Demastered – A Series X Project

[Pete Tranter’s Sister]

There’s a particulary odd but jarring issue I have with the new episodes of Red Dwarf…

They look ‘wrong’.

The first six series steadily expanded their visual and audio palettes as the episodes progressed but they maintained a visual consistency primarily through the use of analogue cameras which captured 50 frames per second instead of 25, a 4:3 screen ratio which constricted the idea of a more cinematic Red Dwarf visual style and of course, rubbishy old VHS quality for fans wishing to buy any episodes before the DVD era.

So I’m going to essentially demaster series X.

I’m going to begin with a frame interpolater to double the framerate to 50 FPS, matching the first six series, crop the sides to remove the widescreen and more cinematic feel to the latest episodes and run the episodes through a consumer VHS player and recapture the footage, desaturate the colour and add a few blemishes here and there.

I might even redo the title sequence and end credits but that would lead to me tinkering endlessly…

So, that’s my plan and I’m sticking to it.

Topic

[Mr-Stabby]

Don’t forget some 1980s rejected Doctor Who sound effects, turn down the saturation to about 10%, and after all that, copy the finished programme to VHS, smear shit all over it, re-rip it. Then upload :D

[Ian Symes]

Do the framerate thing, then STOP, FOR GOD’S SAKE.

[Pete Part Three]

>…crop the sides to remove the widescreen and more cinematic feel to the latest episodes and run the episodes through a consumer VHS player and recapture the footage, desaturate the colour and add a few blemishes here and there.

This bit is a joke, yeah?

[Pete Tranter’s Sister]

Luckily, I’ll be providing three versions!

– Frame rate doubling and that’s that
– Frame rate doubling and widescreen cropping
– Going all out with VHS capturing, audio tweaking, intro and credit edits and a few more surprises

The first two versions will not be made available.

[mick]

My Betamax recording of trojan perfectly achieved most of what you’re going for, especially as I had to pipe the signal from my V+ box through a scart-composite transcoder (V+ box doesnt use the composite carrier in the SCART cable) then into my composite to RF modulator to finally go into the flakey RF-in.

[Pete Tranter’s Sister]

But your betamax recording doesn’t interpolate new frames, merely duplicate frames.

[mick]

I have a hardware interpolator I can whack in there somewhere, and a scanline generator if you want to go all out…

[Pete Tranter’s Sister]

Interesting…

I’ll report back after some VHS tests and see if additional ‘analogueness’ is needed.

[Jonathan Capps]

Luckily, I’ll be providing three versions!

Yay :)

The first two versions will not be made available.

Oh :(

[Ian Symes]

That’s like saying I’m going to provide three version of this sandwich – one will be two slices of bread, one will be some bread with butter and ham on it, and the third will be the full sandwich. The first two versions will not be eaten.

[mick]

I could re-do the credits with my video toaster… or with my shitty Tandy home video titler.

[Pete Tranter’s Sister]

The video toaster was NTSC only, unless you’re one of those American Red Dwarf fans that I keep hearing rumours about.

The sandwich will be of an ’88 to ’93 vintage.

[mick]

I have a PAL transcoder card in my A4000 so it’s not an issue ;-)

EDIT: sorry that should technically be time base corrector not transcoder.

[Pete Tranter’s Sister]

I can’t decide whether you’re trolling me with tales of sexy vintage hardware or you’re genuinely an analogue head.

[mick]

A few people on this forum could answer that haha

But basically, name a piece of analogue video hardware made before 1995 and there’s a very good chance I have it stuffed into a corner somewhere.
From open reel onward, I also have complete edit suites (the size of a small room when set up) for umatic and SuperVHS.

Cameras ranging from B&W Studio setups to betamax consumer models, kinescoping rigs…

Also have an appallingly massive amount of Amiga hardware.

So no, not trolling.

[Pete Tranter’s Sister]

MARRY ME.

[Ben Kirkham]

God, I love this sexy tech speak!

[Pete Tranter’s Sister]

All this to make a professionally produced and visually beautiful show look a bit pish and 80’s…

[A Bailey]

Counterpoint to this is Doctor Who. State of the art now in many ways but that’s a good thing.

I would love to see Red Dwarf 1 if it was available in this sort of quality. The bleak atmosphere and 2001ish effects shots would be magnificent in cinematic quality.

[Ridley]

Do the framerate thing, then STOP, FOR GOD’S SAKE.

