XPost: alt.startrek, alt.tv.star-trek, alt.tv.star-trek.enterprise   
   From: f0o@psu.edu   
      
   "David Johnston"  wrote in message   
   news:3fd652dd.96963835@news.telusplanet.net...   
   > On Tue, 09 Dec 2003 15:59:23 -0600, z  wrote:   
   >   
   > >Graham Kennedy  wrote in news:1071004575.6058.0   
   > >@eunomia.uk.clara.net:   
   > >   
   > >   
   > >>   
   > >> I wouldn't be especially sad to see Enterprise go. I would   
   > >> be sad that they probably wouldn't want to make another   
   > >> series if this one flops. Not for quite a long while anyway.   
   > >>   
   > >   
   > >I"d miss it.  The one thing going for making another series is that the   
   > >special effects costs are going down all the time   
   >   
   > They aren't, you know.  You just get better effects for a given   
   > investment, but since the audience is constantly getting more   
   > demanding (I still can't believe that people were actually bitching   
   > about the the CGI in the Hulk movie.  Man, they'd have a heart attack   
   > if they ever saw a Harryhausen movie), it always costs the same   
   > or more to do a new series.   
   >   
      I don't know.  I believe there will be a point of demising returns here.   
   You can only simulate reality so much.  After that about the only people who   
   can tell the difference in quality will be the people who do CGI work.  Even   
   today I think they are doing a very good job; look at LOTR.  As processing   
   power keeps increasing and hardware prices keep decreasing, or at least you   
   can buy more bang for the same buck, CGI production costs will begin to go   
   down in time.  Especially once they have better automated software tools.   
   This may take another 10 to 20 years, but it will happen, I believe.  You   
   will know this when CGI starts creeping into more and more non sci-fi shows.   
      
   [Tim]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)