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

[Fang Zei]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

And yet given that they're finishing them up digitally then why not correct whatever the lens is doing, if it's doing it wrong? The lenses created for IW/EG weren't just the old lenses rehoused but brand new glass apparently, so they really shouldn't have any of this kind of 'stretching' as they've been built from scratch. It's funny but Opaloch talks of the lenses having a "1.3x" squeeze rather than the 1.25x that they actually have, could this simply be a case of them applying a slightly wrong desqueeze in post? This is why I mentioned "the perils of anamorphic" before, it's not just what it does in-camera but what they do with the image afterwards where they have to be careful.

One such example that's long stuck in my mind is from X-Men 1 near the end, when Logan is holding the lifeless body of Rogue and then she suddenly starts to draw power from him, as Jackman reacts the shot looks a touch too narrow and it's got nothing to do with the glass or the angle, it's just not been desqueezed properly.

Could this possibly just be an Opaloch thing?

Thinking back on Elysium and Chappie, I want to say I noticed similar abnormalities.

Interesting to find out this was brand new glass used on IW/Endgame. I always thought everything looked a little too good to have been shot through lenses made at least 50 years earlier.

[ITDEFX101]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

And yet given that they're finishing them up digitally then why not correct whatever the lens is doing, if it's doing it wrong? The lenses created for IW/EG weren't just the old lenses rehoused but brand new glass apparently, so they really shouldn't have any of this kind of 'stretching' as they've been built from scratch. It's funny but Opaloch talks of the lenses having a "1.3x" squeeze rather than the 1.25x that they actually have, could this simply be a case of them applying a slightly wrong desqueeze in post? This is why I mentioned "the perils of anamorphic" before, it's not just what it does in-camera but what they do with the image afterwards where they have to be careful.

One such example that's long stuck in my mind is from X-Men 1 near the end, when Logan is holding the lifeless body of Rogue and then she suddenly starts to draw power from him, as Jackman reacts the shot looks a touch too narrow and it's got nothing to do with the glass or the angle, it's just not been desqueezed properly.

I noticed this during my first viewing of the movie. I was like come on Regal you really ****ing up this presentation!?!?!?!

Almost sent a letter to IMAX QC about that. Thankfully I read this post before I did so. Gonna see it at Udvar Hazy tonight.....hopefully still not crowded. :\

[Agent Kay]

Originally Posted by Mike0284

I didn't get Godzilla sadly but happy I didn't get this mess.

[dannphou]

Anyone know if Spider Man Far From Home is supposed to open up to 1:90:1 for IMAX?

[Merkur]

Originally Posted by dannphou

Anyone know if Spider Man Far From Home is supposed to open up to 1:90:1 for IMAX?

Seems like it
https://twitter.com/IMAX/status/1125384721121153024

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Fang Zei

Could this possibly just be an Opaloch thing?

Thinking back on Elysium and Chappie, I want to say I noticed similar abnormalities.

Interesting to find out this was brand new glass used on IW/Endgame. I always thought everything looked a little too good to have been shot through lenses made at least 50 years earlier.

I don't remember Chappie looking anything like as stretched as this did.

People mentioned before that maybe it's the glass doing it, particularly at the edges of the frame. I just watched the 'mini series' of Hateful Eight (it having been shot on the 'classic' - though still extensively refurbished - UP70 glass) and it did indeed have some compression at the extreme edges of the image on the widest angle lenses - but, as I noted previously, what we're seeing on IW and EG is quite a drastic crop into that ultra widescreen image as captured so visible wide angle compression shouldn't be an issue.

Gonna see if I can get to the nearest LieMAX to catch this again, see if it looks just as stretched as the regular DCP and what, if any, difference the embiggening makes.

[rikraq]

I went to see Endgame in IMAX. My first time with that format and honestly IMO, it wasn't that different to me. I could've happily seen it again in a regular theater. Maybe it was where I was sitting, I don't know.

Plus that long ass Godzilla clip was annoying.

What is the diff between IMAX and RPX?

[CinemaFirst]

Originally Posted by rikraq

I went to see Endgame in IMAX. My first time with that format and honestly IMO, it wasn't that different to me. I could've happily seen it again in a regular theater. Maybe it was where I was sitting, I don't know.

Plus that long ass Godzilla clip was annoying.

What is the diff between IMAX and RPX?

What I remember from Infinity War, as I haven't seen Endgame yet outside of an Imax theatre, is that I found the composition of the 2.35 aspect ratio rather restrictive compared to the Imax 1.90 version.

[Merkur]

Certainly. I watched the film twice yesterday. Once in scope and once in IMAX, and I hate the idea of not being able to watch film in 1.90:1 or 1.78:1 aspect ratio again on home media.

Also, IMAX Laser (2D) is the best way to experience the film IMO. Although I have yet to experience Dolby Cinema.

My viewings ranked terms of tech:
IMAX 2D Laser (although the audio had some issues)
IMAX 2D (Xenon)
IMAX 3D (Xenon)
4K 2D with Atmos

[Dreamliner330]

Is there a list somewhere of IMAX movies with 1.90:1 content?
I had the same question about Homecoming and several other movies (Aladdin 3D, etc)...I used to just look on IMDB but either nothing is in 1.90:1 or it isn't being updated...