“Stay back, Pete Tranter’s Sister.”

[Ben Paddon]

Y’know, if we ever get isolated model shots from Red Dwarf X I wouldn’t object to seeing them dropped into Series I and II.

[Pete Tranter’s Sister]

I agree with Adam’s comment about the audio and visual presentation in post-2005 Doctor Who being a positive. Let’s be fair, the older Who serials really had to make use of what was around them, mostly uninspiring, overcast location shoots around England and of course, harshly lit studio sets adorned with plastic and chipboard tat to make it all futurey-wuturey.

So does Red Dwarf but let me finish…

Doctor Who is primarily (at least now) an action-adventure series whereas Red Dwarf will forever be a sitcom that just happens to be set in outer space. A more cinematic presentation suits Doctor Who and allows the viewer to engage in the unfolding storyline and characters without being continually reminded and distanced from the world presented because of the rubbishy sets that were so prevelant through its original twenty-six year run.

Red Dwarf however, suits a traditional non-widescreen and video captured presentation because it doesn’t prioritise the action and adventure over the comedy. Its main goal is to make the viewer laugh. In the Bodysnatchers documentary ‘Remastering Red Dwarf’, Doug Naylor comments that a cinematic presentation adds a gloss and barrier to the comedy that sits inbetween the show and the viewer. I seem to pick up on that divide when watching series VII, Back To Earth and the new episodes and my suggestions for essentially reformatting series X so it sits alongside the first six series visually are a way to re-engage that priority of comedy over the visuals, action and adventure.

Ironically, after this little jaunt to ‘Eighties’ up the new episodes, I’m going to be embarking on a project to remaster the first six series.

[Pete Part Three]

>Red Dwarf however, suits a traditional non-widescreen

Nothing, in the 21st century, suits a traditional non-widescreen presentation unless you’re trying to convince people it was shot in the 20th century (and why do that?). Pretty much everyone has widescreen televisions, so why the hell should anything be shot in 4:3 these days? And cropping stuff that was shot in widescreen is fucking moronic. Good luck trying to frame 90% of the scenes properly.

[Pete Tranter’s Sister]

The stock series X episodes will be there in high definition widescreen if you prefer them, nobody is taking them away. I prefer a 4:3 ratio, standard definition, 50 frames per second ‘video’ look and Red Dwarf was suited perfectly for that as in my mind, a cinematic presentation detracts from the comedy.

Shooting in 4:3 was championed by Stanley Kubrick as it allowed the entire height and width of a film frame on a 35mm camera to be utilised and furthermore, he ensured that a widescreen presentation of the film was possible by keeping the action within an open matte and opening up the matte (top and bottom of the frame) for optional fullscreen presentations which showed off more of the scene that were previously hidden in widescreen

This is much more than a simple frame speed bump and widescreen cropping. This involves new intro and credit sequences, VHS covers, pre-episode channel identifiers, the whole works and is a labour of love and a very quirky project, almost like a fan translation of a Japanese video game or a fan recut of a movie.

This is Series X – 1990(ish).

[Pete Part Three]

>The stock series X episodes will be there in high definition widescreen if you prefer them, nobody is taking them away.

Thanks, I was worried.

>Shooting in 4:3 was championed by Stanley Kubrick as it allowed the entire height and width of a film frame on a 35mm camera to be utilised and furthermore, he ensured that a widescreen presentation of the film was possible by keeping the action within an open matte and opening up the matte (top and bottom of the frame) for optional fullscreen presentations which showed off more of the scene that were previously hidden in widescreen

Oh, wow. I didn’t realise that Red Dwarf X had been shot in a way so as to preserve two formats, as championed by good old Stan. Crop away, then.

[Pete Tranter’s Sister]

I’d like to open up this thread to fellow boarders with suggestions about VHS slipcase designs, pre-episode identifiers, intro and credit sequence changes and any other tweaks that could be implemented.

[Pongo]

This is a wonderful idea.

In the Bodysnatchers documentary ‘Remastering Red Dwarf’, Doug Naylor comments that a cinematic presentation adds a gloss and barrier to the comedy that sits inbetween the show and the viewer.

He said that? Why did he go ahead and Series X all cinematic?

