|
|
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Does IMAX’s New Laser Projection Deal With Kodak Threaten RealD?
|
Edward Havens
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 614
From: Los Angeles, CA
Registered: Mar 2008
|
posted 10-20-2011 01:17 AM
Great, Bobby. It's good to be principled. But principles don't keep companies afloat.
And for the record, my wife and I love IMAX 15/70. We love 70mm. We love Cinerama. When we were still living in Los Angeles, we would regularly go the Egyptian and Aero whenever the American Cinematheque held their regular 70mm festivals. My wife even volunteered quite a bit of her free time to keep the American Cinematheque website up-to-date, in order to learn what was happening before the general public. We moved within a few blocks of the Cinerama Dome, so we could walk there whenever they showed a Cinerama movie.We would visit the California Science Center regularly to check out any IMAX movie they played something we hadn't seen yet. And when we lived in Manhattan before that, we would regularly go to the Loews Lincoln Square to check out the real non-DRM'ed IMAX movies, be it Wings of Courage or L5: First City in Space or China: The Panda Adventure.
Enjoy your Quixotic battle. You weren't going to have much 15/70 at this point, no matter which way IMAX went. So remain bitter and angry over the change. Or maybe channel some of that anger and work to save some of the 15/70 projectors, to ensure future generations get to enjoy them the way we have.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Keegan O'Brien
Film Handler
Posts: 39
From: Eugene, Oregon, United States
Registered: Sep 2011
|
posted 10-21-2011 07:17 PM
It seems like a lot of assumptions have been made about IMAX's digital roll out. We know, aside from that it's a laser technology system, absolutely nothing about the new projectors. Comments such as - "IMAX Digital is simply not anywhere near as good as real 15/70 IMAX." , are, at this point, completely unfounded in relation to where IMAX is headed come 2013. It's safe to assume that it will be a 4K system, since IMAX has been looking for a 4K replacement for quite sometime, and the manager of "Evergreen Aviation and IMAX" informed me that 4K is being discussed now that they are being forced to go digital. He told me this a month or so before this announcement.
From the buzz of RED Digital's Laser projector, the color and contrast seem to be absolutely breathtaking, which is very hopeful. And, since it's digital, it will obviously be cleaner than current 15/65mm prints. My point being that's it's way too early to come to such rash judgements.
On a slightly different note, I'm curious about what Jonathan said. When I watched the MI:4 trailer in D-IMAX recently, the IMAX filmed scenes switched to 1.78:1, as opposed to 1.44:1, which left empty screen space at the bottom of the screen. My first thought was that it was simply because the system was formated for 1.78:1 since that was the aspect ratio of the feature playing, but Jonathan's comment has me curious. Can anyone confirm whether D-IMAX DLP systems are 1.44:1 capable?
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."
Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 10-21-2011 10:10 PM
quote: Keegan O'Brien
Comments such as - "IMAX Digital is simply not anywhere near as good as real 15/70 IMAX." , are, at this point, completely unfounded in relation to where IMAX is headed come 2013.
Unfounded? Do you care to provide some specifics on how their "laser projection system" will show a projected picture superior in quality to 15-perf 70mm material? I don't think you can. Therefore, my "assumption" is 100% right on target.
quote: Keegan O'Brien
It's safe to assume that it will be a 4K system, since IMAX has been looking for a 4K replacement for quite sometime, and the manager of "Evergreen Aviation and IMAX" informed me that 4K is being discussed now that they are being forced to go digital. He told me this a month or so before this announcement.
Two things: One: 4K is NOT equal to 15/70 resolution. 4K only approximates what standard 35mm can show. Two: now you're assuming things about 4K being used instead of the ordinary de facto standard 2K. The vast majority of Hollywood movies are only rendered in 2K, even most of the ones shown in fake IMAX.
Let's have some damned specific numbers on those laser projectors. What is their native resolution? Every digital projector has a fixed hardware limited maximum native resolution it cannot ever pass. What is it? Further, what in the living damned hell is Hollywood ever going to do to render to this new standard is if is even any better at all than the current 2K (or maybe 4K, but NOT EVER 70MM quality) standard of resolution?
