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

[Geoff D]

Good point. If they are indeed working with a flat 1.43 extraction then they'll probably end up using a fair bit less than the number I posited above to account for your oversampling, plus reframing etc. They can then scale it up during the finish.

[42041]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Good point. If they are indeed working with a flat 1.43 extraction then they'll probably end up using a fair bit less than the number I posited above to account for your oversampling, plus reframing etc. They can then scale it up during the finish.

Have you had a chance to check out IMAX Laser yet, Geoff? Curious what you think of it.

[Geoff D]

No mate, the only one remotely close to me is in old London town, Leicester Square, but I only travel into the capital for one format: 15/70.

As for die kamera, according to ARRI the 65 has a specific 1.50 crop mode (4320x2880) which is virtually equivalent to 8/35 in terms of image size on this sensor, so that's still a healthy amount of real estate to be playing with. (Nolan isn't shy about using VistaVision on his IMAX shows.)

And as Bayered and low-pass filtered as it most certainly is, when you're dealing with a sensor that big in the first place those issues aren't quite so major when you're blowing down your footage to 4K, unlike when using a physically smaller sensor. It should have very little grain/noise which will help with the quality of the extraction too, unlike the 1.43 from 5/65 extraction that was used on BvS, which looked shite in 15/70. ARRI's own comparison chart is below.

[dvdmike]

So with civil war using the new digital "IMAX" cameras, does this mean we are getting shifting ratios and more than a 2k finish?

[antovolk]

Originally Posted by dvdmike

So with civil war using the new digital "IMAX" cameras, does this mean we are getting shifting ratios and more than a 2k finish?

Shifting to 1.9:1. Tempted to ask the Russos more about this & what they plan to do for Infinity War at an Apple Store Q&A tomorrow.

As for the finish - probably like TFA... Apparently IMAX Laser and Dolby Vision versions were finished 4K.

[Spike M.]

If you thought the Alexa 65 nonsense was bad, now they're doing it with a prosumer Canon camera, too.

Embarrassing.

[dvdmike]

Originally Posted by antovolk

Shifting to 1.9:1. Tempted to ask the Russos more about this & what they plan to do for Infinity War at an Apple Store Q&A tomorrow.

As for the finish - probably like TFA... Apparently IMAX Laser and Dolby Vision versions were finished 4K.

Yeah I was thinking g more than one finish, but this had the full IMAX push over Dolby.
If you can find out that would be great, I ask Gunn daily why shoot 8k for a 2k finish and never get an answer

[antovolk]

Originally Posted by dvdmike

Yeah I was thinking g more than one finish, but this had the full IMAX push over Dolby.
If you can find out that would be great, I ask Gunn daily why shoot 8k for a 2k finish and never get an answer

It's getting the new 3D Dolby Vision treatment actually, second film to do so following Jungle Book.
https://elcapitantheatre.com/event/1...mes/2016-05-05

[Poya]

Originally Posted by Spike M.

If you thought the Alexa 65 nonsense was bad, now they're doing it with a prosumer Canon camera, too.

Embarrassing.

IMAX is a brand. Unless if it was shot with the ACTUAL camera, it's Dolby Vision for me.

[Spike M.]

Originally Posted by antovolk

Shifting to 1.9:1. Tempted to ask the Russos more about this & what they plan to do for Infinity War at an Apple Store Q&A tomorrow.

As for the finish - probably like TFA... Apparently IMAX Laser and Dolby Vision versions were finished 4K.

TFA wasn't released in 4K, anywhere.

Unless I missed something, we still don't even know if DV and IMAX can pull off 4K 3D.

[xbs2034]

Originally Posted by Spike M.

If you thought the Alexa 65 nonsense was bad, now they're doing it with a prosumer Canon camera, too.

Embarrassing.

