Large Format/"Premium" Theaters (IMAX 15/70, Digital IMAX, XD, ETX, RPX, etc.)

[ManBeast]

Originally Posted by xbs2034

Saw Jurassic World tonight in IMAX laser at Leicester square. Seemed to me like it wasn't quite as large as the other IMAX lasers I've been to (in NYC, San Fran, and Reading, MA) but a nice fairly large and comfortable size from my seat (row G) and of course great picture and sound as you would expect from the system.

In addition to the normal IMAX countdown right before the movie there was an extended IMAX intro in the middle of the trailers which was a more impressive display (had some obvious sound effects to show off the range and overhead speakers), but was long enough that I imagine it would get a bit tiring seeing repeatedly.

The short piece with the jet that flies over? I thought that had to play as part of the pre-reel in every IMAX screen?

It never gets old

[xbs2034]

Originally Posted by ManBeast

The short piece with the jet that flies over? I thought that had to play as part of the pre-reel in every IMAX screen?

It never gets old

Yup, it ended with the jet flyover (pretty impressive).

It must be only for some countries as I've never seen it before. In the U.S., in museum IMAXes we just get the countdown, and in multiplexes also we got a very brief "coming soon in the stellar sounds and crystal clear images of IMAX" before the IMAX trailers begin.

[Agent Kay]

Mission impossible Fallout switches to IMAX ratios twice!

[Riddhi2011]

ILM VFX shows that they were indeed working for 1.66:1 safe composition for the IMAX version of Star Trek: Into Darkness. Here's the video -

Behind the Magic: Journey to the Red Planet for "Star Trek Into Darkness" - YouTube

And @GeoffD, I got the techniscope stills for 'First Man' from Imdb.

[Riddhi2011]

Originally Posted by xbs2034

Saw Jurassic World tonight in IMAX laser at Leicester square. Seemed to me like it wasn't quite as large as the other IMAX lasers I've been to (in NYC, San Fran, and Reading, MA) but a nice fairly large and comfortable size from my seat (row G) and of course great picture and sound as you would expect from the system....

Hey, could you tell me whether the aspect ratio of JW2 was 2.40:1 on that IMAX Laser screen, or did it occupy more vertical area of your screen?

One thing I noticed while watching this on a PLF screen is that I saw a bit more image (1-2% maybe) on the vertical space. When the Brachiosaur was walking across the screen, its head was partially cropped out in the regular scope screens, every time I saw. But the full head was visible on the PLF screen.

I think that was because the regular screens don't project edge-to-edge and lose about 2% of image from all four sides; which may be due to how the screen borders don't exactly align with the projector throw distance. However, because the PLF screen has a 1.89:1 frame, the full height is displayed without any cropping.

[xbs2034]

Originally Posted by Riddhi2011

Hey, could you tell me whether the aspect ratio of JW2 was 2.40:1 on that IMAX Laser screen, or did it occupy more vertical area of your screen?

One thing I noticed while watching this on a PLF screen is that I saw a bit more image (1-2% maybe) on the vertical space. When the Brachiosaur was walking across the screen, its head was partially cropped out in the regular scope screens, every time I saw. But the full head was visible on the PLF screen.

I think that was because the regular screens don't project edge-to-edge and lose about 2% of image from all four sides; which may be due to how the screen borders don't exactly align with the projector throw distance. However, because the PLF screen has a 1.89:1 frame, the full height is displayed without any cropping.

If it was a 1-2% difference, I probably wouldn't have noticed it without doing a A to B comparison. But yeah, regular theaters often cut off a tiny amount of the image side to side, and the film was naturally in scope (but in IMAX laser where the screen basically fills your field of view and the cinema is very good with black levels, I barely notice the black bars).

It also seemed like Leicester Square shape wise was somewhere between 1.43 and 1.9. I would guess a bit taller than 16x9, maybe it was the 1.66 ratio (which I know was a very popular ratio in Europe before).

[UFAlien]

Originally Posted by xbs2034

It also seemed like Leicester Square shape wise was somewhere between 1.43 and 1.9. I would guess a bit taller than 16x9, maybe it was the 1.66 ratio (which I know was a very popular ratio in Europe before).

Per the Large Format Examiner measurements the Leicester Square IMAX is one of the very few locations that adheres exactly to the 1.90:1 ratio (87' wide by 45.8' high).

You are correct that it's the smallest of the four IMAX screens you mentioned, though that's only because of the shorter, wider ratio - the Reading screen is 84.4' x 65.5' so for any film with a ratio of 1.90:1 or wider the image is actually smaller there than in Leicester.

The San Francisco Metreon and NYC Lincoln Square IMAX screens are among the largest in the world; San Fran's is 97.6' x 75.6' while New York's is 101' x 75' 6'.

[Agent Kay]

I need to try the empire, but it's hard when the BFI is a walk away.

