Jump to content

Recommended Posts

As an aside, Star Wars doesn’t engage in it much because most of the screen evidence suggests that their tech is commodified enough that you can get around the galaxy in hours rather than weeks/months/years like Star Trek.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Seto Kaiba said:

Macross Frontier elaborated more on how fold communications work.  From the name, I'd think of something like what you're envisioning. 

(...)

A transmitter that creates a tiny space fold to connect two points in realspace.  Instead, what Frontier established was that fold communications is more...

Fixed.

 

You also seem to be approaching this from the perspective that MF is the be-all and end-all of Macross.  This is at odds with what Kawamori-san himself has said: each Macross series is an in-universe dramatization of historical events.

Also note that I based my earlier post on what was depicted in MF, M+, and so on.

 

9 hours ago, Seto Kaiba said:

it's seems very likely that the relay satellites used in the Galaxy Network are little different to the communications satellites today.

"Seems" being the operative word there.  In short: we don't know.

 

9 hours ago, Seto Kaiba said:

If we were to look for the closest real-world analog, I'd say it's probably the in-flight wifi and phone systems of modern jet airliners.

There's that "we" again.

 

You're also speculating that it is based off of current (as in early 2020) capabilities.  I'm approaching it from the perspective of "what was the state of things when XYZ series was released?"—which is what was informing Kawamori-san when he was producing the shows and deciding how to describe future technology to his audience.  For example the addition of cell phones and smart phones in Haruhiko Mikomoto's SDFM, but the lack of them in the original TV series simply because that technology existed (in palm-size) in 2009 but not in 1982.

Therefore, "we" think that this topic should be approached from the perspective of 'what were the communication capabilities in Japan in 1994 and 2007*?'

 

* when M7 (when the Galaxy Network is first mentioned) and MF were being produced.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In researching my earlier post, I came across this description on Wikipedia that may help others grasp the unique circumstances that are colouring Kawamori's depiction of the internet, Galaxy Network, and so on:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_in_Japan

 

The most relevant to existing Macross series (and perhaps the next Macross series) is about the circumstances and problems unique to Japan:

Quote

 

The Japanese model of optical fiber deployment is difficult to compare to other markets. The last kilometer is often done on lattice towers, shared between operators, even cable operators. This distribution technique reduces the vulnerability to earthquakes and lowers costs dramatically.

The prevalence of FTTH can be explained by the Japanese government's forced local loop unbundling of NTT and very low charges to connect for new Internet service providers (ISPs), leading to new ISPs connecting DSL with low cost and being able to charge cheaper prices due to having a smaller scale operation to challenge the incumbent NTT into using its greater finances to lay fiber to the home to distinguish itself from the competition with higher speeds and also incentivizing some other ISPs to explore fiber to the home, although it remained the dominant fiber provider.

The unique problem facing Japan's broadband situation is due to the popularity of high-speed FTTP. Operators struggle to maintain enough bandwidth to allow maximum usage of the service by customers. Even the largest operators have capacities in the region of tens of gigabits while customers with 1 gigabit FTTP services (or higher) may number in the thousands. This problem is further compounded by limits caused by internal router bandwidth.

 

 

The middle and last paragraphs tie directly into my earlier points about trunk-line bandwidth limitations (many local 'small scale' providers licensing certain percentages of the overall bandwidth, etc.), and about the local caching of data (if the Emigrant Fleet is akin to multiple local connections each with huge bandwidth, but the trunk network itself has limited capacity and 'internal router' bandwidth problems).

Edited by sketchley
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, sketchley said:

You also seem to be approaching this from the perspective that MF is the be-all and end-all of Macross.

No, I'm approaching it from the perspective of that series being the first time that any source elaborated upon how this technology works.🙄

 

55 minutes ago, sketchley said:

You're also speculating that it is based off of current (as in early 2020) capabilities.  I'm approaching it from the perspective of "what was the state of things when XYZ series was released?"

Just FYI, the application I described WRT in-flight telephony and Wi-Fi is a system that was designed and implemented in the 1980s and achieved widespread adoption in the early 1990s. The system was expanded and adapted for in-flight internet service in the early 2000s with the first systems entering service around 2003 and beginning to achieve widespread adoption around 2006. So it was a thing at the time those shows were made.

 

38 minutes ago, sketchley said:

The middle and last paragraphs tie directly into my earlier points about trunk-line bandwidth limitations (many local 'small scale' providers licensing certain percentages of the overall bandwidth, etc.), and about the local caching of data (if the Emigrant Fleet is akin to multiple local connections each with huge bandwidth, but the trunk network itself has limited capacity and 'internal router' bandwidth problems).

