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

[Dreamliner330]

Originally Posted by xbs2034

No, its 2K digital as well. If/when laser comes (rumored to be after Sucide Squad, but then was also rumored to be done after Force Awakens in order to play BvS in laser, but instead they reinstalled their 15/70 projector just for that film) it would fill the screen.

I saw Force Awakens on a similarly sized IMAX screen in San Francisco and laser did the 1.43 scene brilliantly.

I've heard fantastic things about 4K IMAX, but with 2K being so recently installed in the Minnesota theater I really don't know if they'll replace it so quickly with 4K. I'd like them to but I worry they'll want to get more use out of it.

I'm also curious what their plans are for the 1.9:1 rooms...probably the same 4K projectors with permanent top/bottom cropping.

[xbs2034]

Originally Posted by Dreamliner330

I've heard fantastic things about 4K IMAX, but with 2K being so recently installed in the Minnesota theater I really don't know if they'll replace it so quickly with 4K. I'd like them to but I worry they'll want to get more use out of it.

I'm also curious what their plans are for the 1.9:1 rooms...probably the same 4K projectors with permanent top/bottom cropping.

I heard that's true unfortunately, that when they already had to pay for digital renovations fairly recently, they are less likely to spring for a costly laser upgrade.

Most of the laser locations are international now (I think a mix of new IMAX theaters and ones that dropped 15/70 before the domestic ones did), with them signing a deal for as many as 75 new ones in China alone just recently.

[Dreamliner330]

The Minnesota location is located in a zoo and from my understanding is actually owned by IMAX corporate. So I hope they will get upgraded sooner but attendance is pretty low at that theater.

It's very frustrating because when I heard they were planning to upgrade to 2K I wrote letters emails and phone calls to IMAX begging them to wait for laser.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Dreamliner330

IMAX: People will pay for quality. Prove you're still capable of it.

Unfortunately they've realised that people will still pay for the name when all they're getting is 2K digital, so why go the extra mile?

[MrsMiniver]

Originally Posted by Dreamliner330

Is that 4K Laser?

IMAX is doing everything they can to kill their own brand. First they diluted their brand with '1.9:1 IMAX Digital' now their pulling these shenanigans on their 1.43:1 screens...Heck, you can't even see upcoming IMAX releases without reverting to Wikipedia. They killed the 'IMAX domestic film slate' page. Meanwhile, competing Atmos theaters with recliners are better in every regard for ever title except actual IMAX sequence films.

It really bothers me because when IMAX flames out we'll all miss the glory of those enormous 1.43:1 screens filled with content.

IMAX: People will pay for quality. Prove you're still capable of it.

I totally understand and get what you are trying to say about digital IMAX vs classic film based IMAX. I for one understand the importance for masking, good picture quality, good sound, and I completely understand the difference between film and digital based presentations.

However, what a lot of critics and the comments by some forget, is that IMAX digital in now its 8th year of presentations. The vast majority of moviegoers (read 95%) do not not care that IMAX was once a film based format and is not like what it currently is.

The experience of going to the movies as a whole must improve, the lack of masking, dim picture quality, to loud of a level of sound all must improve to compete with home video which often times is a superior way of watching a film.

[Dreamliner330]

Originally Posted by MrsMiniver

I totally understand and get what you are trying to say about digital IMAX vs classic film based IMAX. I for one understand the importance for masking, good picture quality, good sound, and I completely understand the difference between film and digital based presentations.



However, what a lot of critics and the comments by some forget, is that IMAX digital in now its 8th year of presentations. The vast majority of moviegoers (read 95%) do not not care that IMAX was once a film based format and is not like what it currently is.



The experience of going to the movies as a whole must improve, the lack of masking, dim picture quality, to loud of a level of sound all must improve to compete with home video which often times is a superior way of watching a film.

I don't care one way or another about film. But when you use a projector not capable of even filling the screen width, quality compromises were made.

[xbs2034]

Originally Posted by Dreamliner330

The Minnesota location is located in a zoo and from my understanding is actually owned by IMAX corporate. So I hope they will get upgraded sooner but attendance is pretty low at that theater.

It's very frustrating because when I heard they were planning to upgrade to 2K I wrote letters emails and phone calls to IMAX begging them to wait for laser.

