Okudas Address “Timescape” Blu-ray FX ‘Mistake’

One of the unexpected benefits of the TNG remastering project has been the restoration team's work to correct certain visual effects errors or inconsistencies that have become fan fodder over the last twenty-five years -- changing in-jokes and other text once though illegible through the standard definition haze, repositioning energy beams, and performing other tweaks across the seasons.

"Encounter at Farpoint": The energy beam used to feed the Farpoint creature from orbit was moved from the captain's yacht to the phaser array.

"The Royale": The Charybdis mission patch is reworked to remove the re-used patch from the real-life Apollo 17 mission.

"Darmok": The phaser beam emanating from the forward torpedo launcher is replaced with a shot from the dorsal phaser array.

div_spacer

A similar issue occurs in TNG Season Six's "Timescape," where a power transfer emanates from the Enterprise "deflector array," yet the energy beam seems to be generated from the port side of the engineering section of the ship -- leading some fans to question why this effect was not similarly adjusted in line with the examples listed above.

Michael and Denise Okuda, TNG art department leads who have been acting as consultants to the HD remastering of The Next Generation, took to Facebook today to address this issue:

okuda-fb
What do you think? Should "Timescape" have been altered to reposition the transfer beam, or was the CBS Digital team right to leave it as is? Tell us in the comments below!

div_spacer

Order Star Trek:
TNG - Season 6
on Blu-ray
today!



Order TNG's
"Chain of Command"
on Blu-Ray
today!

  • James G.

    As Q might say: “Oh please…”

    • James

      Eh. I think they’re right. The phaser beams in previous episodes were just a case of it firing from the wrong place, in this episode the original FX team even lit some of the windows a different colour. Perhaps there’s some sort of deflector technology in the neck?

      Or I’m just spouting rubbish.

  • CleverGirlRaptor

    Read as: “We didn’t notice the mistake initially and didn’t feel it would be economically feasible to recall all the blurays already printed just to fix this one issue.”

    • archer9234

      They recalled S1 over the audio issue. I see that as less of a problem. Since the Stereo track was still in there. But then again, I don’t use 7.1 systems. So I can’t really judge that.

      • Masterironfist

        Recalling the blurays for the audio was the right move. That was a huge error, this is a minor one. People have been fine with this for years but to have a audio track mix that isn’t right on multiple episodes that was a big deal.

        • archer9234

          Well at least CBS-D cares. Hollowman’s BD release mixed the entire movie wrong. The channels were in the wrong order. The rear channels were set as left and right. So if you only had a stereo setup. You only heard low echo voices.

          • danielcw

            “Hollowman’s BD release mixed the entire movie wrong. ”

            What are you referring to?

          • archer9234

            Play the Hollowman bluray on a stereo system only. The audio is way too low and echoy. I then checked the track. The rear left and right tracks meant for 5.1, were put in the front left and front right speakers. So if you’re playing the movie on 2.0 only, the movie’s audio is messed up. Even when it down mixes, its wrong. Because the audio is inverted. Sound FX are taken priority over dialog.

          • danielcw

            Ah, now I get it, you are talking about the movie “The Hollow Man”.

            I thought you are talking about a company called Hollowman, and they botchered a Star Trek movie release :)

            Slightly on-topic:
            The first German DVD-release of Generations had the rear channels swapped, left was right and vice versa.
            (and ST6 was missing its LFE, and some synchronity issues on TNG S1, later DS9 seasons and the Next Level sampler)

          • archer9234

            LOL, I forgot about the space between Hollow Man. Sorry. That’s a pretty bad mess up on those Star Trek DVD’s.

  • Chris915

    I really don’t have a problem with it…

    • hypnotoad72

      Agreed. I’ve seen few issues in season 6. Only the season 2 issues are worthy of angst…

  • Matt S.

    It looks like there might be an even bigger mistake on this set. Correct me if I’m wrong, but in “Relics” it appears that there is a starfield behind the star as seen on the viewscreen while the Enterprise is INSIDE the Dyson sphere. This goes way beyond just a minor technical error and compromises THE major concept of the episode and the setting for those particular scenes.

    • Chris915

      Yea, I noticed that too.

    • Mat Rowe

      Original transfers clearly don’t show stars. This is a definite oversight in the remastering.

    • archer9234

      Yes, this error was the real bad. The neck emitting the beam. I didn’t really care. I can see why they did it. When the camera slowing moves, you can see the 3D of the frozen time frame with the beam like that. If it was at the deflector, it would look more flat. But the stars with the Dyson sun was really bad. I was like: “How could this of happened?” Did they reuse a previous stock shot? They fixed the poor compositing of the reuse in the sink hole, from Season 2.

    • Justin Olson

      You’re absolutely right! That is clearly a significant mistake on CBS Digital’s part. Oops! They usually only forget to put things in when they make a mistake. But here’s a case where they wasted time adding something that definitely didn’t need to be there.

      It’s unfortunate, but kind of hilarious in context. There are superfluous stars all over the place in that episode, both seen and unseen. For instance, what star is illuminating the Dyson Sphere from the outside? Data says in dialogue that there are no other stars around! The sphere should only be radiating in the infrared. It would have been cool if they saw it that way on the viewscreen and the Enterprise had to use spotlights to illuminate the surface when they came close to it (in essence, to show it to the audience in a cleverer way). Geordi’s VISOR would have come in handy too. It’s a case of real physics being more interesting than the writer’s and VFX supervisor’s imaginations. A true lost opportunity.

      • Destructor1701

        The more I learn about science and astronomy, the more I lament the VFX industry’s lack of familiarity with same.

        It was particularly jarring and evident with the recent series of Cosmos: A Spacetime Odyssey, where many common misconceptions were given polished and beautiful airings in a show designed to educate about science and reality.