I don't disagree that the nature of the network probably means that most resources are cached locally, especially given that we know many corporations seem to prefer to have local branches in various emigrant fleets and regions.

The part I don't agree with is that a internet design for interstellar use would necessarily have the same very specific shortcomings of Japan's domestic internet despite vastly more advanced technology and a very different operating architecture. Especially given that, for some of these fleets and planets, this network is essentially the only way to conduct communications and commerce with other governments. (Never mind the logistical problems of trying to upgrade infrastructure if it takes literal years to reach the infrastructure you need to upgrade.)

Edited by Seto Kaiba
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Seto Kaiba said:

No, I'm approaching it from the perspective of that series being the first time that any source elaborated upon how this technology works.🙄

 

Just FYI, the application I described WRT in-flight telephony and Wi-Fi is a system that was designed and implemented in the 1980s and achieved widespread adoption in the early 1990s. The system was expanded and adapted for in-flight internet service in the early 2000s with the first systems entering service around 2003 and beginning to achieve widespread adoption around 2006. So it was a thing at the time those shows were made.

 

I don't disagree that the nature of the network probably means that most resources are cached locally, especially given that we know many corporations seem to prefer to have local branches in various emigrant fleets and regions.

The part I don't agree with is that a internet design for interstellar use would necessarily have the same very specific shortcomings of Japan's domestic internet despite vastly more advanced technology and a very different operating architecture. Especially given that, for some of these fleets and planets, this network is essentially the only way to conduct communications and commerce with other governments. (Never mind the logistical problems of trying to upgrade infrastructure if it takes literal years to reach the infrastructure you need to upgrade.)

Not to mention that given the current state of the human race at this point, communications and info-sharing within a fleet as well as communicating with other fleets and governments would be vital.

On that note Seto: one question I have is that aside from the dedicated military comms, say a colony fleet ran into a branch fleet of Zentraedi. How far off would I be in assuming that the network between fleets would be used to communicate position, size and composition of said fleet to warn other fleets of their presence and threat capacity? And would the local network allow for a military sub-network that would allow for connections to sensor probes that would presumably be ahead of the fleet?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, pengbuzz said:

Not to mention that given the current state of the human race at this point, communications and info-sharing within a fleet as well as communicating with other fleets and governments would be vital.

Yup... and not just militarily.  Politically, socially, culturally, technologically, economically, financially...

It's even more important in the Macross setting than it is in the real world, since nowhere in the real world is months or years away from the next-nearest outpost of civilization.

 

5 hours ago, pengbuzz said:

On that note Seto: one question I have is that aside from the dedicated military comms, say a colony fleet ran into a branch fleet of Zentraedi. How far off would I be in assuming that the network between fleets would be used to communicate position, size and composition of said fleet to warn other fleets of their presence and threat capacity? And would the local network allow for a military sub-network that would allow for connections to sensor probes that would presumably be ahead of the fleet?

Based on Macross 7's unaired episode "Fleet of the Strongest Women" and Variable Fighter Master File: VF-25 Messiah, information about such encounters is relayed to the New UN Government as quickly as possible.

Given that the typical Zentradi main fleet normally has its forces dispersed across many light years to scout for enemy forces in the area in a manner not dissimilar to an emigrant fleet's early warning picket scouting for threats, resources, inhabitable planets, etc. getting anything more than a rough order estimate of a Zentradi main fleet's available forces is unlikely without risking detection.  (And risking detection is incredibly undesirable, so they would probably be content with just that rough estimate.)

In Macross Frontier, we see a Frontier New UN Spacy reconnaissance unit drop relay pods after folding into the area of operations to ensure that the Combat Information Center back on the fleet's flagship (Battle Frontier) has uninterrupted access to all available data on the emerging situation with as little delay as possible.  So even if it's not connected directly to the galaxy network proper, the same approach is used to overcome fold communications obstacles in a strictly military environment.  The logistics involved probably means that fixed early warning satellites are likely connected to the network, while reconnaissance flights (manned or unmanned) from carriers are likely tied into the carrier the flight launched from, and from there into a fleet or planet's local network.  But because this has not been a topic that has ever come up other than for fleets operating on the frontier, this is nothing but an educated guess.

Edited by Seto Kaiba
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I know this might be a troublesome question (especially when you view it from how in Real Life, certain countries are acting against each other) but...

