Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Will Tron 3D have 15/70mm engagements?

This is topic Will Tron 3D have 15/70mm engagements? in forum Large Format Forum at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=14;t=000211

Posted by Sean Weitzel (Member # 244) on 11-03-2010, 04:40 PM:

Just curious if anyone who might be in the know can confirm whether or not Tron 3D will have 15/70mm print runs for traditional Imax theaters?

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 11-03-2010, 05:55 PM:

IMAX Sydney have it listed as Coming Soon. They are 15/70.

Posted by Joseph L. Kleiman (Member # 3097) on 11-03-2010, 09:18 PM:

Yes. TRON will have IMAX 15/70 prints made. In fact, a number of 15/70 theaters participated in TRON Night. For the film, first run will be in 3D only, but second wave will see some 2D deployments on both flat and dome screens. The switch from 2.4:1 to 1.7:1 that takes place during the film is most noticeable in a traditional IMAX environment.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 11-03-2010, 10:51 PM:

Wasn't this movie shot entirely with a digital 3D video camera setup? I don't like "LieMAX" but if the movie is originated in digital 3D with only native HDTV resolution what's the point in blowing the movie up to 15-perf 70mm at all?

I ask this because I've seen a couple movies shot in "digital" that were blown up to 15/70 prints, Superman Returns being an anger inspiring example for how it was hyped. I was very very unimpressed. 2K/HDTV imagery absolutely does not have the native resolution level needed to address the size of film-based IMAX screens. An analogy would be me taking the low res thumbnail image on my Film-Tech profile and blasting it up on a billboard print. It's crap!

Posted by Marc Jensen (Member # 3561) on 11-03-2010, 11:47 PM:

quote: Bobby Henderson
Wasn't this movie shot entirely with a digital 3D video camera setup?

Not exactly. The real world footage was only shot for a 2-D presentation. Once our perspective heads into the Tron world, you'll see content shot with the Fusion Camera System for 3-D.

Posted by Michael Brown (Member # 890) on 11-04-2010, 03:53 PM:

Why couldn't it open up full IMAX ratio of 1.33?

It'll still look good and I plan to see it at an IMAX 15/70 location, but if they have planned to have it open up in certain scenes, then why not go with the full IMAX aspect ratio?

Posted by Greg Anderson (Member # 235) on 11-04-2010, 07:19 PM:

Hey, not bad!

Posted by Michael Brown (Member # 890) on 11-05-2010, 09:14 AM:

Full-Frame IMAX [Big Grin]

Posted by Mike Olpin (Member # 1115) on 11-06-2010, 05:44 PM:

The trailer shifts from matted scope to full frame. I bet the movie does too.

Posted by Mark J. Marshall (Member # 1409) on 11-06-2010, 09:06 PM:

quote: Marc Jensen
Not exactly. The real world footage was only shot for a 2-D presentation. Once our perspective heads into the Tron world, you'll see content shot with the Fusion Camera System for 3-D.

So is the entire movie in 3D? In other words does that mean they're faking the 3D for the non-Tron world stuff?

Posted by Mark Strube (Member # 4190) on 11-07-2010, 03:33 PM:

If both of the trailers released so far are any indication, the real world footage will remain 2D. I suppose this could change, of course... but I hope it doesn't. The transition to 3D could be considered this generation's Dorothy entering Oz.

Posted by Kurt Zupin (Member # 2751) on 11-08-2010, 01:05 PM:

The "Real" world stuff will be 2D and the Tron stuff will be 3D.

Thats funny Mark, I had written a response the other day that said the same thing. About how this was the generations OZ, with the shift.

Also, none of this will be full IMAX frame. It will be like all of Disneys other DMR's. Fill alot of the screen, but not all it. It will be side to side full but there will still be blank screen. It just looks like it fills the screen because its black on the top and bottom like when the Credits roll.

Posted by Michael Brown (Member # 890) on 11-08-2010, 04:59 PM:

Some of it will be in 2.35 and some sections will open up to 1.85 is what i'm assuming going by the trailers.