Well, Navy Pier in Chicago and the Bullock Museum in Texas may well be owned by IMAX as they are not part of multiplexes (I'm pretty sure at least Navy Pier location is owned by IMAX itself) and both are currently closed for laser renovation (indeed the Bullock Museum will host the U.S. premiere of Malick's Voyage of Time as its grand re-opening). So it seems like IMAX are willing to pay for laser at certain theaters they own. The big issue again may be that the Minnesota location converted so late from 15/70, after many others did it years earlier, and you are probably right they should've just held off till laser if possible.

I imagine if any site doesn't close for renovation fairly soon (in order to be open for big holiday films like Doctor Strange, Fantastic Beasts, and Rogue One) probably isn't happening at least until well into 2017. The only upside may be that it could play Dunkirk in 15/70 (but agree overall it isn't worth the inferior presentations to every other film in the meantime).

[singhcr]

I called the MN Zoo IMAX location and confirmed that their 15/70 projector is still installed. That means I might be able to see a 15/70 print of Dunkirk.

As for their 2K setup, seeing SPECTRE on that was my first and last experience. The picture quality was abysmal and felt like watching a giant LCD TV. I complained to IMAX corporate and the local management about how bad it was and the local guys tried to tell me how much better "digital" was than film and the corporate people said that Sam Mendes viewed SPECTRE with the same setup at the BFI IMAX and said that it was the definitive way to see the film.

[xbs2034]

Originally Posted by singhcr

I called the MN Zoo IMAX location and confirmed that their 15/70 projector is still installed. That means I might be able to see a 15/70 print of Dunkirk.

As for their 2K setup, seeing SPECTRE on that was my first and last experience. The picture quality was abysmal and felt like watching a giant LCD TV. I complained to IMAX corporate and the local management about how bad it was and the local guys tried to tell me how much better "digital" was than film and the corporate people said that Sam Mendes viewed SPECTRE with the same setup at the BFI IMAX and said that it was the definitive way to see the film.

I don't think digital IMAX is horrible by any means (though I will say, while I like the look of film more than digital as a capture format, I prefer DCP to 35mm so some who prefer film projection always may feel differently), but yes there is a noticeable dip in picture quality vs 15/70 and the worst part is how it can't fill the bigger screens.

At Lincoln Square, you could tell the local theater employees were disappointed that it couldn't fill the screen after they change, and they asked me about how I felt about picture quality after seeing digital IMAX there. And that goes a longer way with me than just trying to basically lie that it is far superior.

BTW, think they are wrong about Spectre, as it had its world premiere in Leicester Square as that site's re-opening with laser (my brother in law, who lives in California but is from England and travels there for work a lot, was there at the time).

[Geoff D]

^ That's the thing, if IMAX want to waffle on about 4K laser being superior then that's fine, but IIRC there are still fewer laser installs than active 15/70 throughout the world (that's off the top of my head, I'm happy for actual facts to say otherwise). In any case, they REALLY need to pull their finger out if they don't want this premium brand of theirs to be stuck in 2K projection limbo for the next decade.

[Will.]

Originally Posted by singhcr

I called the MN Zoo IMAX location and confirmed that their 15/70 projector is still installed. That means I might be able to see a 15/70 print of Dunkirk.

As for their 2K setup, seeing SPECTRE on that was my first and last experience. The picture quality was abysmal and felt like watching a giant LCD TV. I complained to IMAX corporate and the local management about how bad it was and the local guys tried to tell me how much better "digital" was than film and the corporate people said that Sam Mendes viewed SPECTRE with the same setup at the BFI IMAX and said that it was the definitive way to see the film.

I saw Interstellar at the MN Zoo and it was life-changing. But I agree the 2K is pretty abysmal in comparison. The Force Awakens in 3D was decent but I would have loved to see those 70mm scenes on film.

[xbs2034]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

^ That's the thing, if IMAX want to waffle on about 4K laser being superior then that's fine, but IIRC there are still fewer laser installs than active 15/70 throughout the world (that's off the top of my head, I'm happy for actual facts to say otherwise). In any case, they REALLY need to pull their finger out if they don't want this premium brand of theirs to be stuck in 2K projection limbo for the next decade.

http://www.imax.com/news/imax-laser-here

Looks like there are about 30 current laser sites worldwide. Given that we known some theaters are also getting ready for fall renovations to laser, and how small recent 15/70 releases have been, I imagine laser will certainly be more common than 15/70 by the release of Dunkirk, if it isn't already.