        On the other hand, this dearth of accurate imagery makes me all the more ecstatic when I see something done exceptionally well, like my recent epiphany about the post-season-three TNG intro sequence: it’s not just a bunch of random space imagery… It depicts various stages of the formation of a star system, really really well!

  • Simon

    I think it was just a matter of an overwhelmed FX team in 1993 trying to do both TNG & DS9 at the same time. An error was made and the HD team just reproduced what was there originally.

  • Charlie

    Not a big deal

  • http://www.facebook.com/sup4j1m James Blackwell

    Who cares. Would you rather of it not been remastered at all?

    • Stephen

      That’s a false dichotomy.

    • hypnotoad72

      Why not ask the customers who purchase these goods? Put yourself in their place. Or in the place of the people who do the work… who is trying to satisfy whom?

  • pittrek

    I actually prefer when they don’t change things, even when these changes are fixes. So I’m glad they decided to let it as it is

  • Bridger

    Now it is too late to fix it, but I am disapointed.

    • Kaine Morrison

      It is not too late to fix it.

      The files can be brought up on their computers and fixed, then the files get sent out to the pressings, and new Disks are made.
      Then issue a recall on the original Disks.

  • Frank B.

    How can anybody “realize” after “some analysis” whether it was an artistic choice or not? Either I have notes from the VFX team or did talk with the artist. To have an energy beam emanating from the port side to feed an object ahead would require some kind of extendable emitter platform or the like of which I have never heard for the Enterprise-D. And the vocal Information does not match the visual one: “There’s a second energy beam. It’s coming from the Enterprise deflector array. Do you have any idea what that could be?”
    Looks to me like they forgot to fix it. I’d say matching vocal and visual information outranks any “artistic” intentions that might have been involved or not.

  • Esmeralda

    Stupid. They need to fix all error. I do not care if they are artistic chose or not. They are error. A this looks stupid.
    I hate errors.

    • Rob

      STERILIZE IMPERFECTIONS

    • Stephen

      You missed the s from the end of your first use of the word ‘error’ which should be plural. You should have said choice, not ‘chose’ in your second sentence. The word error in your third sentence should be plural – it’s singular. Finally, the word ‘A’ in your fourth sentence is superfluous.

      • Esmeralda

        Fast writing, and there is no Edit button here.

        Point is, justifying this error with artistic choise is stupid. Errors in the show are errors.

        Continuity ( correction of errors that corrupt continuity ) for them should be priority, everything else should be in second place.

        Sometimes I have the feeling, that they just want to recreate everything exactly as it was originally. Even if something was like that originally. because of low budget, because necessary technology was not available ect..

        Point is, TNG was not intended to be seen in HD originally also. And they created TNG HD. So they do not need to recreate bad VFX exactly as they where originally, if they can make them more convincing now. TNG HD is different show than TNG SD.

        • hypnotoad72

          There is an edit button…

          I thought it had been said that the TNG-R project would – as closely as possible – recreate the original look, albeit at HD. Any liberties with new f/x or fixing them would be at the discretion of those doing the work… and TNG’s f/x were pretty great back in the day.

          True, there have been some hiccups – given the scope of the project they are inevitable. Indeed, for all the flaws in TNG-R season 2, I noted a couple fixes from the original versions (e.g. the “Time Squared” having a nacelle being cropped, even though “The Schizoid Man” for the HD version introduced an errant crop…)

          TNG was edited on videotape because it was cheaper. Not because it was meant to be that way. Had they the resources, everything would have been edited on film – and look even grainier. What they’re doing today arguably looks even better because there aren’t as many generations of film layers being processed…

          • Esmeralda

            I do not have ”Edit button”, but I’am posting as ”guest”, so maybe that is why.

            But I disagree.

            TNG was edited on videotape, because HD television was science fiction back then. TNG is filmed to be shown on SD television.

            All VFX composition are done in SD. For the same reason.

            Also like you said ”Had they the resources”,… exactly so, that they had the necessary resources back then, VFX would look different, more convincing, every planet would look unique ( no reuse of the same planets ), every alien ship would look different ( no reuse of the same models acting as different alien ships ) ect..

            But they have resources now. They can make everything how was originally conceived/ imagined by the authors.

            So why same planets, matte paintings, ship models are again reused, when they can make them unique now as is supposed to be originally.

            Why same errors are recreated. We do not need TNG SD NO.2. We will always have TNG SD. Copies of that version will not disappear.

            TNG HD is different show. Now they have opportunity to make a VFXs as originally conceived, but not executed because they did not had necessary resources.

            That is why I like TOS REMASTERED more. In TOS remastered at least every planet, every matte painting, every alien ship lookds different. And VFX are closer to orginal vision of the autors.

        • Stephen

          Perhaps you have a point, but there is a budget (cash and time) that they need to stick to, and I think some things they really do want to leave as they are because it may have been an artistic choice. But inevitably some things sneek through the cracks. They corrected a turbolift door number to show the correct deck, but I just noticed that in Relics they left Ten Forward and got in a turbolift with the number 8 on it. Same mistake, but they must have just missed this one. Nobody’s perfect!

          • Kaine Morrison

            Timeframe that needs to be adhered to? No, they already delayed the set once, they could have done so again.

      • hypnotoad72

        True, but since he’s using a free service is he not entitled to be not put in the effort?

    • data

      Me too!!

  • Masterironfist

    Sounds like a PR statement, what I read between the lines is “oopss we forgot.”

    For this particular fx shot, In either case, it doesn’t matter to me

  • New Horizon

    Not a big deal, and it really should have been corrected, but the reasoning makes little sense to me.

  • Christopher Roberts

    Just doesn’t quite jibe with the change made for “Darmok” does it? A phaser beams firing from the torpedo bay, while technically wrong, were more artistically interesting to look at than a stock shot.

