|
|
This topic comprises 4 pages: 1 2 3 4
|
|
Author
|
Topic: End date for 15/70 IMAX
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."
Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 11-27-2013 02:56 PM
quote: Lyle Romer
With the laser projection I'm dissapointed that IMAX didn't decide to do a precision aligned 4 projector system to make 8K instead of the overlapped 2 projector 4K.
There are numerous reasons. First, and most obviously, there's little if any 8K content to play. 4K is the current, standard top end, for DI, CGI, effects compositing and videography. A few movies have been digitally treated in 8K resolution, but often with certain compromises.
Then there's the issue of IMAX wanting their 2nd generation d-cinema projection system to work on screens possibly larger than the ones that showed 15-perf 70mm film. IMHO, that's not really a good idea. It would be a lot better to keep screen sizes down to some limit in size that way we can actually see a noticeable improvement with sharpness & detail over the fuzzy or jaggy images IMAX' 2K system has been showing.
As it stands, not nearly enough movies are being produced in 4K as it is. Too many movie productions prefer to render the final product in mere 2K either to make 3D more economical or produce 2D movies in 2K to just to save even more money. 4K has 4 times the pixel count of 2K. Even with all the latest jumps in computer processing power, 4K will always take a lot longer and cost more than 2K to render.
While I would love to see Hollywood movies move past the 4K barrier, up to 6K, 8K and even higher, there's various obstacles standing in the way of that. Computer technology must improve to handle the data bandwidth of storage needs of such formats in a fast & practical manner. Imaging chips for video cameras and projectors aren't there yet. I imagine camera and projector lenses would need some serious improvement.
Outside of technology, higher resolution imagery will reveal flaws and other shortcomings in movie sets, costume designs, crap that got into the shot but might have otherwise been missed at a lower resolution, etc. Finally, actors are extremely age conscious. A female star past the age of 30 or 40 might not like a camera and lens system that shows every skin pore, fleck of pancake makeup and any hint of aging that might be taking place.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 4 pages: 1 2 3 4
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|
Home
Printer-friendly view of this topic