My B5 question.

[Hephaestus O'leander Klebold]

"Funny, but the reason I didn't watch Babylon5 originally when it was on
TV, was because I assumed it would be dreck and I have been a reader of
the best of Sci-fi all my life.
I could never get much into Star Trek or the other Sci-fi shows because
they all seemed so formulaic and those silly costumes like on Star Trek,
bugged me. I just assumed Babylon5 was dreck. TV hasn't been my thing
anyway. In the last couple years as I started watching DVD Box Sets,
have I gotten into some past or current TV shows. Most notably of these
past shows is Buffy the Vampire Slayer/Angel, Firefly/Serenity and now
Babylon 5. Although I had known of these shows when they were on TV, I
never watched them except maybe a few Buffy episodes that might have
accidentally been on the tube. I would have only glanced at B5 as I
would flip channels, looking for a movie. The costumes would bug me.
Whenever I turn my TV to the Sci-Fi channel there is rarely anything on
that seems appealing at all, but first impressions isn't always going to
be right. Good thing, is that most good things do end up on boxsets, for
those like me that cannot get into a regular schedule of TV watching at
X time on X day.
dc"

DVD box sets have been a great blessing for me, as I order old shows I
have not seen for years, usually in remastered form so they look pretty
good. Some old movies, unfortunately. have not been so well treated. I
am not always pleased with the pricetag, either. I used to watch TV sf
almost to exclusivity and record it all, but my interest has waned in
the last few years and I don't bother to tape anything anymore. I also
am a reader of SF books, though I don't read near the levels I used to.
Worsening vision and more distractions, I suppose. I was a big fan of
every incarnation of Star Trek. I wouldn't be one of the fanatics that
dress up for the conventions or learn to speak Klingon, but i knew the
minutiae of treknology and canon very well. Classic kirk trek is, and
will aways be, my favorite. took me a while to get into Cueball [Picard
of STNG infamy], but I ultimately did. i have liked the newer
incarnations to varying degrees. i watched B5 from the very first airing
of its pilot episode and never missed a show. I was very angry at the
way crusade was shabbily treated by TNT in the later eps [what few there
were]. They would run some wrestling show overlong to delay the start of
the Crusade ep for that night. I had to set up my VCR to run until they
ran out of tape in order to get the ep at all, then go back and erase
all that idiot posturing and the latest idiocy of Hulk Hogan and other
steroid poisoned no-brainers. THAT was the end of the road for me in
terms of any faith in TV networks in regards to SF. It is now an
attitude of "wait and see what they throw you this year" and just HOPE
for some halfway decent quality.

[Morgan]

Hephaestus O'leander Klebold wrote:

[Massive snip]

Have you tried Farscape? It takes a while to get into but once you're in
it's great. Same gos for the new Battlestar Galactica but to a lesser
degree.

[Hephaestus O'leander Klebold]

"Have you tried Farscape? It takes a while to get into but once you're
in it's great. Same goes for the new Battlestar Galactica but to a
lesser degree."

I have seen at least 60% of Farscape eps. It was a good premise, but i
thought they were sometimes too dependent on far out makeup and muppet
prosthetics. I have seen far less of the new BSG: I have seen the pilot
and a handful of eps and find it OK. I prefer the original concepts and
continuity, but I am not one of those original series purists who
condemn the new version before they have seen an episode.

[PlowBoy]

Maybe he was going to warn her?

Post by Hephaestus O'leander Klebold
"Have you tried Farscape? It takes a while to get into but once you're
in it's great. Same goes for the new Battlestar Galactica but to a
lesser degree."
I have seen at least 60% of Farscape eps. It was a good premise, but i
thought they were sometimes too dependent on far out makeup and muppet
prosthetics. I have seen far less of the new BSG: I have seen the
pilot and a handful of eps and find it OK. I prefer the original
concepts and continuity, but I am not one of those original series
purists who condemn the new version before they have seen an episode.

[Bob]

Post by Hephaestus O'leander Klebold
I have seen at least 60% of Farscape eps. It was a good premise, but i
thought they were sometimes too dependent on far out makeup and muppet
prosthetics.

That's the strength of FS - it's a lot cheaper to be creative with
puppets than CGI. And it is better looking too.