  • Stephen

    You’ve got to wonder what was going through the FX person’s head when they decided to shoot a phaser beam out of a photon torpedo tube launcher…

    • archer9234

      Director mistake. Someone thought photon torpedo shot. But Phaser was obviously in the script.

      • James

        it did produce quite a dynamic image though.I was sorry that it was replaced with a standard view. I’d have preferred to see the phaser come from one of the emitters on the nacelles.

  • Laughingman

    Still no one is mentioning the missing hull breach / scorch marks that should be on the underside of the saucer section. Those could have been SD blotchiness, but I swear there was a damage ‘layer’ added on over the model which they obviously couldn’t hurt, and that damage is conspicuously missing from the blus.

    • Tone

      You are totally right. I remember the scorch marks when I watched the episode on DVD years ago.

      Just lazy BS if you ask me.

  • Stephen

    My biggest grievance is with the warping starfield seen through the windows of the Enterprise (a stunning and expensive FX shot at the time). It looks great, but if there is a table in the room (such as the one in the Conference Lounge or Captain’s Ready Room), the reflections on the table should be at an approximate 90° angle to the ones seen in the window, but instead they are all moving together in the same direction. Here’s a couple of examples:

    The surprising thing to me was that they got it wrong despite the fact it was done correctly on the original release. I mentioned it to mike after, I think, Season 4 was released. He acknowledged it, but I’m not sure if it’s been addressed in season 6.

    • Destructor1701

      You are not correct.

      I whipped up a mock-up of the
      lounge, stars, and table, and raytraced the reflections to show you that
      the TNG image is accurate.

      I can’t really come up with the language to explain why you’re wrong, though. Just look at the picture, I set up the geometry, and let the computer bounce the light around realistically.

      • Destructor1701

        I’m responding to this to ask mod to delete the comment, since I posted this by mistake during an internet connection clusterfrak. I subsequently created a Disqus account to post the same thing, without realising that this posting had succeeded… so this serves no purpose.

        Since it was posted under a guest account, I have no way of deleting it.

    • Destructor1701

      You are not correct.
      I whipped up an image in 3DS Max to show how the reflections would appear in reality. I just set up the geometry, and let the computer bounce the light around.

      http://i.imgur.com/iWo09D1.jpg

      The TNG imagery is accurate.

      • Stephen

        Goodness, that was a rather bold opening to your (double) post, but allow me to demolish it….

        Whilst I have great admiration for your graphic rendering skills, your physics leaves a little bit to be desired, Hopefully the picture below will help illustrate my position.
        As can be seen from the episodes (and as Michael Okuda explained to me) the starfields converge on to a single point of infinity. In my illustration it is represented by the red dot marked A (behind the bulkhead unfortunately, but you can see from my animated gif earlier, and indeed your CGI where that point would be).
        Now, what we see on the table is a mere reflection of what is showing in the window – even allowing for the difference owing to the camera position, the angle of the table, and the distance (both vertically and horizontally) between the table and the window.
        The approximate position of the REFLECTION of point A is shown as point B. It follows that the REFLECTED stars MUST converge on the this reflection point marked B.

        Looking at both the graphics on the Season 4 Blu-ray (and not just the scene I capped, but EVERY scene involving reflecting warping starfields reflected on a table) the reflected stars are ALWAYS converging on point A (the actual infinite point of convergence) and NEVER on a theoretical point B – wherever it may lie (it could be in a number of positions depending on the camera location with respect to the table, but it would be a remarkable coincidence if the camera position happened to place point B directly on top of point A as appears to always be the case).

        So in summary, YOU are not correct.

        • Destructor1701

          Nope, you’re still wrong. The table would need to be inclined at about 30 degrees towards the window to sort the vanishing point of the reflection as you suggest.

          As it is, the vector of the stars’ relative motion is parallel to the table’s reflective surface, meaning the vanishing point lies along the axis of reflection.

          Therefore, light striking the table from above is reflected at the inverse of its arrival angle, so essentially, the vanishing point doesn’t move, and the stars seen in the reflection are the ones above.

          If you don’t believe the ray-tracing render I did, then try it in real life with a mirror and a taut string. As long as they’re parallel, the vanishing will be the same. It’s not like I faked the reflections on my mock up, they were computed by an algorithm expressly designed for that purpose.

          It will emerge from further investigation on your part that it is not I who is bold in my assertions.

          • JJ

            This argument is awesome haha

          • Destructor1701

            Hehe, yeah. Two gigantic nerds getting our panties in a bunch over the photonics of an old TV show. What’s not to love!?

          • Stephen

            The trouble with your CGI, I think, is that it is showing the stars only coming from one side of the ship, and it is very hard to tell which reflection is from which original streak as they all look the same.

            In my complex model, I’ve differentiated each warped star by colour.

            On the right, I’ve enhanced the reflection using my own CGI skills, as the lighting conditions weren’t ideal. Anyway, you can see that the point of convergence is clearly visible in the reflection of the table (pallet knife), and that each stars angle of approach to that single point is effectively mirrored around a theoretical horizon. What we are NOT seeing here are the reflected starts heading for the same point as the actual ones (point ‘A’ in my earlier post).

            So my further investigation still draws me to the inevitable conclusion that you are indeed wrong.

          • Matt S

            In your CGI you’ve now moved the vanishing point up and to the right, proving that if you relocate it far enough you can in fact get the vanishing point on the table. (This is the equivalent of tilting the table towards the window as Destructor suggested earlier btw). But the vanishing point in the gifs above is nowhere near where you’ve placed it. And your reflection is not rotated 90 degrees either, it’s exactly 180 degrees. (it’s just a reflection, just like when you look in a mirror you aren’t perpendicular to yourself!), so you still didn’t prove your point.

            This isn’t that hard. Just look at the reflection of the chair next to O’Brien. It’s obvious that what should be reflected is whatever the stars would look like if you got down next to that chair and looked up. The table is reflecting only the top half of the warped stars, and the vanishing point and stars in the lower half are not being reflected at all.

