Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Titanic - the IMAX 3D experience

This is topic Titanic - the IMAX 3D experience - April 2012 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=000225

Posted by Jonathan Goeldner (Member # 4854) on 01-23-2012, 10:53 PM:

PARAMOUNT PICTURES, TWENTIETH CENTURY FOX AND LIGHTSTORM ENTERTAINMENT TO SET SAIL AGAIN WITH JAMES CAMERON’S OSCAR-WINNING “TITANIC” WITH A WORLDWIDE 3D RE-RELEASE ON APRIL 6, 2012

Movie’s Re-Release to Coincide With the Centennial of the Ship’s Sailing

HOLLYWOOD, CA (May 19, 2011) – Paramount Pictures, Twentieth Century Fox and Lightstorm Entertainment jointly announced today that James Cameron’s “TITANIC” will be re-released worldwide on April 6, 2012.

The release, which marks the 100th anniversary of the Titanic setting sail (April 10th), will present the film in 3D for the first time ever.

Written, directed and produced by Cameron, “TITANIC” is the second highest grossing movie of all time. It is one of only three films to have received a record 11 Academy AwardsÒ including Best Picture and Best Director; and launched the careers of stars Leonardo DiCaprio and Kate Winslet.

Called “A spectacular demonstration of what modern technology can contribute to dramatic storytelling” by Variety upon its release in 1997, the long in the works 3D conversion is being overseen by Cameron and his Lightstorm producing partner Jon Landau who produced the hit movie.

Said Cameron, “There’s a whole generation that’s never seen ‘TITANIC’ as it was meant to be seen, on the big screen. And this will be ‘TITANIC’ as you’ve never seen it before, digitally re-mastered at 4K and painstakingly converted to 3D. With the emotional power intact and the images more powerful than ever, this will be an epic experience for fans and newcomers alike.”

“This new presentation of Paramount’s top-grossing film is particularly special because 2012 is the 100th anniversary of our studio. Paramount has had the pleasure of introducing audiences to some of the all-time classics of cinema during that century of moviemaking and we cannot think of a better way to mark the occasion than with this re-release of ‘TITANIC’,” said Brad Grey, Chairman and CEO of Paramount Pictures.

Commented Fox Filmed Entertainment Chairmen and CEOs, Jim Gianopulos and Tom Rothman: “Our 30-plus year relationship with Jim Cameron and Lightstorm has been enormously rewarding, from ‘Aliens’ to ‘Avatar’, and the global phenomenon of ‘TITANIC’ remains one of the greatest sources of pride in our history. We are pleased to allow a new generation of audiences to experience the film in its brilliant digital restoration in 3D.”

------

new news:

http://www.slashfilm.com/video-blog-...-preview-imax/

The other reason I would recommend viewing the movie at an IMAX theatre is that you will see more than you would in a normal 3D theatre. Cameron announced that since the film was shot in Super 35, they were able to remaster the entire film at a larger aspect ratio than its original (and normal 3D re-release) theatrical distribution. This means you’ll get more image at the top and the bottom, which hopefully provides a more immersive experience.

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 01-23-2012, 11:09 PM:

Wouldn't that only be true in IMAX theatres that still have the old IMAX 4:3ish screens? Don't all the new LIEMAX digital installs have standard scope ratio screens? How will they expand top and bottom of the image?

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 01-23-2012, 11:30 PM:

quote: Jonathan Goeldner
Cameron announced that since the film was shot in Super 35, they were able to remaster the entire film at a larger aspect ratio than its original (and normal 3D re-release) theatrical distribution. This means you’ll get more image at the top and the bottom, which hopefully provides a more immersive experience.

that! The movie was composed for a scope ratio. THAT is the ratio it should be presented in. [Mad]

Posted by Ian Parfrey (Member # 5122) on 01-23-2012, 11:44 PM:

[Roll Eyes]

It is almost, aesthetically speaking, impossible to recompose framing from 2:35 to 4:3 no matter what the originating format is.

Yet more [bs]

from Cameron. After his comment on a recent post that "..you can't shoot 3D on film", anything he now says is just rubbish.

It's one thing to promote one technique over another, but to deliberately lie to skew public opinion is just blatant marketing spin.

