6 ms·

TNG was like this (sourced from a video version and with a very nasty interlace look) on Netflix up to a couple of months ago. Now they stream the magnificent r

TNG was like this (sourced from a video version and with a very nasty interlace look) on Netflix up to a couple of months ago. Now they stream the magnificent remastered blu-ray HD version which is sourced from the original film with fresh CGI since the original CGI was tied to the video. It's not clear whether DS9 will get the same treatment.

dbcooper 11y ago
I prefer to watch SD rips from the TNG blu-rays. The merciless clarity of 1080p just kills the magic.
- Keyframe 11y ago
  I agree. Remastered TNG, in 1080p, looks like a theater-based teleplay.
  - knodi123 11y ago
    at least it's not HFR. I was never able to achieve immersion in the hobbit movies, because I felt like I was watching people on a stage.
    - danjc 11y ago
      I had precisely that problem and this is the first time I've heard someone else mention it.
      - superuser2 11y ago
        YES! I'm insanely sensitive to this too. I have to interrupt group TV watching to play around with the TV's menus and turn off the "automatically simulate 60fps" setting that so many Smart TVs have on by default these days. My mother can't tell the difference at all. I'm pretty sure this is just something that only a subset of the population notices enough to care about.
        Bognar 11y ago
        The simulated 60 FPS (or higher) are significantly worse than just 60 FPS source material. TVs attempt to interpolate between the frames automatically and it just screws everything up.
        rossy 11y ago
        Yes! I didn't mind the HFR Hobbit movies at all, but I can't stand the interpolated HFR that comes out of smart TVs. Once you start to notice the artifacts (often distortion or weird juddering in the background,) it becomes much less enjoyable to watch than the standard uninterpolated 24fps content. I look forward to a future of real HFR content, not fake interpolated crap. And of course, smart TV HFR butchers hand-drawn animation.
        aninhumer 11y ago
        Personally, I find the higher framerates valuable enough that I'm willing to put up with the artifacts. They're easy to see if you're looking for them, but I think most of them are pretty ignorable, although there are some pathological cases (any time the scene pans across regular vertical bars e.g. blinds).
    - jjaredsimpson 11y ago
      I really enjoyed HFR it only distracted me for the first few minutes. The actions scenes were way clearer. I saw the first 2 hobbits on TV and the 3rd in theaters. And I definitely preferred HFR.
      - Keyframe 11y ago
        I do production and post production for a living. I didn't like HFR in Hobbit. The lighting was off, so was motion blur - cheapening the effect of it. Maybe with further tweaking it will look 'filmic' eventually. I do like it in 3D though. Also, high frame rate is AWESOME for (almost) anything live TV, and I think that's a real future of it. For example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XVXQlkpaC5k https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XVXQlkpaC5k
    - aninhumer 11y ago
      I'm very much inclined to think this is just what people get used to. You're used to watching lower framerate, so your brain is yelling "something is different" all the time you're watching. I got used to higher framerates (mostly via interpolation), and now 24fps stuff feels really jerky to me, almost like stop motion.
- devonkim 11y ago
  I've wondered if this could be fairly easily emulated with some playback filters locally if a viewer has a preference of experiencing material with lesser fidelity (CD v. vinyl comes to mind where it's almost more about ceremony and romanticism than technical merits 95%+ of the time to reject the hi-fi version, "remastering" insanity notwithstanding).
  - octobyte 11y ago
    If you look at video game emulation, CRT shaders are in vogue for that very reason. Would be quite interesting if someone were to apply the same filters to video playback.
  - baldfat 11y ago
    CD vs Vinyl is not a fidelity issue but actually a compression that is a part of analog which is what people call "warm" sounding. A good analog recording has just as much or more fidelity then digital. An analog recording can actually reproduce a accurate sound wave while a digital can technically never be able to do that. (Former sound engineer)
    - nitrogen 11y ago
      Actually digital recordings can reproduce signals up to Nyquist perfectly. Watch this surprising demo: http://xiph.org/video/vid2.shtml http://xiph.org/video/vid2.shtml
      - devonkim 11y ago
        In some defense of vinyl purists, there's a lot of signal intensity above audible human hearing range in sibilants and especially percussions. http://www.cco.caltech.edu/~boyk/spectra/spectra.htm http://www.cco.caltech.edu/~boyk/spectra/spectra.htm However, similar to how we perceive ultra low frequency more as a physical vibration than as sound, these harmonics above 20 kHz are probably merely annoying and subtly felt and impact one major issue of enjoyability - listening fatigue. So maybe we don't want those frequencies from a musical perspective anyway. Regardless, there's hardly any equipment in use by even "audiophiles" on full-blown analog setups that can faithfully reproduce sounds beyond 30 kHz because of electronics design limitations in themselves rather than an analog-digital end user recording format distinction. In fact, a lot of vinyl historically had to be mastered with a low-pass filter cutting off a lot of the high frequencies because historically with sufficiently high enough energy in high frequencies, the needle would be tougher to control and fly right off the track sometimes (one explanation I read from an audio engineer - really not sure about that logic, but there's definitely low AND high pass filtering on vinyl that makes it lower fidelity in many respects than the master). Heck, most vinyl produced since the 70s comes from digital masters in the first place. http://wiki.hydrogenaud.io/index.php?title=Myths_(Vinyl)#Myth:_Vinyl_is_better_than_CD_because_it_reproduces_higher_frequencies_than_CD_and_avoids_anti-aliasing_filter_issues_at_the_frequencies_CDs_can_reproduce http://wiki.hydrogenaud.io/index.php?title=Myths_(Vinyl)#Myt... Bugs the crap out of me to see people claim vinyl is superior on technical merits rather than aesthetic ones (sound preference / taste is real). You'd think they're climate change deniers with their insistence and rhetoric. But this is what I meant by purists about the "original" - higher fidelity and clarity is oftentimes not what people desire.
tertius 11y ago
So now I have to watch TNG all over again?!

dbcooper 11y ago

I prefer to watch SD rips from the TNG blu-rays. The merciless clarity of 1080p just kills the magic.

