|
Well, I can't comment much because I can't see the red highlighting at all on the station. (This is presumably a problem with my color vision and not with the case being made.) Then again, I don't have much problem with the effects as the show originally aired. I am still annoyed at the stretch/crop on the DVDs, though. As for "JMS lied" accusations: Firstly, I want to know where the bottom source came from, 'cause "actual render" means different things. Is it the "actual render" from the original 4:3 airing on TV? The stretch/crop DVD version? The Laserdisk version? The streaming version? Secondly, the linked Twitter discussion has JMS state early on that the pictures he was offering were not from the "actual render" but were early render key-frames. That doesn't explain how a color highlight in the early render vanishes from the final render, but then again, I can't see the highlight to address that one way or the other. In any event, if you are going after someone for accuracy you need to make some degree of effort to be accurate yourself. Frankly, I don't care about the quality of the render: if a film version of B5 genuinely exists in the WB vaults and they rereleased the show on Blu-ray I'd buy it even if it doesn't look as good as the DVDs. That's certainly much more likely than WB paying someone else to rerender all the effects. I don't see what JMS has to gain by lying about the existence of such a version; he might lie or be misremembering with regard to the CGI, but who cares if the effect is purely to put pressure on WB to release and maybe fix the lousy Amazon version? EDIT: pretty pictures on previous page.
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2019 19:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 13:51 |
|
|
It wouldn’t be an issue anymore than the remastered TOS Star Trek episodes clearly show the day Leonard Nimoy got a stain on his shirt at lunch that they tried to clean up or how goddamn PURPLE the Romulan uniforms are. Or how on TNG you can pause and actually read the screens and see it’s mostly gibberish. Who cares. It’s the 90s. It’s not supposed to look modern.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2019 21:04
|
|
|
Narsham posted:As for "JMS lied" accusations: Firstly, I want to know where the bottom source came from, 'cause "actual render" means different things. Is it the "actual render" from the original 4:3 airing on TV? The stretch/crop DVD version? The Laserdisk version? The streaming version? Secondly, the linked Twitter discussion has JMS state early on that the pictures he was offering were not from the "actual render" but were early render key-frames. That doesn't explain how a color highlight in the early render vanishes from the final render, but then again, I can't see the highlight to address that one way or the other. In any event, if you are going after someone for accuracy you need to make some degree of effort to be accurate yourself. The difference in the renders is the one JMS is claiming as an original key frame, not only has highlighting that was added after that scene aired, it's 1200x900 as opposed to the originals being 720x486. It's therefore a current, slightly achronological, re-render using the original data, and cannot be an original key frame from the reels (so to speak) submitted for approval. The bottom render is from the B5Scrolls guy, who also has a copy of the original CGI data. The only thing I can think of as far as JMS's motivation is that he's trying to backdoor a re-rendering of the CGI data in lieu of the supposed 2K masters set down on film in the archives. Maybe he's going for the "oops we couldn't find the masters after all, but since you've allocated the budget here's the original CGI data, so just add a little more and we can still get this done" angle, I don't know. Kind of soft-selling them on "it'll only take $1 million to scan and digitize the film reels" but then "whoops, where'd they go? Well shoot. Hey, though, if we did a remaster it'd only take $2 million..." and banking on the fact they would have already committed to something. Apropos to his LOTR fandom it'd be like introducing the dwarves to Beorn two at a time rather than all 13 at once.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2019 21:47
|
|
|
smdh if you don't watch b5 on a 10 inch crt like god intended
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2019 23:42
|
|
|
lost my old email posted:smdh if you don't watch b5 on a 10 inch crt like god intended 
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2019 23:44
|
|
|
Son of Sam-I-Am posted:The difference in the renders is the one JMS is claiming as an original key frame, not only has highlighting that was added after that scene aired, it's 1200x900 as opposed to the originals being 720x486. It's therefore a current, slightly achronological, re-render using the original data, and cannot be an original key frame from the reels (so to speak) submitted for approval. The bottom render is from the B5Scrolls guy, who also has a copy of the original CGI data. It is far more likely that he had the file on his computer and either had it mislabeled or confused it for a different file. Even if every WB exec who was in the way suddenly retired, there's no chance they'd do a remaster unless they were getting PAID money, and it's quite clear that JMS knows that. Plus he never said he had the masters, he said WB has the masters. So why would WB allot a budget to run a new print from the film-stock that they don't have?
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2019 00:31
|
|
|
Even if JMS's explanations of the CG stuff aren't accurate I'm not sure why this guy is so offended by it and I can't say it improves my view of him that he seems to have yanked all those nice HD rerenders off Youtube in response.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2019 01:41
|
|
Seemlar posted:Even if JMS's explanations of the CG stuff aren't accurate I'm not sure why this guy is so offended by it and I can't say it improves my view of him that he seems to have yanked all those nice HD rerenders off Youtube in response. Yeah, I don't get it either.
