File talk:Deneb IV surface, remastered.jpg

CGI(?)
Discussion continued from Forum:How to deal with TNG in HD screenshots

What is your source for Farpoint Station being a CG model? --Jörg 15:17, January 28, 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't see anything saying, one or another, whether it is CGI, but I think it's probable due to 1) it looks like CGI and 2) Michael Okuda saying, "The beautiful shot of Deneb IV was [originally] actually a matte painting done by Industrial Light & Magic, and that was done on film. The planet is pretty much dead on with what was done in the original shot." He's not being clear whether he means the planet as seen from orbit or the planet's surface. However, it's doubtful that he'd describe the planet as seen from orbit to be "beautiful," due to the extreme murkiness of the sphere; it's much more likely that he'd find the surface footage "beautiful". Also, whether this is the the planet as seen from orbit or the planet's surface he's talking about, it was clearly (from his words) significantly changed and recreated for HD. Again, it's the surface footage that this alludes to; it's much more changed, visually, than the simply higher-rez images of the planet from orbit. Hence, CGI was used to recreate the surface. --Defiant 15:37, January 28, 2012 (UTC)

He is referring to the shot of the planet. As strange as it seems (taking into consideration how planets were done later in the series), Deneb IV, as seen from orbit, is a matte painting. Two give-aways: Unlike other planets seen on TNG, the planet is static and does not rotate, also, the clouds do not move across the surface, as they are painted on. The surface shot of Deneb IV, including the old Bandi village and Farpoint Station, were a large tabletop (a pretty big table... ;-)) model created by ILM, as you said. The only thing that had to be redone for the HD transfer of the episode was the smoke coming from the Bandi houses after they have been attacked by the giant spaceship, and the transformation of the Station into the giant jellyfish. The station itself, as shiny and new as it looks, is still the "old" model built by ILM. --Jörg 15:50, January 28, 2012 (UTC)
 * I still absolutely debate your contention that this is a model; it looks nothing like it! Furthermore, you present a complete absence of proof, which is also not very encouraging. I strongly suggest you provide more evidence to support your theory. --Defiant 23:48, January 31, 2012 (UTC)

I know you will not believe a word of what I write here. I watched the episode three times today, and, based on visual observations, I'm sure it's still the same old model. I contacted Mike Okuda about the shot and he confirmed that Deneb IV (the planet) is a matte painting and the surface shot is still the same old model work, without the addition of CG elements. I'm afraid this is all I can give you and if this is not enough, I will take this to Ex Astris Scientia, where a man's word still is enough. Best! --Jörg 00:11, February 1, 2012 (UTC)


 * If this was a CGI recreation, it would be an insanely accurate one, right down to the form and placement of individual hills in the back- and tiny rocks in the foreground. What makes you believe that this is what happened, Defiant - instead of a re-composition of available film elements "just" scanned in a better much resolution? This is what is given as an explanation several times in the interview you linked to, yourself, and I think it is up to you to present proof that they were not telling the truth and actually were doing something completely different - not the other way around. That said - where would this "CGI" trivia even go? Isn't it enough to present this new shot as-is, without any explanation of how it was created? -- Cid Highwind 08:29, February 1, 2012 (UTC)
 * Possibly in an ideal world, but not if images that are simply of higher resolution, without any other substantial differences, are just to be made replacements for the lower rez versions, as is being proposed on the other page. Besides my own opinion that this doesn't look like a model, it's largely for the future debaters who will likely come forth and say, "Hold on, isn't this just another upgraded image and should therefore be used as a replacement, deleting the previous version?" that I've been making my case. However, that now seems to have been lost, making the removable of the previous version somewhat more justifiable. --Defiant 13:18, February 1, 2012 (UTC)
 * Again, the tip of Farpoint Station definitely, definitely does not look like a model; anyone who knows what a model really looks like will agree. If CGI was indeed not used, I conclude that that part of the image was either matte painting or was filmed with some special, hardly-ever-used filming technique. It's certainly not just typical miniature work. --Defiant 13:28, February 1, 2012 (UTC)


 * Then I must be one of the guys who doesn't know "what a model really looks like", because to me, it just looks like one. Please describe in detail what parts you think do not look like from a model, and why. -- Cid Highwind 13:46, February 1, 2012 (UTC)
 * Ultimately, I will indeed accept it may be simply a model shot. I think what's been somewhat confusing the issue for me is the lack of clarity in the shot (even for an HD image, there's a certain amount of atmospheric haziness there), and how well the coloration of the spire transitions from the gleaming grey of its base to more of a pink hue, reflecting the pinkish orange of the sky. The sky, in general, appears to be remarkably well composited into the shot. Also, the sides of the spire look amazingly smooth for a model, though they're not entirely easy to make out, given the lack of clarity. --Defiant 13:57, February 1, 2012 (UTC)

That's because the sky wasn't composited into the shot in post production but was part of the set/model.

http://s95.photobucket.com/albums/l142/gaghyogi49/DenebIVsurface.jpg

Source: TNG Season 1 DVD SPecial Features. --Jörg 14:09, February 1, 2012 (UTC)


 * Also, an image on this EAS page shows the whole model, and how it actually is a complete model. So, I guess that's settled and we can end the discussion about this being a CGI recreation. -- Cid Highwind 14:12, February 1, 2012 (UTC)
 * In actuality, that discussion ended quite a long while ago. I'm still amazed by how well the color of the sky is reflected in the Farpoint spire and in the background mountains. --Defiant 14:18, February 1, 2012 (UTC)
 * That's something for which the pic (actually here) does not appear to account for. --Defiant 14:23, February 1, 2012 (UTC)