Have the creators of Macross, in it's various forms (TV shows, OVAs and Movies, Books both fandom and Cannon) ever noted a list of what countries compromised the UN and Anti-UN forces?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, TehPW said:

I know this might be a troublesome question (especially when you view it from how in Real Life, certain countries are acting against each other) but...

Have the creators of Macross, in it's various forms (TV shows, OVAs and Movies, Books both fandom and Cannon) ever noted a list of what countries compromised the UN and Anti-UN forces?

Ah, well... the answer is technically "All of them" and "None" respectively.

The pre-war Earth Unification "UN" Government was a world government that was proposed, negotiated, and ultimately established through the modern United Nations.  On paper, and for most intents and purposes, every nation was a member.  The Earth UN Forces that were established to oversee planetary defense were, in theory, open to any nation.  The dominant players were, of course, the nations that had the largest and/or most advanced militaries like the G8.  Many of these same advanced nations were also the founders of OTEC, the international NGO that was set up to study and reverse-engineer the technology of the alien warship.

Many fans look at the abbreviation "Anti-UN" for the Anti-Unification Alliance and assume that it was a Legion of Doom-esque "evil UN" rival to the Earth UN Gov't.  That's giving it quite a bit more credit than it deserves.  The Anti-Unification Alliance was something akin to the early Rebel Alliance in Star Wars's Rogue One and Andor... a loose association of nationalist partisans, anti-government militias, terrorist organizations, out of work mercenaries, and other flavors of armed and dangerous ne'er-do-wells from all over the world who found common cause in opposing the Earth Unification Government despite their separate sociopolitical agendas.  They weren't tied to, or openly backed by, any specific nation... though it's indirectly suggested in official material and outright stated in Master File that the largest and best-supported groups in the Alliance were from former Soviet republics like Russia and Poland.  The defense companies selling arms to them that've been named in official materials are in Russia (Sukhoi, Mikoyan), Germany (Dornier and Daimler), and Israel (IAI).

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/18/2024 at 6:36 PM, Jupiter Jazz said:

Anyone know why the 2007 Macross DYRL HD Remaster DVD is so grainy?  It's supposed to be an HD Remaster, but at times I feel like I might as well be watching a low resolution video on YouTube.

Okay, perhaps I need to elaborate.

I understand that a certain degree of grain on older, non-digital celluloid film based movies is expected when remastering/upscaling/etc.  What I don't understand is why the level of grain is so all over the place, in terms of consistency, on the 2007 DYRL remaster DVD.

Some scenes I don't even notice the grain at all.  Some scenes, the grain is a pleasant accent.  But in some scenes the grain is this obnoxious, overpowering, fuzzy static haze that is absolutely deleterious to the image quality and viewing experience. (This is especially prominent in scenes with a lot of pitch black darks.)

It's to the point where even though the HD Remaster is an official licensed product, I find myself pining for literal bootlegs that I used to own.  I'm just curious how or why they dropped the ball this bad? Did they at least get things right on the Blu-ray releases?

Edited by Jupiter Jazz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/22/2024 at 4:03 PM, Jupiter Jazz said:

Some scenes I don't even notice the grain at all.  Some scenes, the grain is a pleasant accent.  But in some scenes the grain is this obnoxious, overpowering, fuzzy static haze that is absolutely deleterious to the image quality and viewing experience. (This is especially prominent in scenes with a lot of pitch black darks.)

You'll notice that the extra grainy and soft scenes are almost always the ones with the Japanese subtitles for the Zentradi speakers. That's because those were optically composited the same way OP/ED credits would be back in the day. You're taking the animation film (yes the film, not the cels), stacking it with the text film and then photographing that to get the final image. This is inherently a lossy process and if done quickly can look sloppy.

For a truly great DYRL remaster they would have to dig out the original negatives for just the animation for all those scenes, but given how quickly the production went and that we've never actually seen those scenes unsubbed I'm not sure those negatives are still around. That and it's just easier to run a complete reel or two of the "final" thing instead of digging out potentially hundreds of individual scenes and then having to re-edit the whole thing together again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 3/25/2024 at 11:20 AM, TMBounty_Hunter said:

You'll notice that the extra grainy and soft scenes are almost always the ones with the Japanese subtitles for the Zentradi speakers. That's because those were optically composited the same way OP/ED credits would be back in the day. You're taking the animation film (yes the film, not the cels), stacking it with the text film and then photographing that to get the final image. This is inherently a lossy process and if done quickly can look sloppy.