          • Stephen

            Well I was trying to balance florescent drinking straws on top of a cardboard Observation Lounge so the vanishing point ended up wherever the straws would reach at their maximum length. But the vanishing point as observed in the reflection could quite easily move around depending on the position and the height of the observer/camera.

            It’s just too much to swallow that in every show we see, the window and reflected starfields are heading for exactly the same point regardless of camera position. It’s as though (and I would argue this is precisely the case) they just applied a single starfield effect to the whole scene and it slaps it on top of whatever blue-screen happens to be in shot – be it a reflection or not. There is no clever reflection algorithm being added to the table shots here or anywhere. That much is obvious.

            Now, I have just watched my shiny new copy of Chain of Command, and look at the difference. It’s quite stark:

            http://i.imgur.com/oy7zJzP.gif

            Now on this one you can see the vanishing points of the window and reflected starfields are nowhere near each other – just as I have said should be the case for most shots where the alignment was by some remarkable coincidence absolutely perfect.

            Now that this change has occurred a good 8 months after I mentioned it to them I’m sure is just coincidence………

          • Destructor1701

            “It’s as though (and I would argue this is precisely the case) they just
            applied a single starfield effect to the whole scene and it slaps it on
            top of whatever blue-screen happens to be in shot – be it a reflection
            or not. There is no clever reflection algorithm being added to the
            table shots here or anywhere. That much is obvious.”

            Actually, no – in your own animated gifs, you can see that the reflected stars are not contiguous with the ones out the window. They took time and effort to align the effect correctly, and flipped the stars in the upper half of the star image for the table, also aligning them correctly. I never suggested that any raytracing was ocurring in the old TNG effects, merely that raytracing on my own computer proved the accuracy of effects that were surely eye-balled by people with an understanding of light paths back in the day.

            This latest example, from Chain Of Command, *is* a compositing error. They have an incorrect reflection in the table – and this one bugs me.

          • Stephen

            So what you are saying is that the vanishing point can never be anywhere but on the same horizontal plane (and directly aft, obviously) as the observer? And the only time you would see it in a reflection of a perfectly horizontal table, would be if you were to bring the table-top up to (or lower your head) the precise level of your eyes? Yes, I can see that would be true.

            But until the chain of command clip, I have never observed an identifiable set of stars mirrored in the reflection. I am inclined (pardon the pun) to agree that the vanishing point in this last example is miss-placed (unless the table is at a slight incline towards the camera (unlikely). However, what I think this is the first example of is actually seeing identifiable stars reflected in a surface. On the last still image I posted you can clearly see 3 stars below Data’s left cuff that are a mirror image of the same ones appearing in the upper part of the window.

            I don’t think they have ever done that before – certainly not in this clip, where I’m sure I can see stars zipping across the table, and then appearing at the BOTTOM of the window (because the whole thing is being shown as if it were all window): http://i.imgur.com/N8Z0joX.gif

            You are winning me over, though.

          • Destructor1701

            Yes, exactly. I’m glad you’re seeing what I mean.

            I think we can meet in the middle on that gif – it’s inconclusive as to whether they separated that portion of the composite from the directly-visible stars.

          • Stephen

            Yes – I’m not 100% sure. A good and spirited case you put there though. I enjoyed it!

          • Destructor1701

            Likewise, hehe. All the best!

          • Destructor1701

            I commend your rapid prototyping skills, that’s a lovely mock-up. But the angles are critically important here.

            You have placed your vanishing point arbitrarily, and converged your “stars” artificially, to achieve the desired outcome. For the vanishing point to appear where you have placed it in your (very nicely constructed!) model, the enterprise would have to be sliding along a vector starboard and ventral, along a heading of roughly zero-two-five, mark three-five-zero.

            In other words, not directly forwards.

            If the ship is moving forwards, the stars are falling away behind it parallel to any horizontal surfaces aboard. The reflection in any of those surfaces carries images from the inverse of the viewing angle.

            The stars reflected accurately in my CGI table are reflected from above. The TNG scene is accurate.

            If you re-tool your (really nicely done) maquette so that the stars are *parallel* to one another *and* to the table, and then trace their lines back to an *actual* vanishing point (not an artificial convergence), you will see that I am right.

        • Chris915

          The reflection is almost looking straight up toward the ceiling, if you look at the reflection of the chair.

  • bytes

    That effect is a mistake, not an artistic choice. Someone in the 90’s messed up. And badly.

    I really dislike the amount of influence the Okuda’s have. I disagree that they should get final word. They make inconsistent arguments. For example, Kirk’s tombstone. They didn’t change the obvious mistake and defended it. Another example is the original Enterprise diagram on Data’s terminal in The Naked Now. This time they did change it to match context. It too was obviously a mistake at the time. And very minor in comparison. Just like corrections to Encounter at Farpoint and Darmok, these are obvious mistakes that have been corrected. You are not preserving anything but bad production by paying someone to recreate the same mistake.

    Let’s admit that this was overlooked. They don’t want to do another recall.

    Just recall the disc with Timescape on it and get it over with. You don’t put beams shooting out of a window on the ship. That effect is not an artistic choice. It is clearly a mistake and need correction.

    • hypnotoad72

      All these minor issues are nothing compared to how BAD season 2 was handled…

    • Brian C. Bock

      Why on Earth would this merit a recall?

    • JJ

      The thing you’re not realizing is that no matter what any of them say, this TNG HD thing was released to make money, not impress hardcore trek fans. A lot people won’t notice the mistake and the people that do already bought it anyway. I know it doesn’t make you happy, but they don’t care. Money Money Money

      • bytes

        Ya true. I think that I’m just annoyed that the Okuda’s always have the last word.

        • Daniel Buckley

          Better them then some anonymous CBS employee with no connection the Star Trek.

