.D View Post

Its quite poorly executed though. The scaling speed and lighting on the ships is very arbitrary and there is no real sense of space with regard to the blocking its just a bunch of ships zipping about and dumped into the frame on a shot by shot basis. No real sense of place. ( also has the worst matte painting of the earth I've ever seen...looks like some graphic from the weather channel). I actually think Generations is better from a VFX standpoint than FC.

Star Trek and Nemesis have much better blocked out shots that make much more consistent sense spacially and much more attention paid to making it look as if the action was actually in front of and photographed by a real camera whch is the goal of good vfx. Very highly crafted shots from DD on Nemesis.

Insurrection is frankly dire from a VFX perspective , I can't think of a well executed shot in the entire film....very very second rate ; ILM didn't do this one though.

Yeh the effects in Insurrection were definitely the worst of the lot - some of those Son'a ships look more like something out of a videogame than a film - they lack detail and look very bland - particularly that Collector ship.

The ships in Freespace 2 had more detail

God I loved that game - from around the same time (late '90s) - I wish there was a sequel
Reply
Reply
post #574 of 2378
10/4/11 at 2:10am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghostface1701 View Post

Hm, personally, I found the 3 minute battle scene in First Contact (especially the 20-second final barrage) to be more exciting than anything in Nemesis. To each his own...

Maybe it's because the Millennium Falcon helped out?
Reply
Reply
post #575 of 2378
10/4/11 at 5:22am
Quote:
Originally Posted by DragonQ View Post

Maybe it's because the Millennium Falcon helped out?

Most definitely. Also, the Defiant piloted by Worf.
Reply
Reply
post #576 of 2378
10/4/11 at 12:00pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by XxDeadlyxX View Post

I did not say Nemesis was a better FILM than the others, I said it is the best in terms of space battles. ie. the long 20-30 minute fight at the end.

What other Trek movie has anything remotely as good?

The climax of Nemesis is just a carbon copy of the climax of Wrath of Khan.
Reply
Reply
post #577 of 2378
10/4/11 at 12:07pm
Had Nemesis kept it's original ending it would have been a great film.
Reply
Reply
post #578 of 2378
10/4/11 at 12:18pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post

The climax of Nemesis is just a carbon copy of the climax of Wrath of Khan.

And the fight inside the nebula was as well, combined with elements from Undiscovered Country.
Reply
Reply
post #579 of 2378
10/4/11 at 3:01pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by nick_danger View Post

Most definitely. Also, the Defiant piloted by Worf.

Commanded by Worf, he wasn't the pilot.
Reply
Reply
post #580 of 2378
10/4/11 at 5:48pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philzilla View Post

Commanded by Worf, he wasn't the pilot.

Really? LOL
Reply
Reply
post #581 of 2378
10/4/11 at 6:15pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by nick_danger View Post

Really? LOL

Really, the pilot was Adam Scott.
Reply
Reply
post #582 of 2378
10/5/11 at 1:25am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr.D View Post

And I have to say that the VFX work done on the TNG films is about the worst work ILM have done). DD did a much better job on nemesis; unfortunately the film was bleurgh.

You're kidding, right? GENERATIONS and FIRST CONTACT's FX work were top notch. The miniature work is outstanding and the CG seamless.

Digital Domain's work in NEMESIS was a step above INSURRECTION.

Smoke trails for the warp effect. Please.

Quote:
Originally Posted by XxDeadlyxX View Post

Plus Nemesis had FAR better space battles than any of the other Treks - Star Trek (2009) was terrible in that regard IMO. I hope the sequel is better.

NEMESIS did the impossible: it made a Star Trek space battle *boring*. Not only that, the Scimitar was so ridiculously overpowered: it takes out 2 giant new model Romulan warbirds in seconds and gets hit with a quantum torpedo volley that would destroy a Borg Sphere...yet that only takes out the cloaking ability. Stupid, stupid writing.
Reply
Reply
post #583 of 2378
10/5/11 at 1:29am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr.D View Post

also has the worst matte painting of the earth I've ever seen...looks like some graphic from the weather channel

You do know it was satellite photos wrapped on a sphere model, right?
Reply
Reply
post #584 of 2378
10/5/11 at 9:20am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fanboyz View Post

Had Nemesis kept it's original ending it would have been a great film.

It would have also helped if they had filmed the entire script and released it as a director's cut.
Reply
Reply
post #585 of 2378
10/5/11 at 9:39am
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterTHX View Post

Digital Domain's work in NEMESIS was a step above INSURRECTION.

Smoke trails for the warp effect. Please.

Although it does seem a bit silly, I think the warp effect used in Nemesis is my favourite from the whole Trek saga, except for Star Trek (2009). Voyager's is probably third place.
Reply
Reply
post #586 of 2378
10/5/11 at 11:00am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osirus23 View Post

And the fight inside the nebula was as well, combined with elements from Undiscovered Country.