I loved every minute of FS. Every actor fit perfectly in his/her/its
role.

FS has to be the most imaginative sci fi saga ever put on film - much
more so than Star Wars.

You would be well served to see the last 40% because it gets better
and better with time. Harvey alone is enough to justify watching the
latter half. And then there's Chiana.

[Talcott Tarnapool Tarnowski]

"That's the strength of FS - it's a lot cheaper to be creative with
puppets than CGI. And it is better looking too.
I loved every minute of FS. Every actor fit perfectly in his/her/its
role.
FS has to be the most imaginative sci fi saga ever put on film - much
more so than Star Wars.
You would be well served to see the last 40% because it gets better and
better with time. Harvey alone is enough to justify watching the latter
half. And then there's Chiana."
Some of the 40% I would like to see that I missed were the ones with the
fate of Zan and the birth of Talyn. Also the one where Creighton was
cloned.

[Tyler Trafford]

Post by Talcott Tarnapool Tarnowski
Some of the 40% I would like to see that I missed were the ones with
the fate of Zan and the birth of Talyn. Also the one where Creighton
was cloned.

"Wait for the Wheel", "The Hidden Memory", and "Eat Me".

(I think.)

[Jack Bohn]

Bob wrote:

[Farscape]

Post by Bob
You would be well served to see the last 40% because it gets better
and better with time. Harvey alone is enough to justify watching the
latter half. And then there's Chiana.

Can one just jump into Farscape at any point and not be lost?
(That's about what prevented me from watching it.)

[Bob]

Post by Jack Bohn
Can one just jump into Farscape at any point and not be lost?

You might get by if you start at season boundaries. But it is best to
start from the beginning and watch the movie at the very end.

Netflix has the DVDs.

[Frank Peelo]

Post by PlowBoy
Maybe he was going to warn her?

Who was trying to warn whom about what?
Please learn to post correctly - after the text you are referring to.
Presumably your query was in response to something in Hephaestus'
message about Farscape and BSG, included below for reference because it
is short, but I cannot find anything in there that would match it.

Post by PlowBoy

Post by Hephaestus O'leander Klebold
"Have you tried Farscape? It takes a while to get into but once you're
in it's great. Same goes for the new Battlestar Galactica but to a
lesser degree."
I have seen at least 60% of Farscape eps. It was a good premise, but i
thought they were sometimes too dependent on far out makeup and muppet
prosthetics. I have seen far less of the new BSG: I have seen the
pilot and a handful of eps and find it OK. I prefer the original
concepts and continuity, but I am not one of those original series
purists who condemn the new version before they have seen an episode.

[Yelps]

Post by Hephaestus O'leander Klebold
"Funny, but the reason I didn't watch Babylon5 originally when it was on
TV, was because I assumed it would be dreck and I have been a reader of
the best of Sci-fi all my life.
DVD box sets have been a great blessing for me, as I order old shows I
have not seen for years, usually in remastered form so they look pretty
good.

I bought a bunch of box sets but now I get them all with Netflix....much
easier, much cheaper.

dc

[Talcott Tarnapool Tarnowski]

"I've pondered this cycle myself. However, won't there come a point
where the new media simply won't have anything to offer? Yes, you can
put Trek or B5 or Buffy on super-hd-dvd-2 or whatever else comes out in
10 years, but you can't re-sample the original video to actually take
advantage of it. You'll still have lo-def moving pictures on hi-def
media.
You can mix sound from 2 to 5 to 7 to 500 channels, but you're getting
diminishing returns if the original show wasn't recorded in a way to
take advantage of it.
You can add 50 hours of hi-def extras instead of the 15 hours that were
on the DVD, but who's going to want to make them? And how many shows are
interesting and/or profitable enough to undertake such an endeavour?
Frankly, I was getting pretty bored by the end of the Lord of the Rings
extras.
One of the reasons I've spent *so* much money on DVD's, and why I know I
won't simply replace everything with Blu-Ray or HD-DVD when they
inevitably get re-released, is that DVD's are both very high quality and
very durable. The transition from VHS to DVD represented a huge leap in
both fidelity and content, and more than warranted boxing up and
car-booting all the tapes I'd purchased over the years. I can't imagine
the transition from DVD to <whatever> representing anything like that
kind of change, and yes, I've seen how nice hi-definition telly is.
The only circumstance where I can envisage a re-purchase is where the
DVD release is still sub-standard in some way. Perhaps the sound mix is
off, or there are transfer issues (I'm looking at you B5, but not too
much), or the extras are pitiful. Then, only then, is yet more expense
going to be on the cards.
Neil B"

You have a good point about the medium being only as good as what the
source material was originally recorded on. You might have "ultra super
HD DVD", but if the original program was recorded on lesser medium, then
most of the potential of the higher grade format goes to waste. You can
only process, remix and remaster so much.

