Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Worst Imax Digital Ever

This is topic Worst Imax Digital Ever in forum Digital Cinema 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=16;t=001464

Posted by Carlos Villalpando (Member # 7411) on 04-12-2013, 10:59 PM:

Hi everyone.
So, the closest IMAX theatre to my hometown is in Guadalajara City, Mexico, which is a 2 hour drive from here.
For somewhat reason not necessary to tell, I was in Guadalajara for 3 days time back in 2011, so, as a film lover, made plans for watching Super 8 to check out the IMAX theatre and enjoy "The IMAX Experience".

How very wrong I was.

There are a lot of places to catch a movie in there, but that particular 21plex is always packed, so we arrived over 1 hour before showtime, and there was a lot of people, as usual, so after a 15min wait in line, we bought our tickets. In the LCD's they use to list showtimes at the complex, I saw something that caught my attention:
"Super 8 IMAX Dig"
Immediately, the word Digital came to my head --as every head with the least quantity of gray matter would do--, but I thought "It can't be that bad".

So, after buying our tickets, we took our spot in line and waited for about another 20 mins, 'til some employee came and let us all in.

As we entered the auditorium, what I first saw was the screen.
It was a big disappointment. The screen was 45 FEET WIDE, yes, 45 ft, for an IMAX theatre, it had that 4:3 aspect ratio that absolutely no one in Hollywood use (excep Christopher Nolan).
There was also a weird shape to the screen, the bottom wasn't a straight line, but a curved line, somewhat like a smile. Also, the first row of seats was placed insanely close to the screen, at about 6 feet from it.

I also noticed all the surrounds were replaced for two big speakers at the rear corners of the auditorium, and the dual digital projectors in the port holes.
We took our seats and waited for showtime.
Lights dim, and commercial ads start. After a little while, trailers begin, and I notice they don't look ANY different to any other digital trailers I have seen.
After 3 or 4 trailers, comes an IMAX trailer where they presume their awesome projection and "laser aligned sound" and such nonsense. After that trailer ends, comes another IMAX trailer, the countdown one, but framed in scope, which I found weird.

So, finally, the movie starts. And although it was played with BOTH projectors on (in 2D), the image didn't look specially bright, in fact, it looked average to me.
The image looked good but not THAT good, in fact, the lack of movable masking toned down contrast and sharpness, and it looked harsh in some spots, which I didn't decide myself if it was caused either by artifacts or a stain in the screen.

But for me, the most disappointing was the sound.
It didn't sound bad, in fact, it sounded crisp, but the volume was WAY too low, in fact, I had to struggle a lot of times to understand dialogue, the showing was in english with spanish subtitles, and although I can perfectly understand an english spoken movie, I was glad there where subtitles in it, since I couldn't completely discern several dialogues.
And I didn't notice any sound coming from the surrounds either.
I guess those big speakers at the rear corners doesn't have the coverage of "normal" surrounds, but since I'm not an expert, I can't assure it.

In short, it was a very disappointig experience, and I don't plan on ever returning to that LIEMAX theatre in a near future.
What shocked me the most, is that this is a former 15/70 venue.
I don't understand why they chose to convert that specific auditorium, since the same chain (and that same complex) have some great non-IMAX auditoriums, with 60 ft screens with an amazing sound system and good digital projection, with no surcharge.

Are there other LieMAX venues as bad as this one?
- Carlos Villalpando

P.S. Since English is a second language, I would like you to rate my language skills, and since I plan on going to the States or Canada in exchange for school next semester, I'd like to have an idea of what I have to improve. Thanks!

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 04-13-2013, 12:36 AM:

With that size of screen, that particular IMAX setup was called an "SR" setup - more of a 'compact' IMAX location and not your huge IMAX complexes nationally advertized.

The house layout is correct for an "SR" setup - of sound and speaker layout.

Posted by Paul H. Rayton (Member # 1817) on 04-13-2013, 12:55 AM:

Hi, Carlos -- from my standpoint, reading what you wrote, your English rates as A-. In other words, pretty darn good! You shouldn't have any troubles taking any courses taught in English.

Posted by Marco Giustini (Member # 4544) on 04-13-2013, 04:09 AM:

With IMAX single surround speakers are normal and if the screen is curved, you'll see a "smiley face" from the average seating position, this is normal too.
Also, Imax use that aspect ratio, it's again normal. It's the Imax aspect ratio!

That said, my last Digital Imax in London was my very last Imax ever, and I reckon my last film at a cinema ever, I'm sick of being ripped off for crap quality.

Posted by Carlos Villalpando (Member # 7411) on 04-13-2013, 10:50 AM:

- Thanks Paul! I'm happy you think that, I plan on taking the Toefl in May [Smile]

quote:
With IMAX single surround speakers are normal and if the screen is curved, you'll see a "smiley face" from the average seating position, this is normal too.
Also, Imax use that aspect ratio, it's again normal. It's the Imax aspect ratio!

The screen wasn't curved, it was a flat screen, but had that weird smiling bottom in it.