[Pete Tranter’s Sister]

The only visual elements of the new episodes that differ quite vividly from the first six series are primarily video resolution, screen ratio and frame rate. In terms of presentation, series VII and Back To Earth were really tuned in terms of lighting and set design to give a more immersive, cinematic feel in contrast to, for example, series VIII and X.

Modern television production is geared towards ensuring most shows don’t go out looking like they were taped in BBC Manchester Studios circa 1988 (for example, the first series of Red Dwarf) so audio and visual post-production is geared towards presenting a professional and ‘film-esque’ production.

I do love the visual style of series X but as I’ve said, this project is more of a fun diversion and alternative rather than a genuine attempt to replace and correct an entire series worth of shows.

Who am I kidding, it is a replacement…

[Ben Paddon]

Nothing, in the 21st century, suits a traditional non-widescreen presentation unless you’re trying to convince people it was shot in the 20th century (and why do that?).

I’m assuming you never watched Look Around You 2.

[Pete Tranter’s Sister]

I still pine for a third series of Look Around You set around 1989 with particularly dodgy blue screen work, clunky CGI titles and a ‘yoof’ section produced by Janet Street Porter.

[Tarka Dal]

Na JSP was running the gaff by 1989.

[Pete Part Three]

>I’m assuming you never watched Look Around You 2.

By “Why do that?” I meant, why would Pete Tranter’s Sister want to do that? I love it when shows replicate the look of 20th century shot-stuff when there’s a valid reason. My problem is that there doesn’t seem to be one here.

Presumably the next project is to convert new episodes of Doctor Who into black and white.

[Danny Stephenson]

What I might do is go to the BBC archives and delete the latest series of Who from their servers, that way it’l;l be JUST like those 1960 episodes…

[Mr-Stabby]

It’s weird. I understand why people would prefer the 50 fields a second look, as it’s more intimate and certainly fits a sitcom. I also understand why a lot of people prefer 4:3 for comedy. In fact it’s well documented that a lot of American sitcom creators didn’t want to move to 16:9 because they thought it too cinematic for comedy. I believe Family Guy was one example that stuck with 4:3 until they were forced to change.

However, sitcoms in America have been shot at film frame rates (and in a lot of cases on multi-camera film) for years. It’s never really bothered me watching it that way, just as watching shows like Big Bang Theory in 16:9 hasn’t bothered me in the slightest.

Maybe it’s what you’re used to do with a show. If a show starts out on 50i VT, then suddenly switches to 25p film, it’s jarring. Whereas if a show was always in 25p, you’re used to it being that way.

Bizarrely Red Dwarf being in 25p never really bothered me. It certainly hasn’t bothered me this new series. Only the re-mastered versions seemed jarring.

Seeing as though old episodes played on computer screens are effectively de-interlacing the footage anyway, do people who love the 50i really have a problem watching old Red Dwarf on a computer screen?

On a slightly different note, i really am worried about films going to 50 frames a second. I really don’t think it’ll work. But then that’s my opinion :)

[NoFro]

I think you should make it like series three where the colours sometimes leave a trail as things move across the screen. That’s the only way I like to watch Red Dwarf.

[Danny Stephenson]

That was the tube in the cameras dealing with light…

[NoFro]

Double post.

[NoFro]

Is that why III looks so bad? I could never work out why the PQ is so much worse than any of the other series.

[Mr-Stabby]

I think because III tried all the moody lighting that the later series did, but whereas Series IV onwards was in Shepperton, III was still in Manchester, which had those really REALLY old BBC Cameras that had been around for years before that. If you look at the Bodysnatcher Collection you get a glimpse of the old cameras and on the side they proudly claim that they’re in BBC COLOUR. As if colour was a big deal :D Shepperton cameras were most likely quite new at that point. On Series 1 and 2 it didn’t matter so much because they overlit it so much, you didn’t notice it so much.

[Pete Tranter’s Sister]

How odd, I was researching that very effect today as I love the trails in 70’s Top Of The Pops and Fawlty Towers.

It’s easily duplicated but therein lies the dilemma when it comes to this project, namely how far the ‘re-analogue’ process can be taken before additional visual processing outweighs the main intents.