Posted by Edward Havens (Member # 4715) on 01-23-2012, 11:59 PM:

From a 1997 ASC article...

quote:
According to Carpenter, Titanic's IP, like that of True Lies, was made at CFI on Kodak's 5244 intermediate stock, utilizing a wetgate direct-contact printer at full aperture, running at 180 feet per minute. A precision ground-glass was used to focus the image through the liquid, while fine-grade filters made overall color compensations. The 2.35:1 anamorphic squeeze was not made at this point, as the IP would also be used to make prints in other aspect ratios.

And since Super 35 captured the image at 1.33:1, it's probable the IMAX 3D version would be 1.43:1, if that's what Cameron and Carpenter decided to do.

Posted by Aaron Garman (Member # 1653) on 01-24-2012, 12:01 AM:

I'd rather just see it in 2D on 35mm or 70mm in a room with a bright steady projector and a great EQ. Somehow I doubt I can find that anymore.

AJG

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 01-24-2012, 12:20 AM:

Will there even be 35mm prints of this re-release? I wonder if they will screw up the soundtrack mix.

After all, I'm sure Cameron WANTED to screw up the soundtrack mix, but simply didn't have the technology at the time.

Posted by Victor Liorentas (Member # 5272) on 01-24-2012, 12:42 AM:

I hope someone like Chris Nolan shoots a ground breaking 3d movie on film with astonishing results! [Big Grin]

I also wonder if there will be 35mm and 15/70 prints?
Perhaps Cameron is above that now. [Frown]

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 01-24-2012, 02:16 AM:

Well if there is 15/70 prints, they won't be worth it as the aspect ratio will be screwed. Also doesn't most IMAX theaters run Hollywood product without masking? That is such poor showmanship and lowers contrast. I've also never liked IMAX sound systems. Liemax/Digimax is as we all agree, a complete joke.

5/70 was and forever will be the proper format for Titanic, but I think most people will agree it will never happen as Cameron doesn't WANT people to see how good it can look.

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 01-24-2012, 04:31 AM:

quote: Edward Havens
And since Super 35 captured the image at 1.33:1, it's probable the IMAX 3D version would be 1.43:1, if that's what Cameron and Carpenter decided to do.

Doesn't matter if it was phographed full-frame super 35, it was COMPOSED for 2.39:1 scope. END OF EFFIN STORY. Just because there happens to be stuff above and below the scope ratio doesn't mean you are intended to SEE it. The fact that there is clean image above and below the scope frame only means that they had one hellofa time keeping extranious set gack from getting in the field, not that the cinematographer was composing for full frame; he COMPOSED for a 2.39:1 presentation.

They can't have it both ways...either they composed it for full-frame presentation back in 1997, which is ludicrous because that would mean that what everyone saw in theatres back then was cropped to shit, OR they composed it to be seen in scope, which means that this incarnation, when it plays in the pittiful few theatres that still actually have real IMAX square-ish screens, you will be seeing, not picture content that means anything, but a scope picture sitting in the midde of the screen with a lots of extranious, non-essential "material" on top and bottom of the original image. Only ONE of these scenarios can be correct and true to the DPs composition.

Contrary to all the babeldegook these sleezy used salesmen are spewing, patrons going to spend extra $$ to see it in the real IMAX theatres are not getting anything "more" just because non-essential image above and below is visible. In fact, that extra stuff will more than likely detract from the orginal compostion and give a totally different feel to the film.

Big screen IMAX patrons will just getting the same nonsense that they would get if a theatre were to run a film intended to be screened cropped 1.85:1 wide screen but instead, presented it in 1.37:1 just because there happened to be full-frame exposure on the print. It's total horseshit. For Cammeron to claim differently with all that trash talk means all he did was make sure there was no extranious set gack in the shots, but he can't be serious thinking trying to convince anyone that they are seeing something BETTER in big screen IMAXs. Just shows he will do anything to make an extra buck. Him and Lucas...Hollywood whores all.

Posted by Paul Gordon (Member # 3320) on 01-24-2012, 07:15 AM:

There was 5/70mm print in Canada until a few months agao. We were going to play at our 70mm festival this year. But since the new 3d flick is coming out, Paramount decided to junk the mint condition DTS print. 70mm in 5perf never again I guess.