Keyframe 11y ago
I agree. Remastered TNG, in 1080p, looks like a theater-based teleplay.
- knodi123 11y ago
  at least it's not HFR. I was never able to achieve immersion in the hobbit movies, because I felt like I was watching people on a stage.
  - danjc 11y ago
    I had precisely that problem and this is the first time I've heard someone else mention it.
    - superuser2 11y ago
      YES! I'm insanely sensitive to this too. I have to interrupt group TV watching to play around with the TV's menus and turn off the "automatically simulate 60fps" setting that so many Smart TVs have on by default these days. My mother can't tell the difference at all. I'm pretty sure this is just something that only a subset of the population notices enough to care about.
      - Bognar 11y ago
        The simulated 60 FPS (or higher) are significantly worse than just 60 FPS source material. TVs attempt to interpolate between the frames automatically and it just screws everything up.
        rossy 11y ago
        Yes! I didn't mind the HFR Hobbit movies at all, but I can't stand the interpolated HFR that comes out of smart TVs. Once you start to notice the artifacts (often distortion or weird juddering in the background,) it becomes much less enjoyable to watch than the standard uninterpolated 24fps content. I look forward to a future of real HFR content, not fake interpolated crap. And of course, smart TV HFR butchers hand-drawn animation.
        aninhumer 11y ago
        Personally, I find the higher framerates valuable enough that I'm willing to put up with the artifacts. They're easy to see if you're looking for them, but I think most of them are pretty ignorable, although there are some pathological cases (any time the scene pans across regular vertical bars e.g. blinds).
  - jjaredsimpson 11y ago
    I really enjoyed HFR it only distracted me for the first few minutes. The actions scenes were way clearer. I saw the first 2 hobbits on TV and the 3rd in theaters. And I definitely preferred HFR.
    - Keyframe 11y ago
      I do production and post production for a living. I didn't like HFR in Hobbit. The lighting was off, so was motion blur - cheapening the effect of it. Maybe with further tweaking it will look 'filmic' eventually. I do like it in 3D though. Also, high frame rate is AWESOME for (almost) anything live TV, and I think that's a real future of it. For example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XVXQlkpaC5k https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XVXQlkpaC5k
  - aninhumer 11y ago
    I'm very much inclined to think this is just what people get used to. You're used to watching lower framerate, so your brain is yelling "something is different" all the time you're watching. I got used to higher framerates (mostly via interpolation), and now 24fps stuff feels really jerky to me, almost like stop motion.
devonkim 11y ago
I've wondered if this could be fairly easily emulated with some playback filters locally if a viewer has a preference of experiencing material with lesser fidelity (CD v. vinyl comes to mind where it's almost more about ceremony and romanticism than technical merits 95%+ of the time to reject the hi-fi version, "remastering" insanity notwithstanding).
- octobyte 11y ago
  If you look at video game emulation, CRT shaders are in vogue for that very reason. Would be quite interesting if someone were to apply the same filters to video playback.
- baldfat 11y ago
  CD vs Vinyl is not a fidelity issue but actually a compression that is a part of analog which is what people call "warm" sounding. A good analog recording has just as much or more fidelity then digital. An analog recording can actually reproduce a accurate sound wave while a digital can technically never be able to do that. (Former sound engineer)
  - nitrogen 11y ago
    Actually digital recordings can reproduce signals up to Nyquist perfectly. Watch this surprising demo: http://xiph.org/video/vid2.shtml http://xiph.org/video/vid2.shtml
    - devonkim 11y ago
      In some defense of vinyl purists, there's a lot of signal intensity above audible human hearing range in sibilants and especially percussions. http://www.cco.caltech.edu/~boyk/spectra/spectra.htm http://www.cco.caltech.edu/~boyk/spectra/spectra.htm However, similar to how we perceive ultra low frequency more as a physical vibration than as sound, these harmonics above 20 kHz are probably merely annoying and subtly felt and impact one major issue of enjoyability - listening fatigue. So maybe we don't want those frequencies from a musical perspective anyway. Regardless, there's hardly any equipment in use by even "audiophiles" on full-blown analog setups that can faithfully reproduce sounds beyond 30 kHz because of electronics design limitations in themselves rather than an analog-digital end user recording format distinction. In fact, a lot of vinyl historically had to be mastered with a low-pass filter cutting off a lot of the high frequencies because historically with sufficiently high enough energy in high frequencies, the needle would be tougher to control and fly right off the track sometimes (one explanation I read from an audio engineer - really not sure about that logic, but there's definitely low AND high pass filtering on vinyl that makes it lower fidelity in many respects than the master). Heck, most vinyl produced since the 70s comes from digital masters in the first place. http://wiki.hydrogenaud.io/index.php?title=Myths_(Vinyl)#Myth:_Vinyl_is_better_than_CD_because_it_reproduces_higher_frequencies_than_CD_and_avoids_anti-aliasing_filter_issues_at_the_frequencies_CDs_can_reproduce http://wiki.hydrogenaud.io/index.php?title=Myths_(Vinyl)#Myt... Bugs the crap out of me to see people claim vinyl is superior on technical merits rather than aesthetic ones (sound preference / taste is real). You'd think they're climate change deniers with their insistence and rhetoric. But this is what I meant by purists about the "original" - higher fidelity and clarity is oftentimes not what people desire.

tertius 11y ago

So now I have to watch TNG all over again?!