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2019 01:57
|
|
|
Seemlar posted:Even if JMS's explanations of the CG stuff aren't accurate I'm not sure why this guy is so offended by it and I can't say it improves my view of him that he seems to have yanked all those nice HD rerenders off Youtube in response. The petty slap fights surrounding everything about the higher resolution CG is simultaneously hilarious and infuriating.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2019 01:59
|
|
|
In fairness, this isn't the first time JMS has been accused--in many cases, accurately--of blowing poo poo out of his rear end and smudging the truth.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2019 02:08
|
|
|
Narsham posted:It is far more likely that he had the file on his computer and either had it mislabeled or confused it for a different file. Even if every WB exec who was in the way suddenly retired, there's no chance they'd do a remaster unless they were getting PAID money, and it's quite clear that JMS knows that. I don't know, I'm just grasping at straws trying to figure out the situation. I have no reason to doubt the b5scrolls guy because he has several of the original CGI artists confirming his statements... but then JMS's position seems bizarre and I don't know what his angle is, and he seems adamant and resistant to correction. I was assuming the supposed masters are "in a vault" somewhere and JMS was planning on going "hey these archives exist" to get Mr. Executive to sign off on it, then heads down there for some film archaeology and "whoops I guess they're gone, but now that we're started we can't disappoint the fans because I told them all publicly about this... well what are we gonna do?" *makes an exaggerated thinky face, then lights up as if achieving nirvana* "hey you know, we have this cgi data..."
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2019 03:46
|
|
|
I feel like I just want B5 to get some kind of new release on a streaming service where I don't have to shell out $100 to show it to somebody else. I don't know what to make of the claim of the big company having secret records they refuse to revisit and the counterclaim of JMS creating an elaborate ruse beyond some spicy hollywood drama. I do wonder if JMS just wants more publicity for his old work or if he has some more elaborate idea to try to drum up support in the industry for some new pitch, either for a B5-related project or something new.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2019 05:10
|
|
|
SlothfulCobra posted:I don't know what to make of the claim of the big company having secret records they refuse to revisit I wouldn't say secret. CBS/Paramount have an archive of all their old stuff which they went to for the TNG Blu-rays. They re-scanned and edited all the old camera negatives and film elements and basically rebuilt the episodes from the ground up. (I never really read up on the TOS remaster but I assume they did something similar) I'm not sure how common practice it is in the tv & film industry but I wouldn't be surprised if WB had a similar archive of sorts.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2019 05:46
|
|
|
I recall hearing that for Farscape, the situation was "We shot on film and we know the film is in the storage building. We do not know where it is, but we're pretty certain it's still in there. Somewhere." So any remaster would require first finding the misplaced film, and then re-rendering the CGI.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2019 06:21
|
|
|
I really wouldn't be surprised if permanent archives were some kind of labyrinthine mess. Keeping storage organized is a lot of work for little to no reward for the bulk of your career. You're lucky if all that film doesn't wind up being a fire hazard. Still better than the system of trashing episodes after filming like in the early days of TV.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2019 07:37
|
|
|
yeah finding it is the big thing. There were some episodes of TNG where they had to upscale an SD source because they couldn't find the 5-15 seconds of film for that scene. The sample disc they originally put out had 13 of "Sins of the Father" upscaled. They found the missing film by the time they got to doing the season 3 blu-ray.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2019 14:47
|
|
|
Son of Sam-I-Am posted:I don't know, I'm just grasping at straws trying to figure out the situation. I have no reason to doubt the b5scrolls guy because he has several of the original CGI artists confirming his statements... but then JMS's position seems bizarre and I don't know what his angle is, and he seems adamant and resistant to correction. I simply have no comprehension of why someone confronted with this particular puzzle would respond by suggesting some plot to trick WB into spending money (which is impossible and would never work) and not, say, that a man in his 60s who admittedly was on Compuserve and plays games might actually be confused about things like CGI production and rendering for a show he ran decades ago. The b5scrolls guy, I presume, sees this as part of a campaign to victimize him personally. JMS wants to cut him out of the process despite all his generous efforts and hard work, and that would function by insisting that his labor was never necessary to begin with. Whereas I'm not convinced JMS knows he exists. JMS grew up in "abusive gaslighting-the family" so I'm not going to claim he's incapable of gaslighting on his end, and there's bits in his autobiography which I found, shall we say, implausibly framed. But he has often been brutally honest and I don't see why "this is part of a clever campaign of lies" would be the default response to claims he makes, especially when it means accepting uncritically the word of someone else whose motives deserve scrutiny. Side note: his autobiography frames the B5/DS9 matter in a way suggesting that the DS9 showrunners were not involved and it was executives at Paramount who decided to try to cut the PTN syndication network off at the knees by beating B5 to air with a similar show who ripped him off. His main internal evidence is an io9 comment, which isn't exactly airtight. It's both plausible and heavily colored by JMS' (somewhat justified) hatred of network executives. If you read his autobiography, it'll make sense when I say that many executives must remind JMS of his father. Distinguishing between likely untruths or distortions that are the product of a person's particular brand of internal bias versus deliberate lies can be a useful skill to practice, especially in cases like these where it will probably never matter because WB won't remaster B5 and b5scrolls guy was never going to be involved if they did.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2019 16:05
|
|
|
About 10-15 years ago I got really invested in the film archaeology efforts to find the lost old Doctor Who episodes, if that helps establish my frame of mind.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2019 17:52
|
|
|
Son of Sam-I-Am posted:About 10-15 years ago I got really invested in the film archaeology efforts to find the lost old Doctor Who episodes, if that helps establish my frame of mind. When are you storming Mugabe’s compound?
