Any rumors about Buffy the Vampire Slayer show coming out on Blu-ray?

[chip75]

Originally Posted by seannyd

Well, Firefly correct me if I'm wrong but Firefly was also shot on film so if they wanted to spend the money they could have given it the old TNG treatment.

The live-action was shot on film, the CGI wasn't. You can't shoot CGI (only transfer it to film)! It was created in standard-definition on a computer. Firefly's effects would have cost millions to recreate at a higher-resolution.

TNG had optical effects filmed elements for nearly everything, anything that was created on a computer was recreated in high-definition but TNG had a healthy budget (for a going concern), Firefly didn't. The old TNG treatment was a huge undertaking by one of the industry's most dedicated professionals.

[slainery]

Why do people keep comparing the remasterisation of the Star Trek series with Buffy's? The ST franchise is in a whole other league in terms of cultural impact, merchandising, international revenue and fandom..

[seannyd]

Originally Posted by slainery

Why do people keep comparing the remasterisation of the Star Trek series with Buffy's? The ST franchise is in a whole other league in terms of cultural impact, merchandising, international revenue and fandom..

Totally. I completely agree with that.

I was only drawing a slight comparison saying that the more people that purchased those sets showed there was demand for that level of quality.

Also, given Firefly's release was essentially just an upconversion, unless I have been misled, I was surprised to see that brand new (inferior) effects appear to have been created for this Buffy remaster which is more than what was done for Firefly since Firefly reused their SD effects.

As for chip, I completely understand the methods that were used and that TNG was a much, much more laborious process than Firefly. I was just trying to say that if you threw enough money at it you could have done what TNG did, despite the differences in technology, even though it would be pretty much impossible to justify the cost.

[DragonQ]

Originally Posted by chip75

They did go back to the original elements with Firefly, they were just rendered in standard-definition. Nearly all the TNG stuff was shot on film and could be re-composited with HD scans.

No that's not true. For any Firefly shots with special effects in them, the entire image is upscaled. Thus, they obviously didn't go back to the original elements of anything, they just upscaled the SD post-effects masters.

There were at least three other options they could've chosen:

- Go back and re-composite the SD effects with the new HD transfer (this might not look right though, and may actually make the effects less look realistic).
- Re-render the effects in HD and re-composite (again, this could make the effects look less realistic if they don't have a high enough polygon count for a proper HD render).
- Recreate the effects from scratch in HD (most expensive option and might be difficult to recreate the effects faithfully, depending on how many of the original files exist and what software was used, etc.).

[chip75]

Originally Posted by seannyd

As for chip, I completely understand the methods that were used and that TNG was a much, much more laborious process than Firefly. I was just trying to say that if you threw enough money at it you could have done what TNG did, despite the differences in technology, even though it would be pretty much impossible to justify the cost.

I don't think it would cost huge amounts but FOX may never justify the costs. They seem to be trying to re-master the show on a very limited budget.

Filmmakers rushed to use CGI for television as it was quick and relatively easy but time unfortunately hasn't been kind to standard-definition effects. It saved money at the time but now it looks like a poor investment!

[Dynamo of Eternia]

Originally Posted by Panemlights

That's sorta ridiculous to say tbh. People have to right to view things the way they want to on their own TV.

Yeah, especially when I'm making a certain choice not because it's my preferred way to watch it, but because it will prevent adverse effects to my screen that could develop if I watch several episodes in a row.


Let's also throw another wrinkle into this argument. Going back to my earlier post about my experience with my previous TV, I still have said previous TV in another room. In theory it would be good to watch 4:3 content since it already has issues as a result from it, so it wouldn't be a big deal at this point to use that TV for that purpose.

But none the less, it's still a smaller TV of lesser quality and lesser resolution than my new one. Should that factor into the decision of how, when, and where to watch it? Am I dishonoring the artists intent by not watching it on the absolute best quality screen available?

And if so, where should the trade off be made? With OAR or with the size and quality of the set since (as I have outlined), both is not a really an option without risking a problem with my newer set.... a risk that I'm not willing to take.

[Panemlights]

Anyone know how to hack and expose Fox and demand a better Buffy remaster on Blu-ray?

[Reddkryten]

Originally Posted by chip75

Filmmakers rushed to use CGI for television as it was quick and relatively easy but time unfortunately hasn't been kind to standard-definition effects. It saved money at the time but now it looks like a poor investment!

Well said! Although I say it wasn't just CGI but all video, I mean, editing on video is why a bunch of shows are in this mess that requires an expensive remastering to save them from. Video just wasn't ready for prime time (well, it was, but it didn't last very long).