[Geoff D]

Fair enough sir, I'm just perpetually grouchy that the biggest IMAX in all of Britainland doesn't qualify for a laser install.

Don't get me wrongo, if the BFI gets a 15/70 print of something then it's all good, but given that BvS only had something like 10 or 11 prints struck (even Star Wars had 20 or so, and that only had one IMAX sequence!) then the 15/70 format really is dead for new releases from here on out unless your surname rhymes with Bolan. Great for Dunkirk, not so good for anything else which means ponying up £20 for a 2K digital presentation on the aforementioned biggest IMAX in Britainland. Ugh. (And yeah, I know the Empire Leicester Square has laser but that's not even a 1.43 screen, for a start.)

[Dreamliner330]

Originally Posted by singhcr

I called the MN Zoo IMAX location and confirmed that their 15/70 projector is still installed. That means I might be able to see a 15/70 print of Dunkirk.

As for their 2K setup, seeing SPECTRE on that was my first and last experience. The picture quality was abysmal and felt like watching a giant LCD TV. I complained to IMAX corporate and the local management about how bad it was and the local guys tried to tell me how much better "digital" was than film and the corporate people said that Sam Mendes viewed SPECTRE with the same setup at the BFI IMAX and said that it was the definitive way to see the film.

Yeah. I went there for Force Awakens and wasn't happy. TBH, with the 3D glasses on I couldn't see the pixels or notice the side shift thing, but it's pretty bad when the projector you use doesn't fill the screen you have.

Originally Posted by Will.

I saw Interstellar at the MN Zoo and it was life-changing. But I agree the 2K is pretty abysmal in comparison. The Force Awakens in 3D was decent but I would have loved to see those 70mm scenes on film.

I saw it FOUR times there. So amazing.

[nrocket3]

I saw TFA in a dome real 70mm IMAX theater and during the 35mm scenes it was weirdly stretched an looked horrible. I wonder how Dunkirk will look with it's regular non IMAX 70mm scenes when displayed on an IMAX screen? Anybody have insight for this?

[Will.]

Originally Posted by nrocket3

I saw TFA in a dome real 70mm IMAX theater and during the 35mm scenes it was weirdly stretched an looked horrible. I wonder how Dunkirk will look with it's regular non IMAX 70mm scenes when displayed on an IMAX screen? Anybody have insight for this?

Domes will always distort non-Imax images, and even the Imax images to a certain extent. I avoid them except for nature specials.

[nrocket3]

Originally Posted by Will.

Domes will always distort non-Imax images, and even the Imax images to a certain extent. I avoid them except for nature specials.

I kinda figured but I'm still wondering about the Ultra Panavision 70mm scenes on on regular non dome IMAX 70mm screen. How would that work?

[Spike M.]

Originally Posted by nrocket3

I kinda figured but I'm still wondering about the Ultra Panavision 70mm scenes on on regular non dome IMAX 70mm screen. How would that work?

That'll look fine. They'll just be blowing it up.

Think of it like playing a 2K movie on a 4K projector; same idea. Domes distort the image because they're using a fish-eye lens to get the image that wide, it doesn't have anything to do with the film format. Regular IMAX's don't use fish-eye lenses.

[nrocket3]

Originally Posted by Spike M.

That'll look fine. They'll just be blowing it up.

Think of it like playing a 2K movie on a 4K projector; same idea. Domes distort the image because they're using a fish-eye lens to get the image that wide, it doesn't have anything to do with the film format. Regular IMAX's don't use fish-eye lenses.

Got it thanks. Regular IMAX 70mm screens have the width of what it would be for the Ultra Panavision but they are just higher as well correct? I'm wondering how much different the non-IMAX scenes will look on an IMAX screen compared to something like Interstellar or Dark Knight rises with 35mm non IMAX scenes?

[Spike M.]

Originally Posted by nrocket3

Got it thanks. Regular IMAX 70mm screens have the width of what it would be for the Ultra Panavision but they are just higher as well correct? I'm wondering how much different the non-IMAX scenes will look on an IMAX screen compared to something like Interstellar or Dark Knight rises with 35mm non IMAX scenes?

Not quite. Because IMAX film runs horizontal instead of vertical, the measurements change. It's a good deal larger than 5/65mm in all respects. 5/65mm will look noticeably better than 35mm, though.