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2019 18:44
|
|
|
Our efforts should be to lose the rest of Dr Who in the same place.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2019 18:48
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Our efforts should be to lose the rest of Dr Who in the same place.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2019 23:28
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Our efforts should be to lose the rest of Dr Who in the same place. now now dr. who isn't bad. it is much worse than that
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2019 00:00
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Our efforts should be to lose the rest of Dr Who in the same place. Post about 1980, I'm with you.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2019 02:21
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Our efforts should be to lose the rest of Dr Who in the same place. Babylon 5 and old Doctor Who are basically cut from the same cloth
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2019 09:27
|
|
|
They made one piece into a scarf and the other piece into
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2019 10:22
|
|
|
MrL_JaKiri posted:Babylon 5 and old Doctor Who are basically cut from the same cloth Jon Pertwee showing up during The Gathering, causing even more chaos and confusion, is already one way I've dreamed of to improve the pilot.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2019 15:46
|
|
|
Some real judgey people up in here in a thread that includes the first season of babylon 5.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2019 21:45
|
|
|
Son of Sam-I-Am posted:Jon Pertwee showing up during The Gathering, causing even more chaos and confusion When I first read this I was still half-asleep and I was wondering what the hell the Third Doctor would be doing in Highlander. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2019 22:26
|
|
|
Timby posted:When I first read this I was still half-asleep and I was wondering what the hell the Third Doctor would be doing in Highlander. There can be only twelve (No sir, only thirteen)
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2019 22:41
|
|
|
CainFortea posted:Some real judgey people up in here in a thread that includes the first season of babylon 5. Yeah yeah yeah, I was binging The Boys and I need a run up before I can handle Jehovah's Witnesses in Space.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2019 00:24
|
|
|
Jedit posted:Yeah yeah yeah, I was binging The Boys and I need a run up before I can handle Jehovah's Witnesses in Space. *brandishes a tiny letter opener at you*
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2019 06:13
|
|
|
So I had the urge to rebuy B5 recently on digital (iTunes) and I played the trailer/clip preview thing to check the quality and holy poo poo, its bad even for SD ? For comparison I watched a few episodes of Highlander on Amazon, and yes it is also SD but its somehow much "better" ? Im going to guess this is a "quality of the masters" type issue or something ?
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2019 18:09
|
|
|
This is a "they had a poo poo source to hand and didn't really care about the quality" issue
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2019 18:14
|
|
|
I recently rewatched most of the series on Amazon and it seemed good enough.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2019 18:46
|
|
|
Seemlar posted:Even if JMS's explanations of the CG stuff aren't accurate I'm not sure why this guy is so offended by it and I can't say it improves my view of him that he seems to have yanked all those nice HD rerenders off Youtube in response. That's really annoying. What's the point in sharing that you have these if all you're going to do is not only hoard the files, but hoard the renders you're making with them. This is exactly why I didn't want to help in his stupid crowdfunder for his new computer so he could render them. He's just shown that he considers these renders to be his property, that he can withdraw access to any time he wants. He, or someone else with a stash, needs to release these files as a torrent or stop talking about them forever because this is getting us nowhere. As long as the files are hoarded by a few people, we're always going to be wading through some silly drama interspersed with endless carrot-dangling.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2019 11:27
|
|
|
But his e-peen!
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2019 15:23
|
|
|
He’s now the superfan, no way is he going to give that title up.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2019 16:09
|
|
|
I would rather just continue to watch and enjoy the show as it was originally aired on TV. I don't need updated CGI models of Babylon 5, they aren't even that good anyways by todays standards.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2019 21:20
|
|
|
I said come in! posted:I would rather just continue to watch and enjoy the show as it was originally aired on TV. I don't need updated CGI models of Babylon 5, they aren't even that good anyways by todays standards. * Foundation Imaging's stuff, anyway. Netter Digital's approach seemed to be "a shitload of ships heading L to R runs head-on into a shitload of ships going R to L and they zap each other".
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2019 22:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 13:51 |
|
|
I said come in! posted:I would rather just continue to watch and enjoy the show as it was originally aired on TV. What bugs me (a little, not a lot) is that the DVDs aren't a great presentation of that. CGI/composite shots were done in 4:3, and cropped+zoomed to make widescreen shots, so they're blurry. There's no option to just have it play everything in 4:3, and keep consistent image quality. And then there's the season 2 intro credits spoiling Delenn's transformation. I mean, the DVDs are great, because they exist, and I'm really glad they exist and that I have a set, but there's all these little niggles
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2019 00:15
|
|