XPost: rec.arts.sf.tv
From: ANIM8Rfsk@cox.net
In article <4OednYEcyu_IdCLXnZ2dnUVZ_ucAAAAA@supernews.com>,
"Mac Breck" wrote:
> Pete B wrote:
> > In article <987d47e0-8330-4375-8fb1-3b986d4911a6
> > @o13g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>, SFTV_troy@yahoo.com says...
> >> From: Joseph Straczynski
> >>> Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2009 23:31:14 -0700 (PDT)
> >>> Lines: 39
> >>>
> >>> Doesn't matter if any of them exist, they could never be upgraded to
> >>> HD or anything close to that. They were produced on antiquated
> >>> equipment at a resolution that's ridiculous in comparison
> >>> to what's currently being done now.
> >>>
> >>> And honestly, what you'd pay to try (and fail) at up-resing
> >>> them would be nearly what you'd pay to render everything fresh.
> >>
> >>
> >> Hello JMS,
> >>
> >> I respectfully disagree.
> >
> > Because you don't know anything about the subject, eh? ;)
> >
> >> DVD players upscale 720x480 videos to HD all
> >> the time.
> >
> > And that proves it - thats just resizing a bitmap (they did that for
> > the dvds already), they are (apparently) talking about 3d models,
> > starting with an exsisting model would only save them about
> > 0.000000001% of time.
>
> Wouldn't it take a considerable amount of time to re-create *all* of the
> 3D models used in B5 (and the movies and Crusade) from scratch, in a
> polygon count (and skin detail) that would look great in HD or on the
> movie screen? That can't be a minor thing to do. Sure, I'd love if
> that were done, but I can't see Warner Brothers *EVER* putting up
> the money to do that. No, not in a million years.
Not only do you have to recreate all the models, you have to recreate
all the textures, lighting, fx, object moves, camera moves . . .
honestly, the models are the least of it.
--
Happy 45th Birthday
The Man from U.N.C.L.E.
Open Channel D!
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
