IMAX NEWS

nice, i wish you guys all the best. I think you should inquire about films being shot at 48 or 72 frames per second. i know the celluloid doubles/triples in cost but i think IMAX HD would be incredible. I love 24 frames but if you increase the frame rate using the same factor you can please all film and video critics alike with the same feel as film and the vivid capture of video. I hope IMAX will continue using there 15 perf/70mm celluloid prints as digital doesn't come close in colour, blacks, contrast, brightness and depth perception in 2D. I think if you guys can do it is try to get James Cameron's AVATAR printed onto imax prints or to be a bit cheaper and without wastage. get it on standard 70mm widescreen prints using DMR technique to scale the digital footage up to maybe 8k resolution. good luck

Wow you guys have huge platters. I would love to have a look inside the projection booth at IMAX Sydney. The platters at GU george street are tiny compared to yours.

Transfomers 2 is now assembled and sitting on the platter ready for its first screening this week. With 8 boxes of giant film - and about an hour of work per box - this was certainly one big overnight shift for our projectionist.

thanks Julie, it's very much appreciated.

Your better off getting avatar on the 70mm widescreen print as its cheaper if the aspect ratio is the same and would make full use of the frame. No point in wasting 2/3 of 15/70mm prints. And you can scale the 35mm/digital prints up to 8k resolution which "BARAKA" was scanned at. So unless its filmed on 15/70mm film, all widescreen releases should use 70mm widescreen. Meaning more detail and if shot on 70mm you don't need anamorphic compression.

I think an interesting way
to make audiences aware and interest them in 70mm is to make a small presentation before a movie that demonstrates the difference between 35mm standard, 70mm widescreen and 15 perforated/70mm. If u can project 70mm through the GT is the question as 70mm is vertical strips not horizontal like 15/70mm. if you can, then Imax would be able to show 70mm while 35mm cinemas would need upgrade.

also you should see if you can get some footage recorded at 48 or 72 frames which yould use to demonstrate it and people might pay a premium to cover the extra costs.
I think next batman would be good to be filmed in 70mm with some scenes in 15/70mm or the entire movie in 15/70mm

If u'd like to see the difference. then get a regular 35mm anamorphic movie then watch "BARAKA" which is an 8K scanned 70mm print on bluray downsampled to 1080p. The quality difference is HUGE!. There is a special behind the scenes that explains 70mm and compares the 8k scans. It's worth a look. its a simple way for your staff and yourselves to see the advantage imax could have.

the film is on youtube HD with excellent sound.
It should be taken down as it should bought but link is below if u want to see but i recommend the bluray copy

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YlULHNXLGi0

Audience if you can get there, see Movies at the IMAX and support the company that gives you biggest and best cinema experience available.

chris is probably a Blu-ray enthusiast and movie buff like I am. and chris IMAX doesn't really upscale 35mm prints. From what I know they scan in the prints at 4K and then just apply a whole lot of Digital Noise Reduction and Edge Enhancment which makes the image appear sharper but it really isn't cause you lose detail when you wipe away the film grain and you also get terrible halos around edges. The 70mm shot scenes in IMAX will be awesome though. And I sort of question Avatar being shown at IMAX Sydney especially since it was shot at 2K it would look pretty bad digital projection or 70mm simply because you would probably see the pixel structure of the image. Unless they just apply blur to the 70mm print to fix that prob. Anyway Julie are you going to have photographers at the first session of Transformers at midnight? Since me and my friends will probably be the first in line. And I can't wait to see a fresh print of Transformers:ROTF at IMAX Sydney.

For those interested in a technical response from a colleague in the giant screen industry...

1. 48fps: Shooting 48fps is not just a financial challenge (due to increased film stock and lab costs) it's also a technical challenge to find both 65mm/15p analogue image capture and projection gear that can run at the higher frame rate. The giant screen world experimented with the format years ago, and after producing two short subjects dropped it as unviable. That having been said, the results on-screen are phenomenal, and from a film purist's POV would certainly be considered worth the cost and aggravation.

2. 70mm/5p (widescreen): Many of the Hollywood films that have been released to IMAX cinemas utilizing the DMR uprez process were shot to be exhibited 'scope' (short for Cinemascope), a format with a 2.35:1 aspect ratio, unlike classic IMAX's 1.33:1 aspect ratio, so there's certainly a lot of wasted screen real estate when transferring these 'scope' films to a 1.33:1 film format. However, the width of the IMAX image, at 70mm, is 35% greater than it would be if the exhibition film format were 70mm/5p (at 52mm), and the brightness achievable with the IMAX (70mm/15p) projector is considerably greater than that of the best 70mm/5p projectors. In other words, while it would be more efficient to use the 70mm/5p film format for many of these DMR releases, the resulting image would be more grainy and darker on screen.

thanks Julie, Your colleague is correct. It's a shame but understandable. My major gripe is actually not with 15/70mm and 70mm. it's really with 35mm anamorphic being used a standard for filmaking. At the time when it was standardised it was cheaper to go anamorphic. But 70mm i think your colleague would agree is better celluloid to be using for mainstream film. The reason i barrack for it is because it is naturally a wide print similar to cinemascope and there is no need for anamorphic lenses. These distort the image and greatly reduce usable resolution. Due to the shear size of the 15/70mm prints its true that it would be cleaner and brighter so if the prints aren't as big an issue as it use to be then by all means use 15/70mm. It is a better print. But movies like revenge off the fallen what be much better quality and value shot on 70mm prints. Hopefully IMAX will be able to develop a camera that can capture and move the film at 48 or preferably 72 frames per second. I thought it would be a matter of adjusting rolling speed and shutter speed but obviously its much much easily said than done. I guess the real future would be digital as it wouldn't be an issue electronically. I sent michael bay through one of his affiliate links a message on 70mm and hopefully he gets it. Bottom line: if there is no major cost issue all imax's should use the 15/70mm imax prints. They are superior no question there. But movies from major studios should move to 70mm without the anamorphic system. The image would be much better if transferred to an imax print and for general exhibition movies would be much better to watch. Thanks julie for the enquiry. your the first to make a genuine effort to get answers to such an issue.

I found a new 70mm film product and it has been said to be better than imax. The image is said to very 3d. Sounds a good companion for the imax GT to show 35mm or 70mm filmms while GT does the large format. I think IMAX should liscence the SDS 70 system. Its suppose to be incredible. The do a comparisoon and if your projectionist can concur with the findings its amazing. 35mm positive 3-4 million pixels, 35mm negative 12 million pixels, SDS 70mm 22 million pixels. Runs at 48fps and 24. I think its would an awesome addition. http://www.superdimension70.com/ http://www.dmxcinema.com/PressRoom004.html

Yes i know where the IMAX sydney is. its a train ride away. The superdimension 70 system isn't here or in regular theatres simply because you need a film maker with a movie made in the format for the system to be considered for imax venues or cineplexes. thats of course if eg. imax was interested in liscensing the projector. Which from the superdimension 70 website states is how they wish to use the system. I've got nothing against the IMAX. all i'm saying is i think it would be a great addition to the imax and would be better value than 35mm DMR to imax. I'm no professional, i just have a great interest in film and believe with Digital technology moving in, this new format might be more cost effective and superior end product to the audience. We just need a film maker to give the technology a go.

I have seen AVATAR twice at the U.K's Manchester film-based IMAX-GT theatre. The moving image niehther filled the IMAX screen top to bottom or left to right. Why?