View Full Version : Digital Imax wanabe!


Alan Gouger
03-09-09, 03:52 PM
Great article. (http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090308/LETTERS/903089997)
Looks like digital Imax provides no where near the same experience as celluloid.




But...but...IT's NOT IMAX!

By Roger Ebert

From Mike Williamson, Burbank:
The writer is a filmmaker.

I tried to go see WATCHMEN in supposed "IMAX" today at a newly installed IMAX theatre here in my local BURBANK multiplex.

Below is the email I sent to IMAX after walking out a couple minutes in.

* * *

Whoever is receiving this email, I encourage you to forward to the appropriate departments, including all top staff.

I just got back from the new IMAX in Burbank, CA and I have to say...THIS IS NOT IMAX!

As soon as I walked in the theatre, I was disgusted. This is NOT an IMAX screen. Simply extending a traditional multiplex screen to touch the sides and floor does NOT constitute an IMAX experience.

An IMAX screen is gargantuan. It is like looking at the side of a large building ,and it runs vertically in a pronounced way. It is NOT a traditional movie screen shape. A traditional multiplex theatre can not house a true IMAX screen without STRUCTURAL CONSTRUCTION to raise the ceilings, etc.

What I saw today was more like the European standard of 1:66-1. IMAX screens are constructed to be your ENTIRE field of view. This screen was PATHETIC by IMAX standards.

I understand in a movie like WATCHMEN, which is not shot in IMAX, that the image will be letterboxed on the screen. HOWEVER, for a movie like THE DARK NIGHT, specific scenes would NOT be able to be shown in the proper aspect ratio at this theatre. It would be CROPPED at the top and bottom. What's the point? Why would I pay extra for this???

Additionally, IMAX seating traditionally puts you IN the movie. The screen is so large that the seats loom ABOVE it, and close to the screen. You almost feel as if you are being DROPPED into the film. The "IMAX" (yes, I am putting quotes around it now) seating at the Burbank 16 has NOT changed one bit since it was just a regular multiplex!!!

A screen that's, oh, about 20% bigger than a standard multiplex theatre should NOT BE CALLED IMAX!!!!!! This is FALSE ADVERTISING.

When the show started, I lasted about 2 minutes before walking out and demanding a refund.

THE PROJECTION WAS DIGITAL!!! You think we can't tell the difference between digital projection and beautiful, crisp 70mm film?!!!? Guess what. We can. I don't care if you DO have two DLP projectors running simultaneously. It's not the same. Not by a long shot.

IMAX should be ashamed of itself as a company. Willfully downgrading itself to nothing more than a standard **** multiplex screen on a wee bit of steroids. Disgusting.

If this is the future of IMAX, then your company is heading towards a PALE shadow of itself. What once was a unique film going experience is now almost completely indiscernable from a regular multiplex screening.

Congrats guys. Paying too much attention to how to do things on the cheap just completely destroyed your company.

If it's NOT 70mm film. If it's NOT a giant square screen. If it's NOT seating which puts you in the center of the action...Then it's NOT IMAX.

I got my money back. I won't be tricked again. And I suggest you start informing customers in advance what is a TRUE IMAX presentation, and what is a ****** digital presentation on a kinda-bigger multiplex screen.

A former enthusiast,

Mike Williamson
Burbank, CA
http://www.nickeleyepictures.com/
http://www.blacklight-pictures.com/

coldmachine
03-09-09, 04:12 PM
Wow, how can that be right? The guy must be mistaken

Peter gets a 70mm presentation from just a single "Scheisse Kontrast" unit.:D:D

Art Sonneborn
03-09-09, 04:44 PM
Wow, how can that be right? The guy must be mistaken

Peter gets a 70mm presentation from just a single "Scheisse Kontrast" unit.:D:D

It has been appropriately relegated.

Art

Art Sonneborn
03-09-09, 04:46 PM
Great article. (http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090308/LETTERS/903089997)
Looks like digital Imax provides no where near the same experience as celluloid.




But...but...IT's NOT IMAX!

By Roger Ebert

From Mike Williamson, Burbank:
The writer is a filmmaker.

I tried to go see WATCHMEN in supposed "IMAX" today at a newly installed IMAX theatre here in my local BURBANK multiplex.

Below is the email I sent to IMAX after walking out a couple minutes in.

* * *

Whoever is receiving this email, I encourage you to forward to the appropriate departments, including all top staff.

I just got back from the new IMAX in Burbank, CA and I have to say...THIS IS NOT IMAX!

As soon as I walked in the theatre, I was disgusted. This is NOT an IMAX screen. Simply extending a traditional multiplex screen to touch the sides and floor does NOT constitute an IMAX experience.

An IMAX screen is gargantuan. It is like looking at the side of a large building ,and it runs vertically in a pronounced way. It is NOT a traditional movie screen shape. A traditional multiplex theatre can not house a true IMAX screen without STRUCTURAL CONSTRUCTION to raise the ceilings, etc.

What I saw today was more like the European standard of 1:66-1. IMAX screens are constructed to be your ENTIRE field of view. This screen was PATHETIC by IMAX standards.

I understand in a movie like WATCHMEN, which is not shot in IMAX, that the image will be letterboxed on the screen. HOWEVER, for a movie like THE DARK NIGHT, specific scenes would NOT be able to be shown in the proper aspect ratio at this theatre. It would be CROPPED at the top and bottom. What's the point? Why would I pay extra for this???