[pL86]

For those in the UK - Odeon Dolby Cinema is coming:

http://investor.dolby.com/news-relea...-company-bring

Also coming to Munich:

http://investor.dolby.com/news-relea...cinema-germany

[GLaDOS]

I really should make going to the Lincoln Square IMAX a part of my bucket list. After seeing this video, I reckon this absolute unit is something to behold in person.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iip2zUuJIzc

[LynxFX]

Originally Posted by GLaDOS

I really should make going to the Lincoln Square IMAX a part of my bucket list. After seeing this video, I reckon this absolute unit is something to behold in person.

I used to work there back in the late 90's. Definitely a treat to see a true 3D IMAX film or a feature film with that sound system. It ruined me for all these AMC's and such with LieMAX screens. They just don't compare.

I wish I was still in that area now with the advent of so many features being shot partially in IMAX.

During Titanic's run, that screen was sold out for nearly 4 months straight. Incredible.

[Bluballs31]

Originally Posted by GLaDOS

I really should make going to the Lincoln Square IMAX a part of my bucket list. After seeing this video, I reckon this absolute unit is something to behold in person.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iip2zUuJIzc

i've seen about 4 movies there and it's great. It's about 35 minutes from me by car. Brought my father to Dunkirk and it was his first time there, his first words as the movie started were "wow it's like i'm walking with them"

made me laugh and i'll always have that memory now, it is a great theater. I can't say the same for the rest of the smaller theaters in there but that imax screen is beautiful

[jd_from_da_80s]

Originally Posted by Bluballs31

i've seen about 4 movies there and it's great. It's about 35 minutes from me by car. Brought my father to Dunkirk and it was his first time there, his first words as the movie started were "wow it's like i'm walking with them"

made me laugh and i'll always have that memory now, it is a great theater. I can't say the same for the rest of the smaller theaters in there but that imax screen is beautiful

I saw the last showing of IW there, Haven't been there since MI:RN, very uncomfortable seats at the time, which is why I stopped going when 84th & B'way got recliners (then Times Square got Dolby) I usually don't see 3D movies, but wanted to see IW in Imax since it was filmed with Imax cameras

Anyway, I didn't know 66th street got new seats. Now they got 165 seats, but I think they had about 400 before (that's a lot of lost revenue) I'd prefer recliners or the Dolby seats, but I'd definitely consider Lincoln Center now that they got those new seats & if the movie is filmed with Imax cameras (another reason I stopped going there since most movies were not)

Something weird I noticed it that even though I was center seat, last row, I felt like I was closer than when I was in the last row when I saw MI:RN. I felt like I was too close, but it could have been the 3D

[erixon20]

Originally Posted by jd_from_da_80s

I saw the last showing of IW there, Haven't been there since MI:RN, very uncomfortable seats at the time, which is why I stopped going when 84th & B'way got recliners (then Times Square got Dolby) I usually don't see 3D movies, but wanted to see IW in Imax since it was filmed with Imax cameras

Anyway, I didn't know 66th street got new seats. Now they got 165 seats, but I think they had about 400 before (that's a lot of lost revenue) I'd prefer recliners or the Dolby seats, but I'd definitely consider Lincoln Center now that they got those new seats & if the movie is filmed with Imax cameras (another reason I stopped going there since most movies were not)

Something weird I noticed it that even though I was center seat, last row, I felt like I was closer than when I was in the last row when I saw MI:RN. I felt like I was too close, but it could have been the 3D

I saw the first showing of Dunkirk there last year and Ready Player One and Infinity War there this year-my favorite theatre! Thankfully I work about 1 minute from that theatre-so it easy to get to.

[jd_from_da_80s]

Originally Posted by erixon20

I saw the first showing of Dunkirk there last year and Ready Player One and Infinity War there this year-my favorite theatre! Thankfully I work about 1 minute from that theatre-so it easy to get to.

Nice, I'm a 10 minute walk from work to that theater & to Times Square, both now being my go to. I can't wait to get my eye surgery so I can enjoy 3D without 3D glasses on top of my glasses.

Off topic , I saw RPO at the 4D auditorium on 42nd, that movie was made for 4D.

[GLaDOS]

https://twitter.com/chrismcquarrie

I know it's not real IMAX but maaaaan it's gonna be a treat on the big screen.

[testmon112]

I would love to have my own theatre with a grading desk. That would be sweet.

[Riddhi2011]

Originally Posted by GLaDOS

https://twitter.com/chrismcquarrie
I know it's not real IMAX but maaaaan it's gonna be a treat on the big screen.

The difference is very little. It's a shame how IMAX has downscaled their experience. 2.40:1 to 1.43:1 is a significant and impactful increase, while this does not look like so.

[Geoff D]

Interesting that the 'scope extraction isn't exactly centred, it's higher up in the 1.90 frame.

[Riddhi2011]

^ I think that's because McQuarrie wanted to give audiences vertigo by showing the sheer drop into the under world. The drop is where the eyes would be scanning towards. It's basic psychology. When you are on a steep place, you want to look at the valley below, to see how far up you are.