          • Frank B.

            But maybe an anonymous CBS employee would have corrected the editing screw up of the docking tube shots in “11001001”? Andrew Probert specifically asked Mike Okuda to have this fixed, but Mr. Okuda wouldn’t exclude it was a deliberate artistic choice of the scene’s editor.

      • hypnotoad72

        And to make money, impressing customers is usually not a bad thing to do. But you’re right – a lot of people won’t notice… a lot don’t even recognize the obvious – and pardon the late-80s expression here – boners pulled during season 2’s “remastering”, which is the only season that falls short and by some considerable margin.

    • Daniel Buckley

      I believe they said at one point that the budget wouldn’t allow for the tracking effect that they would need to do to fix it. They were producing those episodes rather quickly to air on TV.

    • Frank B.

      Good points! How did the Okudas determine that the display in The Naked Now wasn’t a deliberate artistic choice, i.e. a file cover schematic showing the last Enterprise under the command of Captain Kirk. NCC-1701-A was Constitution Class as seen in The Undiscovered Country. And unlike TMP they had plenty of TOS Enterprise schematics at their disposal when making The Naked Now.

    • Kaine Morrison

      There are more mistakes than just Timescape. You should read my long post…

  • Kaine Morrison

    It was NOT intentional. It was a mistake back then. I believe there was even an interview after the season ended, where this was brought up and was admitted to being a mistake.

    They should and need to fix this!

    • Brian C. Bock

      How do you suggest they fix it. The discs have been manufactured. You don’t seriously expect that they’d recall a disc or reissue replacements because they recreated a scene too faithfully to the original, do you? How does this affect anyone’s enjoyment of the show?

      • Kaine Morrison

        They can do it with the prints, not on the disks.
        You make it sound like that since it is on the Disk that it needs to happen to the Disk. The just need to pull up that file and edit it, re-encode it and re-press it.

        • Brian

          Spoken by someone outside the industry. The cost to “just… pull up that file and edit it, re-encode it and re-press it.” would be in the thousands.

          • Kaine Morrison

            I know how much it would cost. I was saying that it is not set in stone like others are saying.

    • Frank B.

      If the original VFX people stated it was a mistake, I wonder how they now feel seeing the mistake recreated in glorious HD.

  • Kaine Morrison

    There is also BlueScreen Bleed in an episode. Someone over at blu-ray.com pointed it out.

  • SpaceCadet

    I think it should have been corrected and it would be consistent with the previous corrections that have been made during this remastering process.

  • Data

    They should have fixed this!! Because the actors even mentioned it! And it wouldn’t have looked worse, so the original people wouldn’t complain about it I’m sure!! Please CBS, fix every everything, the show will only benefit from this unique opportunity! Please for the 4k/3d release in some years, fix everything!!!

    • Mat Rowe

      4K? Maybe WAY later down the road.

      3D? Not a chance. Stupid gimmick designed to attract children back to the cinemas and away from their iPads.

      • Data

        Let’s just wait and see :)

      • hypnotoad72

        Assuming they are re-edited for native 4K. I suspect they might be upscaled… Indeed, “The Simpsons”‘ Blu-Ray releases have been upscaled VT and how some people try to defend that is rather hysterical… “oh, it’s not bad, but my only complaint is the softness, harsh lines, color patterns (moire)…” – which is precisely what happens when you upscale SD video: Every video artifacting blemish gets magnified, and doubled (interlace->progressive).

        • archer9234

          Well the seasons that are upscaled, are only 480 digital. There is no film to go back to and get into HD. They could rescan film for seasons 1-12. But then need to do all the post tape fixes and text overlays.

    • Brian C. Bock

      Fix it? The discs have been made. There’s no “fixing” it. Done.

    • hypnotoad72

      The 4k process would still be the same, with other errors potentially occurring. Assuming 4k is ever done. There’s no reason it couldn’t have, since isn’t the maximum theoretical detail in 35mm equivalent to 4k, and that 4k TV sets have been out for a year or two already?

      Still, “Enterprise”‘s CGI upscaled from 720p to 1080p look fairly good, if not a tad soft. Not by much. But that level of stretching isn’t significant by any means.

  • Allen Williams

    I think fixing errors is more important than artistic vision. That’s why I was never bothered by a full CGI replacement for TOS. Also for the sake of consistency (2ft, 4ft, 6ft enterprise models) I would have preferred a CGI restoration of TNG as well.

    • JJ

      I think the philosophy, ideals, and vision of Mr. Roddenberry is the most important thing. Forget the damn beam, focus on the meaning behind the story.

      • Kaine Morrison

        There was nothing wrong with the stories to begin with though.

    • StuUK

      I too am somewhat of a CG-junkie and the CG model of the Enterprise-D that the FX people for TNG-R are playing with is out of this world gorgeous; I would luuuuv to see this model applied to all the FX-shots throughout Next Gen as a whole but only if the final product on BluRay releases gave us the option to shuttle the camera to the original FX just like those on the classic series; hard for me to pin down why I have that opinion… Nostalgia maybe? Affection for the old-skool way of creating this stuff?? – TNG is my show (haha!) – I wouldn’t want it changed to such an extent that I couldn’t recognise it any more.

      Of course the problem with a CG-restoration is that the person charged with the task is reproducing those practically derived special effects to a CG equivalent is also reinterpreting them no matter how faithful the artist is trying to be. Some of those artistic choices will be good ones; others will inevitably invite fan fall out.
      Case in point? – “Darmok”: The phasers were fired out of the ships torpedo launcher… A silly silly mistake! Do we get some artist to change it? – Sure we do… And they do!
      The final result? – “Darmok”: The phasers fire out of the saucers phaser array… Great stuff! It all makes sense now. Or does it? – Check the Trek Core video; actually check it on You Tube… Check the user comments… Amongst a sea of approvals from fans, some smart arse has identified that they still didn’t reproduce the effect right and now that’s all I’ll think about now every time I revisit that effects sequence! – I can live with the omission; it’s still a massive improvement on what it’s replacing but I bet there are thousands of fans who are a bit narked because of it!

