AVS Forum banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 17 of 17 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
728 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Hi all,

For the last 3 days I was in Atlanta on business, and decided to go to the Mall of Georgia to see the Imax X-Games movie. This was INCREDIBLE. Period. Even if you aren't a big X-games fan (Moto-X freestyle, BMX, skating, street luge), I bet you'll love this. I'll be waiting anxiously for the DVD.


Stayed on for their showing of Spiderman on the Imax screen. Just a warning for those thinking of doing the same, its pan-and-scan. When I saw the opening credits in 4:3 I thought uh-oh. Please please please change to widescreen... alas, it was not to be.


I can't find on the net what the OAR for Spiderman is (haven't seen it on in regular movie theatre), but I'm sure its not 4:3.


This might make you laugh (at least shake your head): this was opening night for Attack of the Clones, I couldn't stay for the 12:00 showing, but out of curiousity I asked the ticket jockey if it was being presented in digital video format (heard that something like 50 theatres were doing so). He sait "wait I'll go ask my manager..."

then he came back and proudly said "yes, it is in digital sound!"


Oh well, at least Imax is getting it right!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
637 Posts
I watched Spiderman in the Imax theater in Irvine last night. I ordered tickets online and was presented a choice of the "big theater" and I took it not knowing it was the Imax. Same experience as you pan and scan. Regardless I liked watching it and stayed to hear the old 60's intro after the credits. It would have been cool if it was with the cartoon though...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,649 Posts
Originally posted by kedelbach:


"Stayed on for their showing of Spiderman on the Imax screen. Just a warning for those thinking of doing the same, its pan-and-scan. When I saw the opening credits in 4:3 I thought uh-oh. Please please please change to widescreen... alas, it was not to be."

_____________________________________


No! IMAX isn't a panned and scanned film format...though its aspect ratio mimics television's 4:3 AR.


Spiderman was most likely shot in Super-35, a format that use the whole 35mm camera aperture to capture images. This yields a FULL FRAME image, one which can be transformed to generate other aspect ratios like 1:85:1, and, with a slight anomorphic "squeeze," scope ratio -2:40:1 for regular 35mm cinema projection.


They must to have used enough of the Super-35 full frame (eliminating things like mike booms, microphones, etc., from audiences' view) to make it suitable for Imax projection. NO panning nor scanning takes place.


I saw Fantasia 2000 in Imax in Las Vegas couple of years ago; it did not bother me in the least that the image's AR was 4:3...simply 'cus the Imax screen is huge...titanic......absolutely monumental; it doesn't need to be "wide-screen"...


-THTS
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
728 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Interesting - now I'm really wondering what the OAR is. Yes I enjoyed the movie regarless of the AR, but I did move to the very last row shortly after the start - it was simply too large a picture to sit any closer - the IMAX X-Treme film can get away with a larger picture becuase it sure looked sharper, better rendered etc to me. 70mm vs 30mm ?


In any event - thanks for the input. Can anybody confirm this?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,207 Posts
Try www.imdb.com, they might have Spiderman's aspect ratio. I saw Spidey on a medium sized screen and it was a half decent experience. Then I saw Ep. 2 on another medium screen and I must say I thought the sound from Spidey was much better! Ep 2. just didn't have any volume. It sounded like I watched on a TV.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,739 Posts
Spiderman was matted @ 1:85:1 I have suspiscion we might even see it 1:78:1 on DVD ;) At least I jope.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,649 Posts
Originally posted by kedelbach:


"Interesting - now I'm really wondering what the OAR is."

_____________________________________________


As I said...Spiderman was most likely shot in Super-35 in which case the camera negative yielded a full frame image...

____________________________________


"the IMAX X-Treme film can get away with a larger picture becuase it sure looked sharper, better rendered etc to me. 70mm vs 30mm ?"

_________________________________________________


Of course IMAX is superior to 35mm; the huge format is incredibly sharp, bright, and highly detailed (E-Cinema will never match this format's capability!). Of course, there is (was -now is mostly used in Las Vegas for rides that mix vision and movement to thrill audiences) Show-scan...another similar film format, one that runs at a higher frame rate (fps).

Even 70mm suffers by comparison to these mega-frame film formats, although not to the degree 35mm does...

_________________________________


"Can anybody confirm this?"

