Re: Star Trek in IMAX
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Doug Pyle
I was unaware of the controversy over digital IMAX until now. I've seen one IMAX 3D film (Monsters versus Aliens) and was very impressed. Turns out it was in the newer digital IMAX 2K. Digital IMAX (2K) may be particularly well suited for 3D, as it employs simultaneous use of 2 projectors. For 2D, this 2-projector system apparently saturates the large screen (compensating for the digital resolution versus analog large-format film).
|
The 2-projector system creates superior color saturation but does
not improve the resolution any. Even the smaller digital IMAX screens are large enough that the limitations of 2k projection can be slightly visible from the first couple of rows. The decision to go with 2k projectors instead of 4k projectors for IMAX digital was almost as disappointing as the decision to delute the format generally.
However, digital IMAX 3D is far superior to the the Real3D format being rolled out for standard digital presentations. Digital IMAX 3D is "true" 3D in the sense that you have two projectors, each projecting the image for one eye and compensates for the dimness of the glasses by pumping out additional light. Real3D uses one projector flipping back and forth between each eye at an unpreceptably fast pace, and uses an image that is artifically lighter and more saturated to compensate for the dimness of the glasses.
Quote:
| While there are pros and cons to the IMAX 2K Digital system, it is clearly not the same as large format analog IMAX. I do wish there was honest advertising, and theaters presenting IMAX Digital would make clear which form of IMAX they project. I don't think "Experience IMAX Digital" would scare away general audiences. |
This is the key. IMAX Digital and IMAX, well, MAX should be branded differently so the value of the one is not impacted by the experience of the other. As much as I hate paying extra, the digital IMAX screen in Albany by far the best blockbuster presentation in town. How I miss the Boston Aquarium screen, though...[quote=Doug Pyle]OK - Having raised the question in this thread, I finally got to see Star Trek today in IMAX (a 2K digital version).
Quote:
| After the ST showing, I polled my family - all agreed it was worth the extra $$ for IMAX even in the digital format. The image was very clear, bright, and appeared somewhat larger (even letterboxed) than films in the same theater hall before IMAX. I don't know specs, but the architecture apparently allowed a large enough screen installation to make a difference. |
The IMAX sound system, which is the same for both the original and digital formats, places the front speakers actually behind the screen. This allows the IMAX digital screens in the retrofitted theaters to fill the entirety of the front wall in a way that the conventional screens they replaced did not.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Bryan Beckman
Here is an interesting editorial on the deliberate branding confusion created by IMAX, and here is a listing of all IMAX theaters in the U.S. and whether they are small-screen digital ("D") or large-screen analog ("1570" for 15-perf/70mm).
|
Note that not all IMAX 15/70 theaters are created equal, either. After seeing a movie in the Simons IMAX at the Boston Aquarium (65' x 85'), for instance, most other IMAX screens seem disappointing in comparison (average 52' x 72'). And the dome theaters make presentations not designed for a curved screen horrendous.
Quote:
| It's worth noting that true IMAX large screens are 1.44:1, while the new "digital" variety are 1.9:1. Think of it this way: Chris Nolan filmed several sequences for "The Dark Knight" with IMAX cameras in the 1.44:1 format. If audiences had seen "The Dark Knight" in IMAX Digital auditoriums, either the top or bottom of the frame would have been sheared off or pillar-boxing would have been introduced to maintain OAR. |
The IMAX digital format is designed for showcasing Hollywood films, not the IMAX film format. The crop for
The Dark Knight is less severe than on the conventional 35mm prints that the vast majority of audiences saw. Any future commercials films to shoot in the IMAX format will almost certain shoot with a 1.88:1 safe crop.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by RolandL
Thanks Bryan. That's a great list. Not all of the "1570" are large screen. Back in 2004, IMAX started converting regular theatres to IMAX. The one we have in Manchester, CT - "Showcase Cinemas Buckland Hills" is "1570" but the screen is not large and has a 2:1 aspect ratio. They showed a few films that were shot in IMAX at first but, they had to cut off the top and bottom on the frame to fill the 2:1 screen. It looked very bad in some scenes. Films that are 2:35 are cropped on the sides so they can fill the full screen.
|
Had prior business in Connecticut one time before the Albany digital location opened, so I was excited to stop at the Buckland Hills IMAX along the way. Saw
I Am Legend: The IMAX Experience. Utterly horrendous. They just took IMAX speakers and an IMAX projector, and stuck them in a regular Regal auditorium. Bad picture cropping on all sides during the
Dark Knight prologue, and dicey presentation for the feature film itself. I would honestly never go back there, and much prefer the fully retrofitted digital IMAX with the IMAX seats and look to the half-ass job at the Buckland Hills theater.