Posted by Edward Havens (Member # 4715) on 01-24-2012, 08:52 AM:

Actually, Frank, Cameron was well-known for shooting in Super 35 specifically so he had options when it came to theatrical (both 35mm and 70mm, which have different aspect ratios) and home video.

But, as I said, it all depends on what Cameron and his DP decided to do when it came to the IMAX conversion. We'll know for sure in a couple months.

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 01-24-2012, 09:28 AM:

quote: Frank Angel
Just because there happens to be stuff above and below the scope ratio doesn't mean you are intended to SEE it.

Exactly! A great example of this is Terminator 2's original VHS release which was uncropped to 4:3. When Arnie smashes the payphone for some change, you can see how it is rigged to crush when he hits it. Right as he hits it, the camera pans down and the coins start falling out. It works great in scope when you don't see what you're not supposed to see. But I imagine Cameron will CGI the boom mics and other stuff like that out. Still not cool as the extra top and bottom stuff will be more of a distraction. Will characters now have too much headroom?

Posted by Victor Liorentas (Member # 5272) on 01-24-2012, 09:54 AM:

In a way the headroom makes it like traditional Imax films where the main action takes place in the center.

Posted by Brian Guckian (Member # 1678) on 01-24-2012, 01:14 PM:

quote: Ian Parfrey
Yet more from Cameron. After his comment on a recent post that "..you can't shoot 3D on film", anything he now says is just rubbish.

Yes it's odd because of course Cameron himself has shot stereo material using film before - for the ground-breaking Terminator 2: 3-D ride at Universal Studios, which was shot on dual-strip 65mm rigs and presented Cinerama-style via 3 pairs of 5-70 projectors!

In similar vein:

quote:
I hope someone like Chris Nolan shoots a ground breaking 3d movie on film with astonishing results!

There is a fascinating reference to Linwood Dunn and Film Effects' Dynavision process here:

Wide Screen Movies Magazine - 3D Processes

quote:
Which brings us to another system that tried to combine the best of both worlds, when veteran cinematographer Linwood G. Dunn and Film Effects of Hollywood developed a system they called Dynavision. This system was intended to combine the brightness and steadiness of 70mm projection while eliminating vertical parallax error which plagued dual strip presentation. Dynavision was an 8 perf 70mm system which printed left and right frames from a dual rig 65mm set up in an over and under format, left over right and with each frame now reduced from the usual 5 perfs to only 4. Apparently the system worked well, and with an extremely wide aspect ratio, resulting from the reduction in frame height, of 2.77:1 must have looked impressive on a large screen. However, I can find no record of any feature or short that was released commercially in this system (please tell me if you know of one).

So - for truly astonishing results, one could shoot dual-strip 65mm, enlarge for dual-strip 15-70 release, reduce for over-under 8-70 release and over-under 35mm release too. All the advantages of film, and no more headaches! [thumbsup]

Posted by Tom Mundell (Member # 4555) on 01-24-2012, 04:38 PM:

quote: Brad Miller
Liemax/Digimax is as we all agree, a complete joke.

I agree, all of my experiences with Liemax have been unimpressive at best, but I guess in general are people believing their advertising? It seems like they've done well enough that more continue to be converted/built?

The other thing I tend to worry about is how will this round of monkeying with the picture and sound affect any upcoming blu-ray release? I really, really don't want them to release only the Imax version kinda like they did with Tron: Legacy.

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 01-24-2012, 08:56 PM:

quote: Victor Liorentas
In a way the headroom makes it like traditional Imax films where the main action takes place in the center.

And how many traditional IMAX screens are left? 10? 20? Most of these engagements will probably be FLAT, including those in LIEMAX (which is no taller than FLAT and you are not allowed to add in the bottom of the screen which is unused 100% of the time).

I wonder if it will get nominated at the 2012 Academy Oscars for Best Picture again.

Posted by Victor Liorentas (Member # 5272) on 01-24-2012, 10:11 PM:

I think I read 44 real Imax screens which show features.

Posted by Jonathan Goeldner (Member # 4854) on 01-24-2012, 10:58 PM:

but given the running time of 'Titanic' (194 minutes) won't this pretty much relegate this to a IMAX-Digital release only?