All those ass hats can say is, "well, it's DIGITAL!!!!!!!!!" Ignorant fuckers.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Keegan O'Brien
Film Handler
Posts: 39
From: Eugene, Oregon, United States
Registered: Sep 2011
|
posted 10-22-2011 01:49 AM
quote: Bobby Henderson
Do you care to provide some specifics on how their "laser projection system" will show a projected picture superior in quality to 15-perf 70mm material?
At this time can you provide specifics on how their laser projection system won't show an image on par or superior than 15/65mm? No. Hence, your assumption is just that- unfounded. You literally know nothing about the new projection system, yet you're making rash, bold statements as to how vastly inferior it is. That's silly.
quote: Bobby Henderson
Two things: One: 4K is NOT equal to 15/70 resolution. 4K only approximates what standard 35mm can show. Two: now you're assuming things about 4K being used instead of the ordinary de facto standard 2K. The vast majority of Hollywood movies are only rendered in 2K, even most of the ones shown in fake IMAX.
Considering that most information that is printed on to 15/65mm these days comes from a 2K source file, the resolution difference you're seeing from a 4K digital image of that same 2K file is slim to none. As for native 15/65mm images, of which we all know are rare, if you're lucky and you get a first generation print, you might be able to squeeze out 12K, otherwise you're looking at roughly 8K. Add in the juddering and scratches, you're in a neck and neck battle with the highest quality digital projection on the market, 4K DLP. The buzz is that new laser systems are even better than DLP; we'll see for ourselves soon enough.
Additionally, 4K doesn't approximate what 35mm can show. Super 35mm, which is "standard" technically speaking, resolves to roughly 3.2K. Anamorphic resolves to roughly 4-6K. That being said, by the time the footage is scanned, graded, printed back on to a film master, then scanned again and then mass printed AGAIN, you start to lose resolution, giving theatrical prints an actual resolution of roughly 2K. Add in the judder, scratches, and poor craftsmanship of a lot of today's projectionist, well, you know how it goes.
quote: Bobby Henderson
Let's have some damned specific numbers on those laser projectors. What is their native resolution? Every digital projector has a fixed hardware limited maximum native resolution it cannot ever pass. What is it? Further, what in the living damned hell is Hollywood ever going to do to render to this new standard is if is even any better at all than the current 2K (or maybe 4K, but NOT EVER 70MM quality) standard of resolution?
I would love some information, and more importantly, I'd love to see the projector's in action. Until then I have no opinion on how they compare. But come on, don't pretend 15/65mm's resolution will never be surpassed. I mean, just over 5 years ago 1080p was the standard for digital technology, now there's two cinema digital cameras that capture images at 4K or above (Sony F65, Red EPIC). The day in which digital surpasses 15/65mm isn't here, but it's on the horizon. In terms of projection, RED Digital and Kodak are both convinced that Laser technology is the future. Who knows what we'll get with it; it's exciting.
That all being said, I love 15/65mm to death, and will sorely miss no matter what happens with this new technology.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Keegan O'Brien
Film Handler
Posts: 39
From: Eugene, Oregon, United States
Registered: Sep 2011
|
posted 10-22-2011 03:43 PM
quote: Bobby Henderson
2K shown on a 4K projector or one with even higher hardware resolution is still only 2K.
Yep. Exactly. 2K shown on 15/65mm is still only 2K as well. Although, Roger Deakins firmly believes that a 2K captured image looks better when projected at 4K than 2K.
quote: Bobby Henderson
IMAX will have to do a lot more with their digital projection systems before I will ever be willing to pay the high price premium to see a movie in one of their branded digital theaters. As far as I'm concerned I'd rather watch 2K or 4K projection in a regular theater as a standard price.
I'm sure it differs by location, but in my experience D-IMAX has been cheaper than 15/65mm. $4.00 cheaper to be exact. The price hike from regular to D-IMAX for me has never phased me, since I do enjoy the incredible brightness, sound, color, and screen size of D-IMAX as opposed to a regular cinema. But, I won't pay for it for everything.
quote: Jake Spell
not to mention that the current DLP chips are in the wrong aspect for 15/70 IMAX auditoriums.
That's unfortunate, but after seeing the MI:4 trailer I suspected as much. Sad. Maybe this is what Nolan and Wally were discussing with IMAX before filming TDKR? They had several meanings discussing the logistics of D-IMAX last year, which I thought nothing of at the time. Perhaps they'll have something worked out by the time TDKR comes out?
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2
|
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