Posted by Carsten Kurz (Member # 5396) on 04-13-2013, 01:08 PM:

Maybe the lower masking was on a lose wire.

Whatever - even without a smile, wouldn't have saved the night, would it?

- Carsten

Posted by Marco Giustini (Member # 4544) on 04-13-2013, 01:31 PM:

I am not an Imax expert but I think I recall the same smiley face in the Imax I saw, but that used to be a real Imax. I thought that was done on purpose for some optical reason?

check this out

Posted by Carlos Villalpando (Member # 7411) on 04-13-2013, 03:57 PM:

Marco, that looks like the smile I saw, but, what is it for? [Confused]

quote: Monte L Fullmer
The house layout is correct for an "SR" setup - of sound and speaker layout.

So, do IMAX SR always sound low? Isn't the big, loud sound a part of the "Experience"?

Posted by Jonathan Goeldner (Member # 4854) on 04-13-2013, 04:37 PM:

the only two utterly lame IMAX-D presentations I saw were at AMC Columbia Mall and AMC's Rio's IMAX-D screen - both screens are the smallest I've seen, and in the case of the latter, the sound for 'Titanic' was so loud and oppressive, it was certainly compensating for the diminished screen - never again, it felt like a rip off to me.

Posted by Marcel Birgelen (Member # 6801) on 04-13-2013, 06:07 PM:

quote: Carsten Kurz
Maybe the lower masking was on a lose wire.

Most recent Digital IMAX screens feature the same "smiley face" design and do not feature any kind of movable masking.

Also, I guess the screen was closer to a 1:1.78 (16:9) aspect ratio and not 4:3

I don't know exactly what that strange shape is for, but I guess it is part of the optical illusion they try to pull off, to make the screen look bigger than it actually is.

When they retrofit an auditorium, they also tend to move the screen a whole lot closer to the first row.

Posted by Marco Giustini (Member # 4544) on 04-13-2013, 06:37 PM:

If I remember correctly, when I saw Skyfall at the Imax in London the extra lowest part of the screen was not used, the bottom of the frame was flat. I thought it had something to do with 15/70 Imax.

Posted by Marcel Birgelen (Member # 6801) on 04-13-2013, 06:59 PM:

quote: Marco Giustini
If I remember correctly, when I saw Skyfall at the Imax in London the extra lowest part of the screen was not used, the bottom of the frame was flat. I thought it had something to do with 15/70 Imax.

Most traditional 15/70 screens have an aspect ratio close to 1.44:1 (the aspect ratio of 15/70 IMAX prints) and don't have that strange curvature at the bottom. (I guess the screen is big enough in most cases, so no optical illusions needed [Smile]

.) "DMR blowups" like Skyfall need to deal with the aspect ratio of the movie. Skyfall was released in scope (2.35:1), in a traditional 15/70 IMAX, you're losing a lot of screen real estate with that.

That's also why they choose a different aspect ratio for those Digital IMAX theaters, as they're not going to show any of those classic IMAX features, but just the latest Hollywood blockbusters.

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 04-15-2013, 02:32 AM:

SR: Introduced in January 1998. The first compact system intended to lower hardware and construction costs for multiplex customers, relative to the GT. Consists of two small-rotor projectors that can project 3D or be used in changeover mode to run longer films. Installed in slightly smaller, but still custom-built, auditoriums with screens up to 55x75 feet (17x23 meters).

IMAX used the Sonics sound system ... which can still put out a healthy "Punch" in the sound output.

Posted by Jarod Reddig (Member # 6363) on 04-15-2013, 07:38 PM:

Pertaining to the link above of the IMAX theater with the screen down. I wonder why they have so many different speaker systems behind the screen?

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 04-16-2013, 02:20 AM:

To fill the area behind them huge screens with non-directional sound. IMAX uses 5 channels behind the screen

Posted by Marcel Birgelen (Member # 6801) on 04-16-2013, 04:24 AM:

I guess he was referring to the old speaker system left in place. They will not be used anymore after the upgrade to Digital IMAX...

Most Digital IMAX locations are retrofits of larger auditoriums. They usually leave the old infrastructure (speakers behind the screen, surround speakers) in place. The only reason they bothered to take the old screen down is probably to avoid reflections.

Posted by Allan Young (Member # 6332) on 04-16-2013, 05:58 AM:

quote: Marco Giustini
If I remember correctly, when I saw Skyfall at the Imax in London the extra lowest part of the screen was not used, the bottom of the frame was flat. I thought it had something to do with 15/70 Imax.

The picture wouldn't have filled the screen in 15/70 anyway, but the Skyfall screenings at the London BFI IMAX were digital.

Posted by Jarod Reddig (Member # 6363) on 04-18-2013, 04:50 PM:

Yes Marcel I was and thanks. I can see 3 different systems in that picture. The original IMAX setup with the top center, a JBL two-way, and either a 3 or 4 way from either JBL or EV or another company I don't recognize. Surprised they dont at least try to take down and/or sell the old ones.