IMAX vs. Christie 2k Super HD Digital Projectors

[J_UNTITLED]

Which provides the higher resolution/better picture: IMAX or a Christie 2k Super HD Digital Projector?

[WickyWoo]

IMAX by far. IMAX is 70mm film. 2k is scraping the low end of 35mm. 70mm has 4x the negative area of 35

HOWEVER

the film must actually be SHOT in IMAX, not an upconvert

[Brandon B]

As you probably realize, but J may not, IMAX is not just 70mm film. It is shot laterally and therefore a single frame actually has about 10X the area of 35mm, not just 4 like standard 70mm. Check wiki or another source for more details.

Oh, and we will probably be at 8K or 16K digitals before we effectively (what you see on the screen) equal IMAX resolution. A 4K does not cut it. The Christie is 2048x1080.

BB

[WickyWoo]

We're not going to see IMAX level digital projectors for a very very long time though, not in any commercial installation

And no, I don't believe any home needs more than a 1080p projector before someone brings it up. You can't fit a screen big enough to make a difference in a house, and if you can, you can afford a commercial system

[Brandon B]

Originally Posted by WickyWoo

We're not going to see IMAX level digital projectors for a very very long time though, not in any commercial installation

And no, I don't believe any home needs more than a 1080p projector before someone brings it up. You can't fit a screen big enough to make a difference in a house, and if you can, you can afford a commercial system

Define a very very long time. I give it about 5 years. We need them in my work for things like the Soarin' ride at California Adventure and Epcot.

BB

[Papi4baby]

Originally Posted by Brandon B

Define a very very long time. I give it about 5 years. We need them in my work for things like the Soarin' ride at California Adventure and Epcot.

BB

Im pretty sure he meant to say in a non-comercial installation.

[Deciazulado]

Originally Posted by Brandon B

Define a very very long time. I give it about 5 years. We need them in my work for things like the Soarin' ride at California Adventure and Epcot.

BB

mmm a 6k projection system (4000 x 6000) yum!

well, I'm sure someone can rig that up today if they throw the $$$

[darinp2]

Originally Posted by WickyWoo

And no, I don't believe any home needs more than a 1080p projector before someone brings it up. You can't fit a screen big enough to make a difference in a house, and if you can, you can afford a commercial system

It is viewing ratio that matters. You don't need a huge screen to make a difference in a house, but I'm pretty sure I'm not the only person here with a screen 10' wide or more. I want higher contrast ratio more than I want higher resolution, but I still want higher resolution. A middle seat in a theater built to THX recommendations (36 degree viewing angle for the worst case seat in the whole theater) I believe that greater than 1080p would make a difference to many people with good vision (not even the best vision).

Even with an 8' wide screen a person could sit 8' back if they wanted to and that wouldn't that unusual a viewing ratio compared to seats in a commercial theater built to that THX recommendation. There are many seats in commercial theaters inside 1.0x the screen width. In fact, the middle seat would be closer than that if a commercial theater was built to that recommendation and the seats started 10% of the way back in the theater from the screen (and the presentation was the full width of the screen).

--Darin

[Deciazulado]

IMAX area is about 50 mm x 70 mm

While for example Super-35 negatives scanned at 2k Digital Iintermediates (Lord Of The Rings, etc) use about 10 mm x 24 mm = 832 x 2000 pixels

You do the math

[WickyWoo]

One of the many reasons why were I bill Gates, after buyin Universal, cancelling HD DVD and burning every copy of the new Battlestar Galactica, the 4th or 5th thing I would do is ban the use of Super35.

Oh and bring back Farscape

[JadedRaverLA]

Originally Posted by WickyWoo

One of the many reasons why were I bill Gates, after buyin Universal, cancelling HD DVD and burning every copy of the new Battlestar Galactica, the 4th or 5th thing I would do is ban the use of Super35.

Oh and bring back Farscape

Evangelize WickyWoo.. evangelize! Super35 is fantastic for TV. It's also the main reason I very rarely go to the cinema any more. If studios don't care about the quality of their film prints, that's fine. Just don't expect me to pay to see some blurry anamorphic print taken from a Super35 negative. Why not just shoot on 8mm and get it over with. Think of all the money you'll save! And I'm SURE no one will ever notice how bad it looks projected. While we're at it, why not get rid of DTS and start using mp3 audio at around 64k for theatrical exhibition? If we work hard enough, we can make the actual films look and sound as bad as the Russian cams available all over the net.

</end rant>