[Yelps]

Post by Talcott Tarnapool Tarnowski
"I've pondered this cycle myself. However, won't there come a point
where the new media simply won't have anything to offer? Yes, you can
put Trek or B5 or Buffy on super-hd-dvd-2 or whatever else comes out in
10 years, but you can't re-sample the original video to actually take
advantage of it. You'll still have lo-def moving pictures on hi-def
media.
You can mix sound from 2 to 5 to 7 to 500 channels, but you're getting
diminishing returns if the original show wasn't recorded in a way to
take advantage of it.

Its still in primitive stages but standard definition will eventually be
converted to hi-def synthetically. The same is true of audio--that is, if
there will be a market for it and if people care enough., but that
technology is in development. Right now converting Standard to High Def is
simply so it will display on High Def screens.

I'm sure that if we assume the market for better quality continues that
eventually this conversion will not have to be processing done by the
company but happen automatically, real time even with old media.

New media will just get smaller. Maybe it will be holographic storage in a
crystal like we see in B5. Maybe it will all be "online"--assuming the
world doesn't implode and all tech progress stop.

Post by Talcott Tarnapool Tarnowski
You can add 50 hours of hi-def extras instead of the 15 hours that were
on the DVD, but who's going to want to make them? And how many shows are
interesting and/or profitable enough to undertake such an endeavour?
Frankly, I was getting pretty bored by the end of the Lord of the Rings
extras.

I think eventually the entire history of cinema and television could be put
onto one piece of media. Maybe it will become an unalienable right for all
to have access to it.....in a perfect world. As long as the limitations of
economics rule, then we can wait a long time. What is theoretically
possible, may not be what happens. For instance archiving of all the B5
threads onto the new format video, could contain every word written about
B5 for example....even all the endless forum threads--if all that depends on
demand then it may never happen. All media whether analog, material or
digital is all transient if the sun explodes. But maybe there will be a way
to access all of the past with worm hole technology as in Arthur C.,
Clarke/Stephen Baxters book "The Light of other Days." Perhaps the inner
workings of biology and physics in nature already has a way of doing this
that is yet to be discovered. DNA "storage," plays itself back, with the
genetic principles of replication and fidelity. Who knows how it all works?
A lot of these ideas and questions appear in in "The Light of other Days."

Post by Talcott Tarnapool Tarnowski
One of the reasons I've spent *so* much money on DVD's, and why I know I
won't simply replace everything with Blu-Ray or HD-DVD when they
inevitably get re-released, is that DVD's are both very high quality and
very durable. The transition from VHS to DVD represented a huge leap in
both fidelity and content, and more than warranted boxing up and
car-booting all the tapes I'd purchased over the years. I can't imagine
the transition from DVD to <whatever> representing anything like that
kind of change, and yes, I've seen how nice hi-definition telly is.
The only circumstance where I can envisage a re-purchase is where the
DVD release is still sub-standard in some way. Perhaps the sound mix is
off, or there are transfer issues (I'm looking at you B5, but not too
much), or the extras are pitiful. Then, only then, is yet more expense
going to be on the cards.
Neil B"

The problem is that DVDs/CD's degrades just as VHS degrades. Its more
durable but it still degrades. The same is true of paintings. Over time
they fade and require restoring.

Post by Talcott Tarnapool Tarnowski
You have a good point about the medium being only as good as what the
source material was originally recorded on. You might have "ultra super
HD DVD", but if the original program was recorded on lesser medium, then
most of the potential of the higher grade format goes to waste. You can
only process, remix and remaster so much.

Theoretically anything can be done, but it would be a synthesizing process
of filling in the missing pixels and waveforms.

dc