As to not muddy the water over in the JVC thread Phil had quoted
, and I think both these comments have some merit here.
Josh said “Realistically, how much IMAX content do you actually watch? TV shows are not IMAX. 1.85:1 movies are not IMAX. (Even if they played in IMAX theaters, they were not composed any differently than rom-coms or low-budget indies.) The amount of material actually photographed in IMAX format and composed for the added vertical immersion of IMAX is infinitesimal compared to the many thousands of movies and TV shows photographed by traditional means.
The problem with installing an oversized 16:9 screen is that it treats anything 16:9 or 1.85:1 as if it were IMAX, so suddenly The Bachelor is the most epic and immersive thing you can watch in your home theater.”
then replied “And the other issue is your vertical field of view fatigues much quicker (than horizontal) and should be 25 degrees or less upwards from the level. Imax deals with this by using stadium seating - you are floating in the middle of the screen, height wise. Few home theaters can do this.”
As to Josh’s comment he always incorrectly conflates having a screen tall enough to contain IMAX 1.89 movies as to automatically means everything else close to that AR should become IMAX sized. No one has ever suggested that nor has anyone suggested The Bachelor is an epic presentation. There may be a few minutes of footage in each episode where it is a long shot of a nature setting where the show is being made that might look pretty amazing as IMAX but the way a show would need to be graded is on it as an entirety and all the close up work would lead me away from viewing it IMAXed.
He is correct other non-IMAX movies are shown in IMAX theaters and even TV shows a few times. IMAX handles these showing very much on a PIA method of presentation. Everything shown at IMAX is not wall-to-wall. They also employ their very expensive IMAX DMR process to media if they intend to show it more immersive. Not unlike how I suggest PIA applies a different factor to DVD or BD or UHD BD.
Blake makes an honest observation about vertical FOV. IMAX1.89 true IMAX1.89 this headroom displays non-critical content and is intended above and below to round out your upper and lower peripheral vision. This is no different than how the sides of a scope movie are shot giving us more lifelike side peripheral content. Studies have been done and some are linked in the opening post as to where our eyes look when watching movies. We walk around every day in real life with our peripheral vision fully filled in all directions and we don’t find it at all fatiguing. The reason is we don’t and can’t take it all in at once and there is no reason to expect we will watching an illusion of real life.
IMAX does have very high stadium seating but so do many of the modern commercial theaters. Seating recline has to be factored in as well as viewing upright to some extent. Most home seating recline way more than normal seating and having the feet out makes row spacing way greater.
If someone wants to explore at home IMAX immersion they will have to be willing to think about a lower screen bottom and if they want two-row seating they should think about the second row being more of a conventional upright seat style. There is little IMAX immersion to a second row if you place them 6’ back from the first row anyway at home unless you really have a massive screen. People willing and wanting IMAX immersions have to be willing to maybe only raise their feet half way during IMAX movies. That shouldn’t be a big problem as I’m always told they are less than 1% of the movies we watch. Watching the NBA IMAXed isn’t a problem you can look around your toes to see the score.
I will attach a couple pics showing real IMAX and IMAX at home recommendations along with one showing what is included in IMAX 1.89 that is not in scope and what is left out of true IMAX 1.43.