Additionally, IMAX seating traditionally puts you IN the movie. The screen is so large that the seats loom ABOVE it, and close to the screen. You almost feel as if you are being DROPPED into the film. The "IMAX" (yes, I am putting quotes around it now) seating at the Burbank 16 has NOT changed one bit since it was just a regular multiplex!!!

A screen that's, oh, about 20% bigger than a standard multiplex theatre should NOT BE CALLED IMAX!!!!!! This is FALSE ADVERTISING.

When the show started, I lasted about 2 minutes before walking out and demanding a refund.

THE PROJECTION WAS DIGITAL!!! You think we can't tell the difference between digital projection and beautiful, crisp 70mm film?!!!? Guess what. We can. I don't care if you DO have two DLP projectors running simultaneously. It's not the same. Not by a long shot.

IMAX should be ashamed of itself as a company. Willfully downgrading itself to nothing more than a standard **** multiplex screen on a wee bit of steroids. Disgusting.

If this is the future of IMAX, then your company is heading towards a PALE shadow of itself. What once was a unique film going experience is now almost completely indiscernable from a regular multiplex screening.

Congrats guys. Paying too much attention to how to do things on the cheap just completely destroyed your company.

If it's NOT 70mm film. If it's NOT a giant square screen. If it's NOT seating which puts you in the center of the action...Then it's NOT IMAX.

I got my money back. I won't be tricked again. And I suggest you start informing customers in advance what is a TRUE IMAX presentation, and what is a ****** digital presentation on a kinda-bigger multiplex screen.

A former enthusiast,

Mike Williamson
Burbank, CA
http://www.nickeleyepictures.com/
http://www.blacklight-pictures.com/

Well Alan, we saw that coming when IMAX decided to go digital without any kind of projection systen that approached IMAX film projection. IMO IMAX is done.

CINERAMAX
03-09-09, 08:23 PM
Wow, how can that be right? The guy must be mistaken

Peter gets a 70mm presentation from just a single "Scheisse Kontrast" unit.:D:D

He was missing the Puerto Rican sisters effect that's why.

coldmachine
03-10-09, 04:13 PM
He was missing the Puerto Rican sisters effect that's why.

Thanks for the clarification. I knew I was missing something.

Its a great relief to know that the CINERAMAX secret underground laboratories in Geneva aren't employing all those research Ph.D's for nothing.:D

Dizzman
03-11-09, 04:12 PM
yesterday i went to a presentation at a local planetarium, and it was two sony 4K's spreado ver the dome with a childrens presentation (zula patrol) and i have to say it was pretty darn cool. i was hard pressed to find a seam.

in order for imax to do "digital" there are options, but i think that many of these would end up costing almost the same as the imax system.

as the author points out... it is the presence in the film that counts. and any smaller screen kills that.

Dbuudo07
03-12-09, 10:39 PM
My local cinema is still using 70mm and according to the manager, there's no plan to change in the near future. I'm going to try to watch a few releases before they do change for my own memory.

Lee Stewart
03-19-09, 04:40 PM
A traviesty!

Like Rolex coming out with a "value" line of watches . . .

To be sold at Target and Wally World.

:mad:

Art Sonneborn
03-24-09, 03:21 PM
yesterday i went to a presentation at a local planetarium, and it was two sony 4K's spreado ver the dome with a childrens presentation (zula patrol) and i have to say it was pretty darn cool. i was hard pressed to find a seam.





But IMAX has no plans to use multiple 4K projectors for their digital theaters.

Art

ChrisWiggles
03-29-09, 03:04 PM
I have never seen a digital that could touch IMAX film, let alone 70mm. Hope it will exist some day, but it doesn't exist now.

Batman in IMAX at IMAX was amazing.

Lawrence of Arabia in 70mm was unforgettable.

You're gonna need more than just 4k to match these experiences. I am sure we will get there, but we are not there yet.

johnbr
03-29-09, 03:42 PM
I think they need the new 8K systen runing at 60fps.

Dbuudo07
03-29-09, 03:52 PM
I think they need the new 8K systen runing at 60fps.

Why 60fps? Why not 48? I hate 3:2 pull down.

ChrisWiggles
03-29-09, 09:24 PM
I like 24fps. Call me a old fashioned. :)

Dbuudo07
03-29-09, 09:26 PM
I like 24fps. Call me a old fashioned. :)

So do I, but if they're going to multiply the frame rate, do it in even numbers.

johnbr
03-30-09, 08:47 PM
Why 60fps is when they were working on showscan they found that the eye works at 60fps.So no fickler.

Dbuudo07
03-31-09, 01:15 AM
Why 60fps is when they were working on showscan they found that the eye works at 60fps.So no fickler.

I can't believe what I'm hearing! They're actually going to use 3:2 pulldown at the theater for a movie. I'm shocked! SHOCKED!

CINERAMAX
03-31-09, 05:04 AM
Showscan had 60 sprockets (http://www.showscan.com/company_2_2.htm) if I recall correctly

Art Sonneborn
03-31-09, 12:02 PM
I think they need the new 8K systen runing at 60fps.


That's the problem they aren't going up from the res of the standard screens next door.

Art

Dbuudo07
03-31-09, 01:08 PM
Showscan had 60 sprockets (http://www.showscan.com/company_2_2.htm) if I recall correctly

Yes, but they're filming at 60fps if I read correctly.