Posted by Kurt Zupin (Member # 2751) on 01-25-2012, 01:52 PM:

It was 48 for MI4 and the Dark Knight Rises Prologue. 52 total, 4 being in the UK. I'm sure it's right around that number, give or take a couple.

Yes, at its current run time of 194min we would not be able to show it. Avatar was pushing it as is, it had full credits though. Could of shortned them and done maybe 3-6 more minutes. Still not enough for Titanic.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 01-25-2012, 01:58 PM:

The dual projector 15/70 systems could do it. Sure it would take 3 changeovers, but it could be ran non-stop.

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 01-25-2012, 04:46 PM:

I just love how they're exploiting the centennial of the disaster to exploit the disaster even further!

Posted by Edward Havens (Member # 4715) on 01-25-2012, 05:51 PM:

One could argue it's crass to even make a movie about the Titanic disaster, but since that's been happening since... oh, a month or so after the sinking of the Titanic... I think we've gotten past that point.

It makes perfect and logical sense to re-release Titanic this year, and nowhere in the trailers or other advertising material does Paramount even mention the centennial. I'd be willing to bet a good number of people are unaware, for better or for worse, of what this year 2012 represents in terms of the Titanic.

Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 01-25-2012, 09:03 PM:

In addition to the 100th anniversary of the sinking of the Titanic on April 15th, a lot of other historical events took place in 1912. Both Arizona and New Mexico became states as the 47th and 48th. Sun Yet Sen established the Republic of China early in January , 1912.

Cinematically, Paramount Pictures was established in 1912.

-Claude

Posted by Antti Nayha (Member # 4980) on 01-30-2012, 06:08 AM:

quote: Joe Redifer
And how many traditional IMAX screens are left? 10? 20?

quote: Kurt Zupin
It was 48 for MI4 and the Dark Knight Rises Prologue. 52 total, 4 being in the UK. I'm sure it's right around that number, give or take a couple.

Now, I know this might come a surprise to some of you guys [Wink]

but the world is actually a bit larger than North America and the UK. There are dozens and dozens 15/70mm screens globally – as of January 24th, the exact number is 106. Of course, some of those are dome screens and/or science theatres, but many are showing features as well.

According to what I’ve just heard, they’re installing new 15/70mm systems in China as we speak.

Posted by Dick Vaughan (Member # 540) on 01-30-2012, 08:55 AM:

quote: Brad Miller
The dual projector 15/70 systems could do it. Sure it would take 3 changeovers, but it could be ran non-stop

Brad

The twin projector IMAX 1570 systems , such as our SRs,can run 158 minute of 3D . You can't do changeovers on 3D .

Running 2D we could theoretically run 316 minutes non stop. Start on right projector change over to left at 158 mins.

Posted by Kevin Cook (Member # 6557) on 01-30-2012, 12:17 PM:

Not only is it Paramount's 100th Anniversary but it is also the 100th Anniversary of the real Titanic's sinking

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 01-30-2012, 12:22 PM:

quote: Dick Vaughan
The twin projector IMAX 1570 systems , such as our SRs,can run 158 minute of 3D . You can't do changeovers on 3D .

You can if you ditch that silly 3D crap! (But you're right, I forgot Cameron was cheezing it up.)

Posted by Victor Liorentas (Member # 5272) on 01-30-2012, 02:51 PM:

I pray he makes a 2d 15/70 option and even some 5/70 print's would be fantastic if not more so!
He has talked up "how even in 2d this new cleaned up version looks amazing" so he should let us see it in the best formats properly.
It's not like these prints will not pay their way!
I want 70mm!

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 01-30-2012, 04:35 PM:

quote: Antti Nayha
the world is actually a bit larger than North America and the UK.

What is "the UK"? Did you see the latest picture of Earth from NASA?

Here's the old one.

Here's the new one.

At least they took the picture of the FRONT of the Earth this time! [Smile]

Posted by Jonathan Goeldner (Member # 4854) on 02-01-2012, 10:52 AM:

quote: Joe Redifer
What is "the UK"? Did you see the latest picture of Earth from NASA?

Here's the old one.

Here's the new one.