Originally Posted by Merkur

Also, IMAX Laser (2D) is the best way to experience the film IMO.

Why not Laser IMAX 3D?

IMAX 3D > *

I love 3D so much. It is really frustrating they are moving away from it. Due to circumstances with friends I saw Endgame 5 times in IMAX 3D (I rarely see a movie more than once in theater). I couldn't imagine seeing it in 2D or cropped to 2.39:1. Yuck.

Even for my MCU rewatch, I chose 3D over 4K in my home theater.

[Merkur]

I don't hate 3D but I don't love it either. If I had to choose between 2D and 3D I'd definitely go for 2D.

I find the 3D to be quite useless in most films. It only adds depth and I even kinda lose that after the first hour to the point where it looks like 2D to me but dimmer. It's clear that 3D is just a marketing tool and a cash grab for most films. The only film I'm excited to see in 3D is Cameron's next Avatar film. I'm also very envious of people who got to see Gravity in IMAX 3D.

Endgame was my first 2D Laser experience and it was wonderful. Perfectly bright, sharp and colorful, especially since it came after a terrible Captain Marvel screening (standard theater) it was incredibly dim. I can't explain how good it looked.

There are two IMAX screens around me, one has top notch audio and acoustics but stuck with Xenon and they usually offer 50/50 2D/3D screenings. The other one was a large scope screen that was recently converted to IMAX with Laser. The image quality and screen size are perfect but the audio is not. There's a weird echo that is only noticeable in the center channel which really annoys me. They usually only offer 3D unless the film is 2D only so I was surprised to see 2D screenings so had to see it in that format.

Usually if 3D is the only option, I'd go for Laser but gotta say Xenon 3D (Endgame) didn't look as bad as I thought it would. Definitely dimmer than 2D.

[CelluloidPal]

Originally Posted by Merkur

I don't hate 3D but I don't love it either. If I had to choose between 2D and 3D I'd definitely go for 2D.

I find the 3D to be quite useless in most films. It only adds depth and I even kinda lose that after the first hour to the point where it looks like 2D to me but dimmer. It's clear that 3D is just a marketing tool and a cash grab for most films. The only film I'm excited to see in 3D is Cameron's next Avatar film. I'm also very envious of people who got to see Gravity in IMAX 3D.

Endgame was my first 2D Laser experience and it was wonderful. Perfectly bright, sharp and colorful, especially since it came after a terrible Captain Marvel screening (standard theater) it was incredibly dim. I can't explain how good it looked.

There are two IMAX screens around me, one has top notch audio and acoustics but stuck with Xenon and they usually offer 50/50 2D/3D screenings. The other one was a large scope screen that was recently converted to IMAX with Laser. The image quality and screen size are perfect but the audio is not. There's a weird echo that is only noticeable in the center channel which really annoys me. They usually only offer 3D unless the film is 2D only so I was surprised to see 2D screenings so had to see it in that format.

Usually if 3D is the only option, I'd go for Laser but gotta say Xenon 3D (Endgame) didn't look as bad as I thought it would. Definitely dimmer than 2D.

And IMAX isn't on most films?

[benji888578]

Originally Posted by dannphou

Anyone know if Spider Man Far From Home is supposed to open up to 1:90:1 for IMAX?

Originally Posted by Merkur

Seems like it
https://twitter.com/IMAX/status/1125384721121153024

For select scenes, yes.

Originally Posted by Dreamliner330

Is there a list somewhere of IMAX movies with 1.90:1 content?
I had the same question about Homecoming and several other movies (Aladdin 3D, etc)...I used to just look on IMDB but either nothing is in 1.90:1 or it isn't being updated...

This list has short notes about 3D/2D, aspect, exclusives and special cameras used...it is well maintained and sometimes vague until close to release date.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List...leased_in_IMAX

[Merkur]

Originally Posted by CelluloidPal

And IMAX isn't on most films?

Well, essentially yeah. Especially if it's "Specially Formatted for IMAX" or even "better"... constant aspect ratio/scope.

But it truly is the best option to watch a movie that is available to me, otherwise I'd end up watching a movie on a small standard screen with dim projection and mediocre sound. So it's a win-win situation here.
You get to see the film on a big screens with really good projectors and brilliant sound systems, so you get what you pay for. You have the option.

3D on the other hand - specifically in IMAX or other premium large format screens, is forced on the customers by not providing the option of 2D screenings.

For example, I went to see Blade Runner 2049 in IMAX. You wanna what was the worst thing about the experience? 3D. The sound was INCREDIBLE. If they had offered 2D screenings, I would've gone to a second time but I had to settle for standard 2D with Atmos which was way below IMAX.

[CelluloidPal]

Originally Posted by Merkur

Well, essentially yeah. Especially if it's "Specially Formatted for IMAX" or even "better"... constant aspect ratio/scope.