Posted by Caleb Johnstone-Cowan (Member # 3710) on 11-08-2010, 07:40 PM:

I've seen about ten minutes in IMAX Digital 3D and it wasn't full frame, looked like a normal Scope DMR conversion except the black bars are less pronounced on the smaller IMAX Digital screen. Everything we saw was in the Tron world. I was impressed by what I saw.

Posted by Tom Petrov (Member # 1534) on 12-05-2010, 05:22 PM:

Its funny how the original Tron used 70mm at time will the new TRON will be shown on 70mm IMAX while filmed in Digital.

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 12-05-2010, 05:57 PM:

quote: Tom Petrov
Its funny how the original Tron used 70mm at time will the new TRON will be shown on 70mm IMAX while filmed in Digital.

Almost as funny as how badly you constructed that sentence.

Posted by Tom Petrov (Member # 1534) on 12-05-2010, 07:14 PM:

quote: John Wilson
Almost as funny as how badly you constructed that sentence.

Wow! I can't believe I wrote that.

I've been drinking these = [beer]

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 12-05-2010, 07:23 PM:

No kidding. [Razz]

Posted by Ian Parfrey (Member # 5122) on 12-05-2010, 08:42 PM:

He's not as think as you drunk he is. [beer]

Posted by Kurt Zupin (Member # 2751) on 12-10-2010, 05:21 AM:

Looking at the frames tonight and this is going to be one of the few rare IMAX DMRs thats going to fill up almost all of the frame. It will fill 3/4ths, only leaving some black at the top of the screen. Better then a crappy transfer that leaves big black bars on top and bottom. Will have more after Monday Morning

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 12-10-2010, 10:49 AM:

The big question will be how badly Blur-O-riffic the native 1080p video image quality ends up being when blown up to IMAX size. I have not been impressed at all by other video-originated movies blown up to IMAX. I'm not sure how this will be any different. It's one area where film-based IMAX may have no advantage at all over the movie shown in a Lie-MAX installation.

Posted by Paul Gordon (Member # 3320) on 12-10-2010, 11:51 AM:

It should look pretty good...as most of the Tron world is CGI right? so can't they output that at any rez they want? 2k-8k?

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 12-10-2010, 01:17 PM:

The movie, at least all of the 3D stuff, was recorded using dual 1080p HD quality electronic cameras. Native 2K is all viewers will get. In doing 3D CGI, that kind of busts the budget for doing 4K or better quality renderings. A pair of 2K renderings will have to suffice.

Posted by Kurt Zupin (Member # 2751) on 12-10-2010, 05:27 PM:

I've been look at the trailer for the past 8 months and its looked good. I don't think it will be an issue Bobby. Our tech was in this week and he had just come from showing it to the Director and had seen it about 4 times and he said it looks good and is fun to watch.

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 12-13-2010, 12:23 PM:

quote: Kurt Zupin
It will fill 3/4ths, only leaving some black at the top of the screen. Better then a crappy transfer that leaves big black bars on top and bottom.

Bet it will be like "AVATAR" on the DVD/BR release then - using a 1.77:1 picture ratio.

Posted by Michael Brown (Member # 890) on 12-14-2010, 10:58 AM:

Is anyone planning to go see this in IMAX? I'll propably go next week when I get paid. Hopefully better image quality than Inception.

Posted by Michael Coate (Member # 757) on 12-14-2010, 01:24 PM:

quote: Kurt Zupin
Better th[a]n a crappy transfer that leaves big black bars on top and bottom.

How can it be considered crappy to adhere to an original aspect ratio?

Posted by Kurt Zupin (Member # 2751) on 12-14-2010, 02:22 PM:

Probably should of worded it diffrent, films like Eclipse and Shrek are movies that shoudn't be made into IMAX films. I would ever argue INCEPTION shouldn't of either. If showing it in IMAX adds nothing to the experience then it really is a "crappy" transfer. Never said anything about aspect ratio. If your watching a film on a 60' screen and you are seeing about 40% of hte screen covered your usually not happy. Tron adhere's to its orginal aspect ratio, and it fills almost the entire screena for almost 50% of the time and looks sharp. Michael Brown, if your only going to see it once then it needs to be seen in IMAX. You see it in Digital and your not going to get the aspect changes.