[slainery]

FOX seems to have focused most of their effort on The X-Files... which is perfectly understandable. I mean, it's the TXF

[Reddkryten]

Originally Posted by Dynamo of Eternia

Yeah, especially when I'm making a certain choice not because it's my preferred way to watch it, but because it will prevent adverse effects to my screen that could develop if I watch several episodes in a row.

Don't some TVs use grey pillar boxes and letterboxes to prevent burn in.

I think everyone agrees that your TV should not be damaged. However I don't think the show should be sliced in half to do so. Grey pillar boxes or making a personal choice to stretch seem like fairly inoffensive options.

[chip75]

Originally Posted by Reddkryten

Well said! Although I say it wasn't just CGI but all video, I mean, editing on video is why a bunch of shows are in this mess that requires an expensive remastering to save them from. Video just wasn't ready for prime time (well, it was, but it didn't last very long).

Video seems to be a crime against television, far worse than CGI effects. Think of all the shows that had zero effects but were filmed on video or edited on video that we could have in HD! All those shows stuck in standard-definition forever!

I'm surprised someone didn't demo film footage versus video footage in one of the studios theatres to show how awful the comparisons were. Films are always telling us to reach for the stars but video never got us past out living room ceilings ....

Originally Posted by Reddkryten

Don't some TVs use grey pillar boxes and letterboxes to prevent burn in.

I think everyone agrees that your TV should not be damaged. However I don't think the show should be sliced in half to do so. Grey pillar boxes or making a personal choice to stretch seem like fairly inoffensive options.

They could add Disney-style curtains to the 4:3 release, some nice velvet drapes either side of the frame would look quite fitting!

[Dynamo of Eternia]

Originally Posted by Reddkryten

Don't some TVs use grey pillar boxes and letterboxes to prevent burn in.

I think everyone agrees that your TV should not be damaged. However I don't think the show should be sliced in half to do so. Grey pillar boxes or making a personal choice to stretch seem like fairly inoffensive options.

For now, when needed, I'm making the choice to stretch the picture. Not because I want to (I would otherwise be fine watching the TV with bars on the sides), but for the concerns about the TV, itself.

Yes, some TVs have gray pillar box options.. my new TV has this, but there are limits.

They are only an option if the signal, itself, is truly 4:3 to begin with, such as 4:3 content on DVD or a standard def 4:3 TV signal.

Many (if not all) 4:3 Blu-Rays and even many HD 4:3 broadcasts are actually 16:9 images, and the black pillar bars are part of the picture. So there is no way to replace them with the gray ones. If the settings are adjusted on the TV to make the image 4:3 with gray bars, you get this weird effect in which the gray bars are where they should be, but the 16:9 image (including black bars) is squished in the middle. In other words, it only works if the TV, itself, if filling in that area, and it's not part of the picture.

It's sort of like the opposite (in terms of black bar location) equivelant of a non-anamorphic widescreen DVD in which the bars are part of the picture.

Personally I wish that the content, itself, on such Blu-Rays was actually 4:3 and I just had to adjust the settings, myself, but they probably do it this way so that it looks correct without average joe-6-packs having to do any adjusting in their TVs. If it worked this way, then I could use the gray bars (or periodically swap between gray and black between episodes to change it up).

It actually drove me nuts on my older 37" TV before upgrading. After having those initial problems and me trying to prevent them going forward, the zoom options on it did not want to properly cooperate with what little 4:3 content that I had at the time on Blu-Ray because the zoom options, while good in many cases, didn't cooperate properly with those Blu-rays and I couldn't eliminate the bars entirely.

Luckily, while the overall zooming options are more limited on the newer set, what options I do have seem to cooperate better with such Blu-Rays. But it's a catch-22 none the less.

[DragonQ]

Originally Posted by Dynamo of Eternia

Many (if not all) 4:3 Blu-Rays and even many HD 4:3 broadcasts are actually 16:9 images, and the black pillar bars are part of the picture. So there is no way to replace them with the gray ones.

Correct. 720p, 1080i, and 1080p are only defined as 16:9 for BD so they are always pillarboxed/letterboxed if not natively 16:9. I think 480i/480p/576i/576p can still be 4:3 on BD though.

[Geoff D]

HD is a 16:9 format so yes, HD 4:3 content will always have to be hard encoded with borders.

[bloomyself]

Originally Posted by seannyd

The simple truth is that packaged media is dying and elaborate, expensive sets like Buffy would need to be is less of a priority. And therefore getting it right is an even lower priority. So if it's too expensive to fix the problems they are creating for themselves, they'll stick with what they have, Whedon's participation be damned.