But it truly is the best option to watch a movie that is available to me, otherwise I'd end up watching a movie on a small standard screen with dim projection and mediocre sound. So it's a win-win situation here.
You get to see the film on a big screens with really good projectors and brilliant sound systems, so you get what you pay for. You have the option.

3D on the other hand - specifically in IMAX or other premium large format screens, is forced on the customers by not providing the option of 2D screenings.

For example, I went to see Blade Runner 2049 in IMAX. You wanna what was the worst thing about the experience? 3D. The sound was INCREDIBLE. If they had offered 2D screenings, I would've gone to a second time but I had to settle for standard 2D with Atmos which was way below IMAX.

Well, that is a matter of opinion as many here rave about Dolby Cinema and while IMAX works for you personally, it doesn't for others.

[Dreamliner330]

Originally Posted by Merkur

I'm also very envious of people who got to see Gravity in IMAX 3D.

During AMC Space Week a few years ago I missed the Gravity day, so I spoke with the General Manager and was able to get a special unscheduled screening on a different day.

My Dad and I got to see Gravity in IMAX 3D all by ourselves and it was the very first time I heard my Dad gushing over a movie.

That manager went so far above the call of duty it’s ridiculous. I sent him a letter of appreciation and everything.


I just really like 3D. Right now I’m watching LEGO Movie 2 in 3D and it looks incredible.

[Dubstar]

Originally Posted by ITDEFX101

I noticed this during my first viewing of the movie. I was like come on Regal you really ****ing up this presentation!?!?!?!

Almost sent a letter to IMAX QC about that. Thankfully I read this post before I did so. Gonna see it at Udvar Hazy tonight.....hopefully still not crowded. :\

how was it Udvar Hazy? Granted the screening I saw at Air & Space was early afternoon downtown, there were but no more than fifty people at my screening. IMAX-laser 3D was by far the best presentation both visually and aurally in my mind.

[Merkur]

Originally Posted by CelluloidPal

Well, that is a matter of opinion as many here rave about Dolby Cinema and while IMAX works for you personally, it doesn't for others.

Of course. What I wrote was my opinion and my personal preference. IMAX is my favorite way of watching movies until something else takes it place (maybe Dolby Cinema if I get the chance to experience it).

But I don't know if anyone who goes to the same theaters I go to, would choose a regular sized 2D screen over IMAX.

Originally Posted by Dreamliner330

During AMC Space Week a few years ago I missed the Gravity day, so I spoke with the General Manager and was able to get a special unscheduled screening on a different day.

My Dad and I got to see Gravity in IMAX 3D all by ourselves and it was the very first time I heard my Dad gushing over a movie.

That manager went so far above the call of duty it’s ridiculous. I sent him a letter of appreciation and everything.


I just really like 3D. Right now I’m watching LEGO Movie 2 in 3D and it looks incredible.

That's really awesome. What a cool guy and it's great you and your dad got that experience.

I'm really bitter about missing Interstellar in IMAX (or any theater really but that's a long story) and I tried to get contact the theater for a special screening but didn't get a response. Once it's gone, it's gone.

[BluBonnet]

Originally Posted by Merkur

Of course. What I wrote was my opinion and my personal preference. IMAX is my favorite way of watching movies until something else takes it place (maybe Dolby Cinema if I get the chance to experience it).

But I don't know if anyone who goes to the same theaters I go to, would choose a regular sized 2D screen over IMAX.

That's really awesome. What a cool guy and it's great you and your dad got that experience.

I'm really bitter about missing Interstellar in IMAX (or any theater really but that's a long story) and I tried to get contact the theater for a special screening but didn't get a response. Once it's gone, it's gone.

So long as you're talking about the real IMAX which has a screen that's a few stories high, I'd agree. I feel fake IMAX is not a great value for what you pay, unless you're using your A-List

[xbs2034]

Originally Posted by Merkur

Well, essentially yeah. Especially if it's "Specially Formatted for IMAX" or even "better"... constant aspect ratio/scope.

But it truly is the best option to watch a movie that is available to me, otherwise I'd end up watching a movie on a small standard screen with dim projection and mediocre sound. So it's a win-win situation here.
You get to see the film on a big screens with really good projectors and brilliant sound systems, so you get what you pay for. You have the option.

3D on the other hand - specifically in IMAX or other premium large format screens, is forced on the customers by not providing the option of 2D screenings.

For example, I went to see Blade Runner 2049 in IMAX. You wanna what was the worst thing about the experience? 3D. The sound was INCREDIBLE. If they had offered 2D screenings, I would've gone to a second time but I had to settle for standard 2D with Atmos which was way below IMAX.

That’s kinda weird that they would do only 3D showings of Blade Runner 2049, since in the US all it’s IMAX showings were in 2D (which made me see it in a standard 3D showing).

But yes, while I like IMAX 3D a lot, in general I think films which release in both formats should offer showings in both. Some films like Avengers, Star Wars, and Aladdin and Spider-Man coming up do exactly that, but quite a few like Captain Marvel, Justice League, Fantastic Beasts 2, Mission Impossible: Fallout, and most animated pictures are 2D only. And while IMAX 3D only is fairly rare now, Alita and Ready Player One did do so.