To be fair, I assume that's from A Beautiful Planet, and perhaps the logos are there because it is an IMAX production (releasing only in IMAX theaters naturally as well). But in the press, IMAX/Canon are being open about it being shot with Canon cameras, and not trying to suggest it was shot with a new IMAX camera.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/imax-f...131000574.html

Also, the reason why Toni Myers switched to digital with this production vs 15/70 cameras she used previously is that with the retirement of the space shuttle fleet, she could no longer send the bulky 15/70 film feels into space (I was wondering why the change after Hubble 3D looked so amazing, and that explains it)

http://www.space.com/32607-jennifer-...-premiere.html

[PeterTHX]

Guys, PLEASE spoiler or delete repeat images.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by xbs2034

Also, the reason why Toni Myers switched to digital with this production vs 15/70 cameras she used previously is that with the retirement of the space shuttle fleet, she could no longer send the bulky 15/70 film feels into space (I was wondering why the change after Hubble 3D looked so amazing, and that explains it)

http://www.space.com/32607-jennifer-...-premiere.html

That's exactly what I was thinking when I just saw the above post. They ARE in space and seeing as the West needs Russian taxis to get up there nowadays I can understand if there's less room in the trunk than before.

[antovolk]

Well poo looks like I'm out of luck with asking any Q to the Russos because this is packed as hell even 40 minutes before it starts...with most people probably not even here for the Russos haha

[UFAlien]

Originally Posted by antovolk

Seems they just don't want to bother with the taller aspect ratio anymore, as evidenced by the massive 1.90 screens like the TCL Chinese in LA...

The Chinese Theatre is actually significantly wider than even 1.90:1; it's got a ratio of 2.04:1 per Large Format Examiner's measurements.

[dvdmike]

Originally Posted by Spike M.

If you thought the Alexa 65 nonsense was bad, now they're doing it with a prosumer Canon camera, too.

Embarrassing.

To be fair, taking a full IMAX rig to space is a pain

[Geoff D]

65mm IMAX is a pain to use on Earth, never mind in space. It's amusing reading the ASC articles about Nolan's Batman movies as the IMAX cameras are cantankerous bits of kit at the best of times; they always had another IMAX camera body AND a 35mm camera on standby if anything went wrong.

Not that that stopped people taking the MSMs and such like up into space before, but now there are more options and less cargo space so I'm not surprised that they're downsizing for an outer space mission.

It's when Nolan starts using that Canon for his IMAX movies, that's when you should start worrying Spike!

[dvdmike]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

65mm IMAX is a pain to use on Earth, never mind in space. It's amusing reading the ASC articles about Nolan's Batman movies as the IMAX cameras are cantankerous bits of kit at the best of times; they always had another IMAX camera body AND a 35mm camera on standby if anything went wrong.

Not that that stopped people taking the MSMs and such like up into space before, but now there are more options and less cargo space so I'm not surprised that they're downsizing for an outer space mission.

It's when Nolan starts using that Canon for his IMAX movies, that's when you should start worrying Spike!

You would think after all the work done over the years and the fanboy he is he would have put more money into making the cameras useable.
You didn't see Kubrick ***** after the things he did with large format in 2001 (yea I know it's not the same system)

[Spike M.]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

65mm IMAX is a pain to use on Earth, never mind in space. It's amusing reading the ASC articles about Nolan's Batman movies as the IMAX cameras are cantankerous bits of kit at the best of times; they always had another IMAX camera body AND a 35mm camera on standby if anything went wrong.

Not that that stopped people taking the MSMs and such like up into space before, but now there are more options and less cargo space so I'm not surprised that they're downsizing for an outer space mission.

It's when Nolan starts using that Canon for his IMAX movies, that's when you should start worrying Spike!

It's not so much the general idea of using a Canon camera on an IMAX movie, it's the continued reduction of the brand and label that gets me. That picture's just hilarious, since they're trying to pass it off as an IMAX system.

There's a similar thing going on with the Alexa. Eastwood's latest movie was shot on the Alexa 65, not even rigs with IMAX stickers on it, just a regular Alexa 65, and the decision to claim it as something "shot in IMAX!" was made after the fact (or mid way, I don't know). Now you see headlines like "Eastwood beats Nolan to be the first to shoot an entire movie in IMAX", and it's just a big terrible joke.

They don't have a 1.43 solution either, Geoff. I made a fuss about it on Facebook and talked with whoever's running their account, and for now they're sticking with 1.9.

[42041]

I think the Alexa 65 would be quite IMAX-worthy, if its 6560x3100 resolution was preserved through post. That may not be quite an IMAX negative but it may very well be an IMAX print (albeit matted vertically - though I'm sure the IMAX folks could get the right anamorphic glass made).