For a truly great DYRL remaster they would have to dig out the original negatives for just the animation for all those scenes, but given how quickly the production went and that we've never actually seen those scenes unsubbed I'm not sure those negatives are still around. That and it's just easier to run a complete reel or two of the "final" thing instead of digging out potentially hundreds of individual scenes and then having to re-edit the whole thing together again.

Thanks for the reply, and sorry it took me so long to get back to you.  I'll have to watch DYRL again when I get the chance, to see this first hand.  That's a shame that a truly great remaster is held back by such a process.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Jupiter Jazz said:

That's a shame that a truly great remaster is held back by such a process.

I mean, remastering isn't reshooting. They're stuck using the original footage, warts and all.

I'd personally argue "exactly as it was in theaters" is a reasonable target most of the time, and that editing to eliminate imperfections that have always existed is the first step towards the dark side of Special Edition reworks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/3/2024 at 8:02 AM, JB0 said:

I mean, remastering isn't reshooting. They're stuck using the original footage, warts and all.

I'd personally argue "exactly as it was in theaters" is a reasonable target most of the time, and that editing to eliminate imperfections that have always existed is the first step towards the dark side of Special Edition reworks.

While I agree for the most part, I do think occasional accommodations need to be made if there were artifacts of a specific process.

Look at it similar to the Star Trek TNG remaster. Originally it was a combination of beautiful film footage with old low-ish resolution 3DCG that was edited together on video and the final master was SD. To do the remaster properly they had to re-render all the 3DCG at HD resolution and re-edit it back together with freshly scanned high-res film footage. Lot of extra effort but absolutely worth it for the final product being as good as it can be in the modern day vs the day it originally came out.

Maybe for DYRL's 50th anniversary they'll see the benefit of doing an in-depth remaster going back to all the best original film elements, if those are still around. Once can only hope.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Such is the dilemma of the remaster... faithfulness to the original "warts and all" vs. trying to present an improved "ideal" version through post-production cleanup.

It's a balancing act, and sometimes the team doing the remaster leans too far in one direction... and the effort isn't always rewarded either.

Robotech's remasters, for instance, were variously blasted for things like changing the SFX tracks or for producing grainy visuals with poor color balance.  On the other side of the spectrum, Paramount's aforementioned Star Trek: the Next Generation remaster lovingly rescanned and reedited the series from the original large-format negatives and recreated all of the old school analog VFX using modern digital techniques, only for the project to be a financial flop because of how expensive it ended up being.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/3/2024 at 8:02 AM, JB0 said:

I mean, remastering isn't reshooting. They're stuck using the original footage, warts and all.

I'd personally argue "exactly as it was in theaters" is a reasonable target most of the time, and that editing to eliminate imperfections that have always existed is the first step towards the dark side of Special Edition reworks.

That's the rub though: I'd argue that the 2007 HD remaster is not even up to the standard of "exactly as it was in theaters," as far as the viewing experience goes.  If the 2007 HD remaster was shown in a modern theatre as is, (as in seeing the level of grain and inconsistencies that one sees when viewing the DVD) I would assume something was wrong with the film/projector/etc., and possibly even demand my money back.  There's something messed up about being better off watching a film on VHS on an old low resolution CRT television, rather than on a digital disk on a high resolution flatscreen TV.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Jupiter Jazz said:

That's the rub though: I'd argue that the 2007 HD remaster is not even up to the standard of "exactly as it was in theaters," as far as the viewing experience goes.  If the 2007 HD remaster was shown in a modern theatre as is, (as in seeing the level of grain and inconsistencies that one sees when viewing the DVD) I would assume something was wrong with the film/projector/etc., and possibly even demand my money back.  There's something messed up about being better off watching a film on VHS on an old low resolution CRT television, rather than on a digital disk on a high resolution flatscreen TV.

It probably isn't. But I was speaking purely about the captioned zentradi scenes.

Like TMBounty_Hunter said, the problems they have originated from the original optical compositing. They're  inherent to the original production, and can't be "fixed" without leaving the source behind and (at best) reshooting the scene.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
6 hours ago, RaisingCane said:

Did the Macross ever leave Earth again for any reason after it was refit following Kamjin's final attack?

As far as we know, it had not left its position in Macross City from the time it's restoration was completed in 2012 until Sharon Apple hijacked it in 2040.

There is no mention of it leaving its position after that event.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, RaisingCane said:

Did the Macross ever leave Earth again for any reason after it was refit following Kamjin's final attack?

The only other time (and that was shortly before it was destroyed), as in Macross II, where it lifted off to fight against Ingues' fleet. And MII is an alternate universe unto itself.

Edited by pengbuzz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...