_______________________


How about it, Lee Antin...Vern Dias???... :)


-THTS
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,134 Posts
Even if "Spiderman" was matted to 1.85 from a Super 35 negative, why would the spend the money to finish the full frame special effects just for an IMAX release? Most movies shot that way only complete the special effects in the widescreen ratio, it's cheaper that way.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,355 Posts
Just wanted to post that Spiderman was presented in the proper 1.85:1 aspect ratio at the IMAX theater at Muvico, Pointe Orlando, Orlando, FL . It was awesome!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,649 Posts
Originally posted by joekun:


"Even if "Spiderman" was matted to 1.85 from a Super 35 negative, why would the spend the money to finish the full frame special effects just for an IMAX release? Most movies shot that way only complete the special effects in the widescreen ratio, it's cheaper that way."

___________________________________________


Umm......picture this in your head, if you would, please:


Someone projects 35mm theatrical prints' reels of, for example, Aliens, Gremlins 2, and Jurassic Park (indulge me!) on a projector not equipped with an aperture plate.

What will you see? Why...a full frame, unmatted image, mostly affecting non-special effects shots. When special effects shots appear, what will you see then? Why...a hard matted image in the 1:85:1 aspect ratio!

Properly projected with aperture plates installed viewers will only get to see these movies in the wide-screen aspect ratio, which is the US standard for spherically ("flat") photographed movies: 1:85:1.


Given that someone else has also mentioned seeing Spiderman in an Imax theater in its "wide-screen" AR of 1:85:1 in this thread is reason enough to pause at this point and ask: is it Imax's own or the wide-screen ratio?

It sounds to me like regular 35mm theatrical prints might being projected in Imax theaters to complement their revenues, yet those films does not appear to have been converted to the Imax format... :confused:


-THTS
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,321 Posts
Kurt,


How bizarre, as I live 4 miles away from the Mall of Georgia and I too saw Spider-Man at the Regal IMAX. They simply did not matte the film frame properly to 1.85:1 so you and I saw more image than should have been present.


The 2.39:1 ratio movies look a lot better on that IMAX screen and are framed properly. I have seen Planet of the Apes, The Last Castle and LOTR:The Fellowship of the Ring on the IMAX and they looked considerably better than Spider-Man did.


The problem is that these 35mm "blow-ups" simply don't have enough resolution for the size of the IMAX screen. Now if only they would show 70mm prints on the IMAX screen!!:D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,134 Posts
Quote:
What will you see? Why...a full frame, unmatted image, mostly affecting non-special effects shots. When special effects shots appear, what will you see then? Why...a hard matted image in the 1:85:1 aspect ratio!
Frank,


Very interesting, I didn't know that the FX shots were hard matted while the non-FX shots were left full frame for the theatrical prints, thanks for the info. It would certainly be odd to see a 4:3 picture and then suddenly have it change to 1.85 every time there was an FX shot.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
94 Posts
Yes, but have any of you seen the Imax® movie "FX" about the making of movie visual effects (well, at least in the good old days before everything was rendered on a computer)? In that film, Industrial Light & Magic re-did the opening "blockade runner" scene from the original "Star Wars" (Princess Leia's ship fleeing the Star Destroyer) in the 70mm Imax® format and it is jaw-dropping awesome. Why can't Lucas pursue his film franchise in this format? Or better yet, the film manufacturers (Kodak etc.) and film studios pursue this technology (along with the Showscan® higher frame per-second display rate; which I have seen as well--also impressive) to try to "up-the-ante" so to speak against Lucas' digital crusade and the competition from the growing home high-definition market?


Give us a reason to still go to the theater to get something we can't get at home.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,649 Posts
Originally posted by Nightingale:


"Yes, but have any of you seen the Imax® movie "FX" about the making of movie visual effects (well, at least in the good old days before everything was rendered on a computer)? In that film, Industrial Light & Magic re-did the opening "blockade runner" scene from the original "Star Wars" (Princess Leia's ship fleeing the Star Destroyer) in the 70mm Imax® format and it is jaw-dropping awesome."

__________________________________________


Indeed, and more so in Imax...but just as jaw-dropping were the F/Xs shots of the original trilogy as all miniature model scenes were photographed with VistaVision (8-perf, horizontal) cameras (rumors has it that Lucas bought all of the then existing VV cameras and refurbished them to working condition just for that purpose), resulting in truly tridimensional imagery. So why f... around with the success of the well worn path of the true and tried?... :rolleyes:


-THTS
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
82 Posts
Quote:
Ep 2. just didn't have any volume. It sounded like I watched on a TV.
I noticed this too, especially with the opening music....cheesy.
 
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top