  • hypnotoad72

    The only mistakes I’m seeing in season 6 are when the episodes first start – there is no fade-in. Just an abrupt picture popping out of nowhere with no fade-in, which (if memory serves) has been typical of the show in the past. I’ve not seen every episode, but it’s been consistent on Chain of Command 1, Ship in a Bottle, Timescape…

  • Kaine Morrison

    I posted this over at blu-ray.com:

    So, it seems that there are quite a few mess-ups with the Video Presentation.

    Do we need a Replacement Program for this season?

    Here are all of the currently known issues:

    #1 – Relics – it appears that there is a
    starfield behind the star as seen on the viewscreen while the
    Enterprise is INSIDE the Dyson sphere. This goes way beyond just a
    minor technical error and compromises THE major concept of the episode
    and the setting for those particular scenes.

    – From a posting on TrekCore

    #2 – TimeScape – the missing hull breach / scorch marks that should be on the underside of the saucer section.

    #3 – TimeScape – The energy beam still
    originates from the neck of the Enterprise for some unknown reason.
    The characters even mention the beam is coming from the deflector
    array.

    #4 – Chain of Command (2) – There is BlueScreen Bleed

    – As mentioned by someone here

    #5 – There’s a slight audio error on the
    Chain of Command Blu Ray. When Jellico exits the bridge after his
    initial negotiation at around the 31:00 minute mark, the swoosh door
    sound comes out of the left speaker when it should be the right speaker
    as the doors are located off camera to the right. Compounded by the
    fact Troi and Riker are staring off to the right of the screen. Minor
    error to an overall terrific presentation.

    – As reported by Connor

    • hypnotoad72

      Dang. I didn’t notice the sound (#5) – but for all TNGs, I’ve always kept the sound at the original stereo.

      Timescape’s problems are fairly minor, and I didn’t even see the scorch marks on the original transmission. Oddly, the beam error (carried over from the original) isn’t as bothersome as the lack of scorch marks, but given how often in Trek that ships are fired upon and there are no marks of any sort afterward (with the rare, very special episode putting in such marks because that’s the obvious key that there’s a reset button waiting to be pressed), I’m not really fazed…

      I missed the bluescreen bleed in Chain of Command II. The next time I see it, it’ll be stuck with me. Was it a big blotch of blue? (all of this is sad, since season 2’s issues were far more numerous, obvious, and frighteningly consistent…)

    • Brian

      As numerous others have posted on blu-ray.com, a replacement program won’t happen. It’s really not warranted. Sure there are a few minor imperfections, but nothing worth complaining about.

      1) Yes, the starfield is out of place and yes, it does counter the story, but it’s minor.

      2) This was present in the original episode. There’s nothing to fix.

      3) This was present in the original episode. There’s nothing to fix.

      4) I haven’t personally seen this, but it’s minor. Similar issues have popped up in previous seasons and didn’t get a response.

      5) As stated on the forums, this hasn’t been successfully substantiated. Some people (2?) have heard the problem, while many others haven’t noticed it.

  • shanebroughton

    I would’ve moved the beam to the deflector since the dialogue specifically states it’s coming from there.

    I’d also lose the sounds coming from the computer consoles since time is effectively frozen.

  • jerr

    I hope the fix it for future versions and the HD broadcast version. I’m ok if the BluRay is botched here and there

    • Brian

      It’s not going to happen. It’s not considered a “problem” so there’s nothing to “fix” as far as CBS-D is concerned.

      • jerr

        That’s why I said hope and not demand

      • New Horizon

        Well, it’s not a problem as far as the Okudas are concerned. They said they asked CBS-D not to fix it, so perhaps CBS had intended to fix it.

    • Kaine Morrison

      So we, who spent money on the best possible presentation of the show, get screwed?
      No, They need to fix the Disks!

  • Tone

    I really am starting to dislike the Okudas. I am really thinking that they are now just nothing more than corporate shills that CBS/Paramount trolley out when they have some Trek to sell.

    • Sykes

      This all sounds pretty ungrateful to me. One or two things get through that you disagree with and you accuse them of “riding the gravy train”? I’d like to see the amount of negative comments these sets would be getting if there were not Trek consultants on hand trying to make sure all the small details are paid adequate attention.

      • StuUK

        I agree completely. The Okuda’s are clearly fans of the show (how can any fan not own a library of their reference books?), they have contributed greatly to the beauty and backstory of the Trek universe, they possess a lot of the nerd-knowledge that a show like this benefits from…
        Their participation in the TNG-R project is surely crucial and CBS-D should surely be commended for inviting them to be involved.

      • Frank B.

        The Okudas have shown in the past examples that they especially pay attention to the correct trajectory of energy beams emanating from the Enterprise, so those in “Timescape” should have been on their watchlist, and not only because Larry Nemecek addressed the “blooper” in his STTNG Companion.

        “The Next Phase” clearly established that an energy transfer beam can emmanate from a tractor beam emitter, and in a remarkable case of continuity the screenplay writers of “Timescape” had the energy transfer beam emmanate from the forward tractor beam emitter near the navigational deflector (“deflector array”).

        In addition, this screncap http://tng.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/s6/6×25/timescape361.jpg near the episode’s end begs for explanation how the energy transfer beam from he dorsal’s port side could possibly have a clear line of sight to the Romulan warbird. Was this screncap also included in the “analysis”?

        • Laughingman

          You can see the hull scorching / hull breach even here. The front of the saucer is supposed to be damaged, and they left it out! Grrrr. Sorry. Just bothers me. The one time we ever get to see the D take damage besides Generations, and they leave it out.