At least they took the picture of the FRONT of the Earth this time!

and if you look really carefully you can see my house... [Big Grin]

Posted by Bob Bregazzi (Member # 5623) on 02-01-2012, 11:36 AM:

Knocking the UK are we?

Posted by Jim Henk (Member # 3628) on 02-18-2012, 02:35 AM:

I'm sure it's not the case, but didn't Sarah Palin say that she could see the Earth from her porch?

I'm so sorry. All right doctor... I'll come quietly...

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 02-18-2012, 09:27 AM:

Actually it was Tina Fey who said the original thing that's led to all those related Sarah Palin jokes.

Posted by Pablo O'Hana (Member # 6804) on 02-28-2012, 11:05 AM:

www.IMAXinfo.net has got LOADS of information about the IMAX screens, dimensions etc. Titanic will be released in full format IMAX.

Posted by Edward Havens (Member # 4715) on 02-28-2012, 11:28 AM:

Not much good the site is. Biased, too much information taken word-for-word from other better sites, couldn't even find a real strip of IMAX film for its comparison to 35mm picture, and the strangest spelling of "opposed" I have ever seen ("a-pose").

Posted by Victor Liorentas (Member # 5272) on 02-28-2012, 11:34 AM:

I know we are getting it on 35mm but it's not clear if it will be 2d or Tech 3d?

Posted by Marcel Birgelen (Member # 6801) on 02-28-2012, 12:38 PM:

quote: Dick Vaughan
The twin projector IMAX 1570 systems , such as our SRs,can run 158 minute of 3D . You can't do changeovers on 3D .

In many local cinemas around here we have a magical, old fashioned solution to this: intermission!

I guess, many people will love you, if you give them a short break halfway around the movie. Most real IMAX theatres were never designed for people hanging around almost three hours anyway [Wink]

Posted by Ben Wales (Member # 92) on 02-28-2012, 12:59 PM:

Forget seeing it in 3D Imax, Jump on a Plane to Belfast (where it all began) and see the DVD "Big Screen" Screening on a Barge! [Eek!]

Titanic Screening

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 02-28-2012, 05:46 PM:

IMAX Sydney will be playing it in 15/70 and will be having an intermission. I wonder where it goes?

Posted by Jock Blakley (Member # 6552) on 02-28-2012, 06:02 PM:

Ugh. There's still an original 5/70 print in Australia that we show from time to time but of course it's on embargo now.

Fox (TITANIC's distributor down under) have at least assured us that they won't junk the print, and their word is worth slightly more than Paramount's...

Posted by Kurt Zupin (Member # 2751) on 02-29-2012, 03:13 AM:

That website is so bad, its almost good. Glad I could add to the traffic for Pablo. Think he had 22 visits now.

Looking like we will be doing the same as Sydney. Good thing we have two QTRU's, one for each eye. Plenty of room for both parts of each eye. Can't wait to see who will be the first person to thread up Part 1 of Left Eye and Part 2 of Right Eye. Should be fun times.

Posted by Cameron Glendinning (Member # 3516) on 03-01-2012, 07:41 AM:

quote: Kurt Zupin
Can't wait to see who will be the first person to thread up Part 1 of Left Eye and Part 2 of Right Eye. Should be fun times.

I really hope that it's not me!

Posted by John Lasher (Member # 968) on 03-02-2012, 09:45 PM:

The intermission could probably go right about where tape 1 of the VHS version ended.

Posted by Jonathan Goeldner (Member # 4854) on 03-02-2012, 10:12 PM:

^ which was where? (although I must admit Cameron makes three hours go by rather quickly)

Posted by Jock Blakley (Member # 6552) on 03-03-2012, 06:16 AM:

It feels like three years running it in 5/70 reel-to-reel [Razz]

Posted by Tim Asten (Member # 4051) on 03-03-2012, 03:18 PM:

The four disc Special Edition dvd of Titanic has the film spread over two discs. The intermission can be seen here. [Smile]

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 03-03-2012, 04:12 PM:

Interesting how the DVD turns up the room lighting. I didn't even see any changeover cues.

Posted by Aaron Garman (Member # 1653) on 03-03-2012, 04:49 PM:

The LaserDiscs's disc break was in the same spot. It's a very natural stop in the film and perfect for an intermission.

