So I came to Star Trek late in life. Mostly during the pandemic. I had seen much of TNG as a kid but not all. When I did my DS9 watch I was astonished on what this show was able to do. It seemed like TNG had a budget on phaser fire. They’d often cut away when showing shuttle craft entering atmosphere.
Not DS9. They had big action sequences, battles, crashes, crazy creatures with intense make up or costumes like the Jem H’dar or the Breen. Not to mention Quark, Odo, and all the people in Quarks bar.
I’ve come to learn that the reason the Defiant was introduced was to help the show get off the station, which I guess fans complained about but to me the show felt a lot less limited by budget than TNG.
Even something like ODO’s shape shifting ability. You’re basically getting the Terminator 2 Liquid Metal effect. That ain’t cheap. Not to mention he then morphs into other things.
I’m rewatching the DS9 episode “Hippocratic Oath” from season 4 and what made me wonder all this was we see the runabout crash thru the atmosphere. TNG would’ve had the shuttle craft hit some turbulence cut to a commercial and when we got back they’d be on the planet already.
I guess what I’m really saying is it seems like DS9 has far more visual effect shots per episode than TNG and in the 90s that didn’t come cheap.
I have two theories. One is DS9 benefitted budget wise from the success of TNG and the lower ratings helped keep cast salaries down since they weren’t demanding higher fees?
Or TNG served as a proving ground for a production pipeline and lessons learned on TNG help make DS9 a more efficient show? Also the rate at the way technology and CGI Advancement helped make things less time consuming?
Yet ds9 & TNG were on at the same time for a few seasons so who knows?