          • Sykes

            Really? Why didn’t you mention it before? ;)

          • Frank B.

            Actually, what bothers me more in this screenshot is either the ridiculous small size of the Romulan warbird or the size increase of the Runabout shuttle….

      • Tone

        In a way, I agree with you, but I (and probably most non-Americans) react badly to the corporate American flavour of BS, I see it, and it makes me almost sick. I lose respect for people when I see them plainly lie, I just can’t respect them after that. Plus this is not the only time they have missed glaring problems during the run of this project.

        I will not waste time feeding them to you, use google and see what I mean…

  • StuUK

    I’m in the camp that supports the opinion that the energy beam coming out of the port side of the secondary hull is a blatant mistake and probably should have been afforded the opportunity to be corrected (ie the beam should look like it’s being emitted from the deflector dish); artistically this correction would not only look better but would serve the show’s consistency; not that this lapse drove me anywhere near as nuts as the phasers firing out of the torpedo launcher in the episode: “Darmok”.

    However for the nerdier fans amongst us, I invite you to refer to your Enterprise-D Technical Manual, chase down the paragraphs related to the ships deflector systems, specifically this part: “The deflector field itself is emitted and shaped by a series of conformal transmission grids on the spacecraft exterior, resulting in a field that closely follows the form of the vehicle itself.” In the episode: “Time-scape” Picard actually refers to the beam coming from the ships deflector array and not the deflector dish. With that passage in mind and knowing that Picard actually referred to an array rather than a specific component of the ship, the final effect does appear less absurd (albeit arguably) since there are elements of the ships deflector technology present on the ships neck.

    • Tone

      Good catch, but the shield grid is not supposed to be capable of directing an energy beam, only the Navigational Deflector is capable of directing energy in that fashion, this is also mentioned in the Tech Manual.

      This fact has also been established in many episodes of TNG, and has been shown on-screen numerous times.

      Sorry, but “rent an Okuda” just made a mistake. If they were involved at all that is.

      • StuUK

        Sure, both the technical manual and several episodes of Next Gen illustrate that the deflector dish is capable of producing numerous beams.

        The shield grid however is seldom referenced in any episode, indeed I can only think of one episode where they even mention it’s existence using that exact terminology and it had nothing to do with using or excluding the shield grid from delivering any kind of beam.
        I have just digested the chapters of the tech manual that talk over the functions of the deflector dish and the shield grid, neither of which reference the shield grid as being incapable of emitting energy beams nor do those chapters confirm that the production of energy beams as being exclusive to the deflector dish (unless you can point me to the sections I’m missing).

        • Tone

          The shield grid is the system that makes the shields, and in “The Defector” Geordi LaForge mentions that he can extend the shields around the Romulan ship, but the side effect of this would be that they would not take much if the Romulans started firing, and that Romulan ship was very very close to the Enterprise…

          The Main Navigational Deflector is not part of the shield grid, and is a large device which projects energy ahead of the ship to push objects out of the Enterprise’s path. As Geordi said in TBOBW, it is the only device designed to channel high amounts of energy and direct it.

    • Data

      Ok with this knowlage it looks different! Than it’s ok of course and the !mistake! lays on our side who critisised it! So learn everybody don’t to judge too fast and me too, without researching the facts :)

      • StuUK

        At nearly 50 years old the entire Star Trek saga has shown itself up to be just as much about art as it is drama. The deflector dish on the Enterprise is a visually more interesting and more dramatic a feature on the ship than the neck of it’s hull. Regardless of whether or not the support material that’s been published for the show can allow through technicalities ‘creative’ decisions to be made (like energy beams that can fire out of any muted feature on the ships hull!) the shows creative talents should be trying to make every frame look cool without betraying the consistency of what we have already been told about the fiction.

        The deflector dish doing it’s thing is far more interesting than… well whatever the neck of the ship can do. Picture the neck of the ship having its chance at the Borg cube in “The Best of Both Worlds” – How dopey would that have been?

        It’s silly to expect fans to do some background reading on the workings of this fictional space vessel (even though I absolutely adore it all and it’s no bother for me!) because the creative powers have blatantly thrown something on the screen that makes the fanbase say: “Err… hang on a minute!!” – The Okuda’s should have pushed for the adjustment in my opinion. It was established waaaay back in the pilot that the ships phasers aren’t simply about blasting asteroids and enemy ships.

        The mistake is on our side? – No it really isn’t!

  • Laughingman

    Dunno, sorry for nagging. But to be completely honest, the scorch marks / hull breaches on the underside of the saucer, that was something I was looking forward to seeing done in HD since the moment I heard that they were remastering Trek. I’m quite disappointed that they were left out. :o(

    • Sykes

      We get it.

  • archer9234

    I have a theory on how they screwed up on the Dyson sphere sun shots. They saw black void in the SD version. And assumed it was space. When if you look closely it’s suppose to be a faded off in the distance wall. It had to be a failure of double checking the material.

    http://i107.photobucket.com/albums/m314/archer9234/Untitled-4.jpg

    • Stephen

      Yes – I think you are probably right. But nobody’s perfect I suppose!

      • Justin Olson

        That’s true. No one person is perfect. Not even two people working together can be perfect. That’s why you need thousands and thousands of knowledgeable fans all over the world double checking for errors. Then perfection (or something very, very close to it) would be achievable, and errors such as this could have been avoided.

        • archer9234

          Very true. The team would need to have a person who isn’t involved with the remaster work. And doesn’t see the shots 100 times a day. But they also need to be VERY familiar to the episodes. Minor errors will be caught a lot easier that way.

  • archer9234

    Another error I found. During Rightful Heir. When everyone walks into the holodeck. They used 10 forwards door sound. Not the holodeck/cargo door sound. In both 7.1 and stereo.