AJG

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 03-03-2012, 05:37 PM:

Fixed it for you:

quote: Aaron Garman
One of the LaserDiscs's multiple disc breaks was in the same spot. It's a very natural stop in the film and perfect for a second intermission.

ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ

Posted by John Lasher (Member # 968) on 03-03-2012, 09:40 PM:

I never saw Titanic on VHS so I don't know at what point tape 1 ended.

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 03-05-2012, 05:31 PM:

Wasn't that an end of reel point on 35mm too?

Posted by Pablo O'Hana (Member # 6804) on 03-06-2012, 07:44 AM:

quote: Kurt Zupin
That website is so bad, its almost good. Glad I could add to the traffic for Pablo. Think he had 22 visits now.

Cheers guys, nice welcoming to the forum from you all.

Posted by Bill Duelly (Member # 3612) on 03-14-2012, 08:45 PM:

No that was not a reel end, but that was where Cameron said he would have put the intermission. There was also more to the scene with Rose and Cal, which would have been used if they did do the longer version with intermission...

Posted by Sean Weitzel (Member # 244) on 03-30-2012, 11:52 AM:

It does not appear that either the Esquire Imax in Sacramento or the Metreon in San Francisco (both 15/70 houses) are going to run Titanic in 15/70. There is nothing on the upcoming shows schedule for Esquire and the Metreon bills it as RealD 3D.

Posted by Joseph L. Kleiman (Member # 3097) on 03-30-2012, 03:26 PM:

It's only playing in two IMAX auditoriums in Northern California - digiminIMAX in Fairfield and 1570 at METREON. The advance preview on 4/4 is not in IMAX and in SF is showing at the Van Ness.

I believe in total only 6 prints were made of the film in 1570.

Posted by Cameron Glendinning (Member # 3516) on 03-31-2012, 06:33 AM:

Sydney Australia recieved there print made up, no interval tag, does anyone know if it would be made up with an interval in mind or a good spot for it?

Posted by Victor Liorentas (Member # 5272) on 03-31-2012, 10:08 AM:

Is anyone getting it in 35mm?

Posted by Cameron Glendinning (Member # 3516) on 04-01-2012, 08:50 PM:

Our test run last night answered all our questions [Smile]

Posted by Victor Liorentas (Member # 5272) on 04-01-2012, 09:02 PM:

How was it?

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 04-01-2012, 10:17 PM:

quote: Pablo O'Hana
Cheers guys, nice welcoming to the forum from you all.

Welcome to the forum! If you have hung around here at all, you should know that this place will give you plenty of constructive criticism, if you deserve it. For example, your site has this sentence:

quote:
The screen is a stretched vinyl painted silver to stop any reflection from the projector.

That's completely false. The only reason you can even SEE the picture is due to its reflection. If it didn't reflect you'd just be looking at a black hole.

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 04-02-2012, 02:16 AM:

quote: Tim Asten
The four disc Special Edition dvd of Titanic has the film spread over two discs. The intermission can be seen here.

Geez, you think they could have had enough classly showmanship to put up an "Intermission" frame instead of that inane "Insert Disc 2." What do they think, that everyone will sit there in the living room thinking the film was over, or that they will just sit there hitting the remote to get the player to skip to the next "chapter"?

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 04-03-2012, 08:11 AM:

If that's a website for an IMAX theatre, I'm surprised IMAX will allow that website to include the use of the term "LieMAX" and the other digital-bashing commentary.

Posted by Jonathan Goeldner (Member # 4854) on 04-05-2012, 05:24 PM:

the IMAX-Digital presentation I saw at Tysons Corner featured it almost full frame, but with black borders on the sides of the image - is this 1.66 then??

are the REAL-D presentations in it's OAR of 2.35?

oh and the post-conversion 3D job - top notch! one word: amazing

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 04-05-2012, 06:09 PM:

Yeppers .. all in nice 2.39:1 presentations.

If one can catch the XtraBrite (6fL) version, it's worth it.