The battle in the nebula is what I was referring to, though I suppose that "climax" could also be read to mean the sacrifice of a certain emotionless character.
Reply
Reply
post #587 of 2378
10/5/11 at 1:08pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by dvdmike007 View Post

I like Nemesis

Heck, I love it. It's one of the three best Star Trek films imo.
Reply
Reply
post #588 of 2378
10/5/11 at 3:00pm
LOL @ this thread.

Don't get trolled guys.
Reply
Reply
post #589 of 2378
10/5/11 at 4:26pm
Talk about off topic.
Reply
Reply
post #590 of 2378
10/5/11 at 4:49pm
We're all Trek fans here, and some tangent Trek conversations are inevitable, but let's try to not stray too far from topic.

Other than watching TNG on BD, there is one other thing that I'm looking forward to. I can virtually guarantee that there will be some kind of reference to TNG BD on The Big Bang Theory, and I'm sure that Wil Wheaton will make another guest appearance as Sheldon's nemesis.
Reply
Reply
post #591 of 2378
10/5/11 at 5:00pm
Not straying from the topic ? I think you just did that one paragraph after saying not to lol :-)
Reply
Reply
post #592 of 2378
10/6/11 at 2:57am
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterTHX View Post

You do know it was satellite photos wrapped on a sphere model, right?

So what ? The process is irrelevant . All that matters is if it works on screen and its very far from succesful. Flat as a pancake.
Reply
Reply
post #593 of 2378
10/6/11 at 8:08pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr.D View Post

So what ? The process is irrelevant . All that matters is if it works on screen and its very far from succesful. Flat as a pancake.

I think the point was... you declared it "the worst matte painting" you had ever seen... and if it wasn't a matte painting, your statement was kind of invalidated.

It's a different argument if you want to argue that it was poor F/X... but you can't argue it was a poor matte painting if it wasn't a matte painting.
Reply
Reply
post #594 of 2378
10/6/11 at 9:40pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by nick_danger View Post

Really? LOL

Don't get it wrong and you won't be corrected.
Reply
Reply
post #595 of 2378
10/6/11 at 9:43pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by HDMe2 View Post

I think the point was... you declared it "the worst matte painting" you had ever seen... and if it wasn't a matte painting, your statement was kind of invalidated.

It's a different argument if you want to argue that it was poor F/X... but you can't argue it was a poor matte painting if it wasn't a matte painting.

Tis is teh worstest CGI evah!



We really got to go through this again (and next time)?
Reply
Reply
post #596 of 2378
10/6/11 at 11:31pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by HDMe2 View Post

I think the point was... you declared it "the worst matte painting" you had ever seen... and if it wasn't a matte painting, your statement was kind of invalidated.

It's a different argument if you want to argue that it was poor F/X... but you can't argue it was a poor matte painting if it wasn't a matte painting.

It is a matte painting, Matte paintings are normally constructed from other photographic reference , its not just painted up from scratch. This is standard practice . You are splitting hairs about terminology and processes you are not directly familiar with.

Its awful and its a matte painting and it most definitely is the worst matte painting of the earth I've ever seen in a mainstream hollywood film.
Reply
Reply
post #597 of 2378
10/7/11 at 4:55am
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZGibbs View Post

Really, the pilot was Adam Scott.

While captains may not always directly maneuver their vessels, it is common for a the word "pilot" to be used as a verb when describing the captain or officer in command. In this instance, Worf. I wasn't referring to the person sitting at the Conn.

So anyway, I really want this sampler in my player right now.
Reply
Reply
post #598 of 2378
10/7/11 at 6:23am
Quote:
Originally Posted by gorthocar View Post

We're all Trek fans here, and some tangent Trek conversations are inevitable, but let's try to not stray too far from topic.

Other than watching TNG on BD, there is one other thing that I'm looking forward to. I can virtually guarantee that there will be some kind of reference to TNG BD on The Big Bang Theory, and I'm sure that Wil Wheaton will make another guest appearance as Sheldon's nemesis.


This thread is starting to read like the script of Big Bang Theory....
Reply
Reply
post #599 of 2378
10/7/11 at 7:59am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matman1970 View Post

This thread is starting to read like the script of Big Bang Theory....

Na, not really. If it were like a big bang theory script someone would point out a flaw in your idea.
Reply
Reply
post #600 of 2378
10/7/11 at 9:14am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr.D View Post

Its awful and its a matte painting and it most definitely is the worst matte painting of the earth I've ever seen in a mainstream hollywood film.

It's not a matte painting. Earth in Star Trek III, IV, and VI was.
In First Contact it's a digital model. Now are you going to argue that the digital starships are "matte paintings" because they're texture mapped?

And it looks the way it looks because the producers had ILM remove the clouds and other features so the audience could clearly outline the landmasses. It's not ILM's fault. Look at their work on Earth a few years later in Space Cowboys. That's how Earth was going to look.

Trivia: The Genesis Planet in Star Trek III was not a painting: it was a model!
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Blu-ray Software

Gear mentioned in this thread:

AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › Star Trek TNG Seasons Remastered on Blu-Ray