    • Brian

      The stereo mix is the same as the one used on the DVDs (and VHS, and original broadcast) correct? So it sounds like this was originally there. Aren’t they just remixing the existing tapes, rather than recreating the tracks? I’d imagine an audio effect mistake would be much more difficult for them to accidentally introduce than an editing or vfx issue. Have there been other audio effect issues in the previous releases?

      • Justin Olson

        Yes there have. One example I can think of is on the Season Four set. In the episode “Night Terrors” you can no longer hear noises in Riker’s quarters that he’s visually reacting to. The sounds are there on the original English Dolby Digital 2.0 track.

        • Brian

          Good point, I think the difference here though is that’s a mixing issue rather than substituting the wrong effect.

          • archer9234

            It still could of been corrected. They reconstructed the episodes from all the main elements. Including the sound FX. Just no one caught the error.

  • Data

    I heard the roomer that this damage visible on the enterprise also has been forgotten on the blu rays?? I couldn’t see it because in Germany the rays has not been released yet. That would be a huge mistake for me!! http://tng.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/s6/6×25/timescape171.jpg

    • Sykes

      That shot remains fine. It’s only missing from one or two (but repeated several times) of the distant shots.

      • Data

        So its not visible in every distant shot (are there more than 2?)?

        • Justin Olson

          The damage is not visible the first time you see the ships frozen in time (at the end of an act break and at the start of the next act). Then at least one more time when the shot is shown again. The only time you see the damage is when time resumes and you actually see the Romulan phaser fire cause the damage.

          You can find an HD screencap TrekCore provided in the Season Six review comments.

  • archer9234

    Well someone didn’t adhere to “artistic” bunk on the team. The shot when the core blows, the power transfer beam is coming out of the director dish, as it should. So now there’s a conflict within the episode…

    http://i107.photobucket.com/albums/m314/archer9234/vlcsnap-2014-07-01-10h05m45s89.png

    • Frank B.

      So at least this shot was fixed. Gotta be grateful for little things, I guess.

      • Justin Olson

        It wasn’t fixed. This is how it appeared originally:

        http://tng.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/s6/6×25/timescape270.jpg

        • archer9234

          Yeah. But it’s a conflict of all the excuses. It was caught at some point even during the original version. They need to suck it up. They called a bad choice in leaving the mistake as is, in the other shots. If they really cared that hard to keep the goof going. This shot should of been uncorrected.

  • Berin Midmer

    Should have fixed.
    Though it’s still not as bad as the decision not to replace the Cause and Effect explosion – what were they thinking?… :(

  • Bridger

    It is not even that, in Best of Both Worlds, take a look at where the Phasere are firing on the pylons they don’t come from the phaser strips but from the pylons itself.

    http://tng.trekcore.com/hd/albums/3×26/the_best_of_both_worlds_part1_hd_204.jpg

    • archer9234

      Yes. They intentionally recreated the goof. it was in the original episode like that. They cherry pick what goof to replicate or not at random. That’s what confuses people.

      • Frank B.

        The nacelle pylons do have secondary phaser strips at the bottom, but that’s obviously not where the paser beams emanate from. But what are the pylon phasers firing at, I didn’t know the Borg cube was that big? I’m starting to look forward to a future edition fixing these goofs and a couple of other items.

        • archer9234

          The Enterprise was in the middle of the borg cube. So it had area enough to fire down.

        • Data

          Me too, let’s hope for the 4k versions, that WILL come, it’s only a question of WHEN!!!!

  • archer9234

    It doesn’t even make sense. People complained as hard on the Darmok shot. With the power beam goof. But they choose to not fix it. The work load isn’t even increased. They used tracking software on the windows. Use it on the deflector dish. And no rotoscoping work needs to be done. Since the model is on a bluscreen. The beam can be put behind it, with ease. I just see the inconstant fixing and goof replications as some random department heads choice of the day.

    Even some very bad mistakes like wires coming out of consoles aren’t fixed. But they fixed the royale patch error. Granted, I don’t expect moving shots to be repaired all the time. That’s a lot of work. But the wire coming out of the transporter console, in timescape is really noticeable. If I was on the team. I’d need 2 days to erase that wire, in the moving shot.

    http://i107.photobucket.com/albums/m314/archer9234/1.jpg

    • Data

      That cable really leaves me cold, it even could be explained easily somehow that theres cable on a starship, thats no problem. Even datas hand underside make-up could be explained on the light shaddow way. But Picards nails can’t be explained in NO WAY!!

  • Data

    Did someone else noticed that picards long nails were there when he sat on the console, right before they were actually growing? I hate these mistakes, how can this happen? It also really takes the power and authenticity out of stewards great acting in this scene, when you know the nails already are there. Maybe it happend because it was not visible in sd. But than they should fix these kind of things for hd! So I hope in some years when the 4 k version comes, where it will be even more visible, they do will fix this!!

    • R

      Picards long nails are visible in sd. LOL never noticed that before!
      But it’s easy to “hide” it in that scene.
      For example scale that scene up and then move it down.
      Or skip to the part where that hand is out of the shot.
      Or just put a big censor square over it… , look away or close your eyes…

      Some things need to be corrected but other things…
      The devil is in the details. Censorious.

  • Donny Pearson

    Respectfully, I’m cool with the beam remaining where it is.

  • pittrek

    Well maybe they could think about it and do 2 versions – one where nothing would be changed, the episode would be still the same just in HD (and with upscaled effects, no CG) and one version with every single misstake corrected and with new CG effects where necessary.. Seamless branching maybe? Or 2 completely different releases? If they would do it this way, everybody would be happy and they would earn for it more money too.

    But now it’s too late for this. But “IF” they do DS9, maybe they could consider it

  • Data

    Does anyone knows why don davis composed “face of the enemy” of season 6? Instead of one of the regular composers? I love the score he’d done!!! He should have done more!! Episode like “decent” would had profited a lot of it!!! He is as least as good as ron jones!