Posted by Jonathan Goeldner (Member # 4854) on 04-05-2012, 08:59 PM:

^ that's what I'm worried about, my neighborhood theater offers side masking (which is ideal for 2.39 films, but the light output of the Sony DP is set way too low for my taste ('How To Train Your Dragon' opening sequence was so dark it rendered the 3D let alone the visual coherence of the scene totally lacking)

Posted by Jonathan Goeldner (Member # 4854) on 04-07-2012, 10:11 PM:

come on, a penny for someone's thoughts

Posted by Blaine Young (Member # 3992) on 04-17-2012, 05:04 PM:

Pacific Science Center in Seattle is running it in Digital. They were told that the 15/70 prints were 94 reels. They simply didn't want to bother with it.

Posted by Kurt Zupin (Member # 2751) on 04-18-2012, 02:45 AM:

The Pacific had no choice, if they wanted to run it they were going to have to run it in Digital. They didn't get to choose if it was 15/70 or Digital. IMAX only struck 5 prints of Titanic in 15/70 and those went to LA, NY, Detroit, London and Sydney.

Posted by Joseph L. Kleiman (Member # 3097) on 04-18-2012, 03:06 PM:

I wish it was showing in 15/70 in Detroit. I really do. Unfortunately, that IMAX theater was mothballed last September.

But it is showing in Dearborn at the Henry Ford, one of the highest grossing IMAX theaters in the country and one of the locations where the Titanic artifact exhibition is currently showing. I have a feeling that Ron, being the Titanic fanatic he is, threatened to close down the theater if he didn't get the film. [Wink]

I'm sure there will be a long shelf life for the film prints in second-run status on the museum circuit.

Posted by Victor Liorentas (Member # 5272) on 04-18-2012, 03:09 PM:

I plan to go to Dearborn this Saturday! They are also showing Titanica!

Posted by Jonathan Goeldner (Member # 4854) on 04-19-2012, 04:15 PM:

quote: Kurt Zupin
The Pacific had no choice, if they wanted to run it they were going to have to run it in Digital. They didn't get to choose if it was 15/70 or Digital. IMAX only struck 5 prints of Titanic in 15/70 and those went to LA, NY, Detroit, London and Sydney.

where in NY is this playing in 15/70?

Detroit? how odd.

Posted by Edward Havens (Member # 4715) on 04-19-2012, 04:22 PM:

I found it odd that our IMAX digital print of Titanic has small black bars on the left and right sides of the screen, even though it does not appear they are using floating windows. But it's pretty clear how versatile Super 35 was for Cameron in 1997 that he do both traditional widescreen and IMAX fifteen years later from the same negative.

Posted by Jim Henk (Member # 3628) on 04-20-2012, 01:24 AM:

And where in LA? Thanks!

Posted by Allan Young (Member # 6332) on 04-20-2012, 02:15 AM:

NY - AMC Lincoln Square
LA - Universal Citywalk

Posted by Kurt Zupin (Member # 2751) on 04-20-2012, 04:07 AM:

I meant Dearborn, I forgot that I was talking to people that would know about the Henry Ford Museum. Tell people its in Dearborn and they say where's that. Then you tell them its a suburb of Detroit and there like Oh Ok.

Posted by Victor Liorentas (Member # 5272) on 04-23-2012, 12:53 PM:

OK I visited the great Henry Ford Museum in Dearborn Michigan!
What a great place!
Watched Titanica in Imax 15/70 2D and it was great! The image on the silver screen was very well lit up with minimal hot spotting and very little light falloff at the far edges.I was in the best middle seat near 3rd row from the back. Perfect seat and I was allowed to keep that seat for Titanic 3D!
Watching Titanic 3D in the 15/70 Imax presentation was fantastic!
It was sharp ,bright and the 3D seemed to have miles of depth. The best 3D I have seen and I had no eyestrain at all.The Real D I saw a week earlier was crap in comparison to this.
The sound at this theater was fantastic with the volume level set perfectly just right! They had a 10 min intermission at the "well you may get your headlines Mr Ismay".
The staff at this theater were insanely helpful and polite and I urge everyone who can go here to do so at the speed of light!
I will now be comparing the Liemax version to this...

Oh and the picture was opened up to show the whole super 35mm frame as shot! Titanic 3D was sold out! At least 400 seats at a 5:45 pm showing on a Saturday.