Posted by Michael Coate (Member # 757) on 12-14-2010, 04:54 PM:

quote: Kurt Zupin
If [you're] watching a film on a 60' screen and you are seeing about 40% of [the] screen covered [you're] usually not happy.

Sounds like evidence this IMAX DMR thing was a terrible idea.

Posted by Kurt Zupin (Member # 2751) on 12-14-2010, 11:52 PM:

Thanks for the grammer corrections Micheal... [Roll Eyes]

Posted by Michael Coate (Member # 757) on 12-16-2010, 09:42 AM:

quote: Kurt Zupin
Thanks for the [grammar] corrections [Michael]...

"Your" welcome. [Razz]

Posted by Michael Brown (Member # 890) on 12-16-2010, 07:23 PM:

quote:
quote: Kurt Zupin
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If [you're] watching a film on a 60' screen and you are seeing about 40% of [the] screen covered [you're] usually not happy.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sounds like evidence this IMAX DMR thing was a terrible idea.

I'd agree, unless the image is going to open up to fit all (or most) of the IMAX screen then I don't see the point of IMAX conversion. IMAX screens are sold to the general public on their height (my local IMAX location loves to brag that the screen is the height of so many double-decker buses). To not then use that height is a waste.

Posted by Aaron Garman (Member # 1653) on 12-31-2010, 01:56 AM:

Just saw this 15/70 at Navy Pier in Chicago...and yes, the 1080p is evident: the image just lacked any sort of punch at all. I saw it in 2K DLP 3D a couple weeks ago and found that to be a much more engrossing experience.

AJG

Posted by Mark J. Marshall (Member # 1409) on 12-31-2010, 07:09 AM:

Gee, I just saw it in 15/70 yesterday at the King of Prussia IMAX and thought it was quite awesome.

Posted by Jonathan Goeldner (Member # 4854) on 01-06-2011, 10:40 PM:

I had the same impression with 'Inception' (15/70mm) - the 2K IMAX Digital was no where as fuzzy looking, and looked fantastic

Posted by Jonathan Althaus (Member # 5042) on 01-07-2011, 07:11 PM:

Saw it in 15/70 today, much better than DLP. I really hope some film is filmed entirely in 70mm soon. The full frame scenes were beautiful.

Side note...... Born To Be Wild trailer looked fantastic and the 3D was amazing

Posted by Jonathan Goeldner (Member # 4854) on 01-09-2011, 09:23 PM:

yet according to the American Cinematography article on Tron Legacy, the director always intended and purposefully shot the film in scope (2.35) the shifting aspect ratio for the IMAX engagements were purely done for the marketing/exploitation of the IMAX screen.

Posted by Jonathan Althaus (Member # 5042) on 01-13-2011, 11:55 AM:

Well it worked. Smoke em if you got em

Posted by Sean Weitzel (Member # 244) on 01-17-2011, 11:04 AM:

I ended up seeing this again in 15/70 at the same cinema over the weekend. Chalk this up as the first time I've seen any Imax presentation that had a scratched print. In this case the left eye had black base scratches horizontally a third of the way up that varied in severity. Some reels appeared to be scratch free. Would that have been operator error at some point? This theater has a GT projector.

Posted by Michael Brown (Member # 890) on 01-27-2011, 07:25 PM:

Finally manged to get around to see this.
IMAX 15/70 at The Printworks in Manchester.

Good sound, good image quality and the scenes where the image height open up generally worked foe me. However fairly unimpressed with the 3D. Was this another conversion? I Was actually more impressed with the 3D on Gullivers Travels which was fairly sucky anyway. Couldn't really tell the difference between the 2D and 3D parts on this (without taking off my glasses and looking at the image), plus there were a few moments where I could still see a double image (with the glasses on). I'm thinking possibly I was sat a little to close to the screen.