– Doubling the frame rate using motion interpolation software (25 progressive frames as seen in VII, BTE and X to 50 interlaced frames as seen in I – VI & VIII)

– Cropping the widescreen picture (16:9 ratio) to pre-Back To Earth (12:9)

– Editing new intro and outro sequences to better match the faster paced editing of the first eight series and bringing back the end credit flyover

– Completely retitling the episodes to introduce subtle chroma trails (jaggies) around the text graphics and using a combination of series I to VI font styles

– Colour grading the episodes to better match how it would look if assembled and edited on a professional betamax machine (or whatever equivalent was used for the first six series)

– Adding colour trails, VHS glitches, banding effects and other quirks of the analogue world to the episodes

– Creating VHS slipcases for the series, essentially Byte One and Byte Two and perhaps a double VHS slipcase for the posh sorts who prefer boxsets

– Pre-episode channel identifiers (Dave as it would be in 1990) with related voiceovers

– SFX editing in some scenes with not-so-subtle grubbing up of certain effects (Rimmer’s glitching)

[Moonlight]

I don’t know why, but I love this idea.

[Ben Paddon]

“Dave as it would be in 1990” would be… well, non-existent, probably. The closest thing would probably be UK Gold.

[Pete Tranter’s Sister]

Hmm, I’m going to format the Dave graphics to match the early 90’s UK Gold graphics.

Hooray! Pish graphics ahoy made on a slow as fuck 386 PC with a 40mb hard drive.

[A Bailey]

I think this project won’t make the episodes better, I’d probably watch one just out of curiosity though. It does seem that by focusing on things like flaws with the cameras used in the past you are missing the forest for the trees.

[Jonathan Capps]

I think you should avoid creating your own blemishes, as you mentioned in your original post. It seems a bit forced. Just transferring it down a few VHS generations should be enough.

[mick]

I like the colour bleeding idea, all the Umatic recordings I own have red colour bleed.

[Pete Tranter’s Sister]

The point is not to make the series better, we’re only two episodes in and I’m already loving it. It’s simply to remove more than one visual barrier between the comedy and the viewer and present the episodes as a uniform continuation of the first six series, namely by rolling back the high definition, 25 frames per second, widescreen presentation.

My initial plan was to leave it there but the prospect of really capturing the quirks of pre-digital, pre-cinematic analogue presentation and pay tribute to a quarter century of Red Dwarf with the first new VHS release in over a decade is something I can’t pass up.

As for colour bleeding and generational loss, any blemishes that I introduce will be very subtle such as colour banding, audio dropouts and the odd twist in the tape with the inherent spookiness that comes with it. We all remember having a favourite movie on VHS as a child and knowing exactly when the tape quirks would show up. For me, it was Back To The Future Part II and as the Delorean lands in Hill Valley 2015, the audio would muffle for a second and a rather thin but annoying grey band would roll up the screen.

At the next Dimension Jump convention, I’m hoping to give away one or two copies as prizes and hopefully get my own copy signed.

Now that I think about it, younger attendees might ask what the fuck a video tape is…

[Seb Patrick]

>I’m going to format the Dave graphics to match the early 90′s UK Gold graphics.

Dwarf wouldn’t have been shown on UK Gold in the early ’90s, though, because it really was just a repeats channel. And it didn’t start until 1992. Your best bet for authenticity, if you’re talking about a non-terrestrial channel that might have commissioned new Dwarf in that era, is probably Galaxy.

[mick]

Would actually really like to see a full animated re-creation of the Galaxy ident, was the only English language channel our fucking squariel ever received properly.
Fond memories of watching a premier of Star Trek VI in Spanish on one of the other channels we managed to get.

[Pete Tranter’s Sister]

A solid recreation of the Galaxy idents and themes would be my ideal choice but it’s hampered by the following…

– Galaxy was never well known televisually outside of early BSB subscribers and as such, doesn’t have a deep and instant nostalgic feeling for many, many people unlike early Sky One idents or even the late 90’s incarnation of the Paramount Comedy Channel.

– Using ‘Galaxy’ may seem like a lazy way to tie-in with the sci-fi setting of Red Dwarf

– The idents stand up remarkably well next to modern channel graphics and I really want to capture a late-80’s, early 90’s feel with pastel colours, shit synth music and bad CGI and geometric shapes. Think of a promotional video for some low-key town or company in Middle England who don’t want to spend more than fifty quid on their graphics and that’s the golden ticket. I give BSB and Sky one thing, they fucking well knew how to do a proper ident in the early 90’s.

Hmm… Paramount Comedy Channel, there’s a possibility, I did fucking LOVE that channel in the 90’s before it became just another crappy sitcom marathon pusher.

[Author]

Replies