Yeah, I agree. And the fact that home video media is dying out is all the more reason why what Fox is doing to the show is problematic. This remastered version will likely be not only what will air on television in syndication all over the world within a few years-- but likely they will also be the versions that Fox will be giving out to Netflix, Hulu, Amazon Prime, and any other streaming services. Essentially, whatever the future of television consumption ends up being, this will be the version people will likely be watching on it. And as our TV sets will continue to get more and more detailed, the picture quality of the original SD DVD's will begin to look worse and worse on those television screens.

Therefore, Fox upgrading the picture quality of the episodes is very important in terms of conserving the show's legacy. If they are choosing to convert it to 16:9 that's their choice- it sucks, but whatever- at least do it right. This version will likely be what we will predominantly be seeing in the future, so try and make it look as close to the original as possible. The coloring/shadowing makes it look like an entirely different show and completely changes the mood, and the new haphazard framing makes it look like it was done by children who know nothing about cinematography.

[BillieCassin]

Originally Posted by Dynamo of Eternia

For now, when needed, I'm making the choice to stretch the picture. Not because I want to (I would otherwise be fine watching the TV with bars on the sides), but for the concerns about the TV, itself.

Have you seen any evidence of burn-in on your new set? Unless you do it in the first 100 hours or so of use, burn-in is practically a non-issue at this point. You have to work very very hard to make it happen. And it's not a "progressive" thing in the classic sense - if you watch 10 hours of 4:3 content, as long as you watch something 16x9 in between, it's not adding to some cumulative total. Next time you watch 10 hours of 4:3 content it's starting over as long as you've gotten those phosphors active in 16x9 at some point.

Just mentioning this because it sounds like you are going to a LOT of trouble to prevent something that really rarely happens anymore.

[chip75]

Originally Posted by Dynamo of Eternia

Personally I wish that the content, itself, on such Blu-Rays was actually 4:3 and I just had to adjust the settings, myself, but they probably do it this way so that it looks correct without average joe-6-packs having to do any adjusting in their TVs. If it worked this way, then I could use the gray bars (or periodically swap between gray and black between episodes to change it up).

I have 3 Samsung players and the oldest has the option to zoom-in 2 times and that's the equivalent of cropping a 16:9 image out of the frame, the first option makes a 1.66:1 pillar-boxing effect. Conversely it will crop a 2.39:1 movie to 16:9.

I think one of the newer models (my 5100 and 5500 don't as far as I know) has the same feature, it's a lot better than your TV doing it, as the subtitles won't be cropped out of the frame if you need to use them. Well worth the investment, if you're worried about your telly!

[d514]

Fun fact:

4:3 content on a 16:9 Full HD TV has about 1440*1080 pixels, that's 1555200 pixels

2.40:1 content on a 16:9 Full HD TV has about 1920*800 pixels, that's 1536000 pixels

2.35:1 content has 1920*816, that's 1566720 - but the difference between 2.35 and 2.4 is hardly noticeable.

So... the picture has a different shape but roughly the same size. Do all the people who wish for old 4:3 shows remastered to 16:9 also want all the cinemascope etc. movies to be 16:9 so it fills the screen?

Originally Posted by slainery

Why do people keep comparing the remasterisation of the Star Trek series with Buffy's? The ST franchise is in a whole other league in terms of cultural impact, merchandising, international revenue and fandom..

And yet many people complained that the HD version is 4:3 and not 16:9. But strangely enough they bought them anyway and the subject is almost forgotten in the TNG threads. Can't be that bad.

Originally Posted by Dynamo of Eternia

Yeah, especially when I'm making a certain choice not because it's my preferred way to watch it, but because it will prevent adverse effects to my screen that could develop if I watch several episodes in a row.

If you are afraid of burn in you shouldn't have invested in a flawed technology. It's not just the burn in but on many plasmas the black levels get worse the longer the TV is in use. This is a built in "feature" which is designed to make the TV last longer.
But I've heard that newer plasmas don't burn in that easily.

If you want 16:9 use the zoom function of your TV. The result can't be worse than these Buffy remasters...

[Clark Kent]

I don't want to rain on anyone's parade, but all signs point to Fox pulling back from television Blu-rays. They are barely releasing some of their genre shows even on DVD these days, shifting lesser releases to DVD-Rs in their new MOD program. The studio has drastically cut back on home video expenditures, downsizing in recent years.

I thought the prospects for an eventual Buffy set on Blu-ray were once fairly good; I am now far more pessimistic about its chances.

[DragonQ]

Originally Posted by Drewbee87

The team doing the PIVOT masters actually tried to fix the crew being visible in the 16:9 version. The problem being they cropped a lot of the frame to do so:

Speaking of visible crash mats, I'd never noticed these ones before:



(from S05E22 - The Gift)