State of movie theaters: mini rant.

[Sal1950]

Blade Runner 2049 is a fav of mine here at home.
The BluRay Atmos audio track makes for a fun immersive viewing experience.

 

[xr100]

I'm looking for technical details. I wanted to know which screens are to Iexact MAX spec, which ones are still able to show actual IMAX film, and many more.

The LF Examiner page to which Blumlein88 linked is probably the best bet, although I wouldn't necessarily count on it being absolutely up-to-date. The "Fmt" column tells you what kind of projection system(s) is (are) installed--15/70 IMAX, D (Xenon) or DL (Laser.)

There is a list on Wikipedia, too, although it varies in accuracy and the level of information. In particular, I'd caution against taking any screen sizes listed as accurate. But, as I mentioned, it's the geometry that makes it an IMAX, e.g. last row no more than 1x screen width from the screen, rather than getting bogged down in whether it's 85ft. wide or 90ft. wide etc.

Having said that, the Giant Screen Association has published its own specifications, in which 70ft. wide is the minimum "giant" screen width.

Mostly I want to know when or if more 70MM films will be played, like just normal 70MM IMAX films.

15/70 IMAX as a distribution format is deprecated. The projectors are no longer manufactured, and remanufacture of key replacement parts is not possible, requiring the cannibalisation of existent (but disused) projectors.

A brief overview of the main projector types:

• IMAX GT (Grand Theatre) - Xenon light source 15/70 projection used in the "classic"--typically "institutional" (museum etc.)--venues that were purpose-built to IMAX spec. with 1.43:1 screens.
• (IMAX SR, MPX - Smaller scale 15/70 projectors used in e.g. early multiplex installs. I don't think any of them are in use today.)
• IMAX Digital - Xenon light source DLP dual projection. 1.9:1 maximum ratio; 1.43:1 not supported. At least the original version of this was 2x2K, although IMAX has their own proprietary system which allowed for pixel-level alignment, including auto recalibration with slightly "warped" image data being fed to one projector to achieve this. The pixel-level alignment is slightly offset, so the "fill" is better, i.e. a reduction of gaps between pixels on the DLP "grid," and that's the key to achieving smooth "cinematic" images. The "image enhancer" in the projection system "watches" the screen (via cameras) for this. At best, very good. Earlier installs in less ambitiously scaled multiplex conversions... eh. OK.
• IMAX with Laser GT - Laser light source DLP dual projection. 2x4K. It's not possible to align to pixel-level at 4K, so instead the system feeds one projector a lower resolution image than the other, IIRC using wavelet-based processing. Again, proprietary to IMAX (and patented.) Using vertical anamorphic lenses, it's able to fill a 1.43:1 screen. This is the replacement system for IMAX GT 15/70 projection, and many venues have done just that, removing the old 15/70 projection.
• IMAX with Laser "COLA" (Commercial Laser) - Laser light source DLP single projection. 1x4K. Intended for "multiplex" type locations. 1.9:1 maximum ratio; 1.43:1 not supported. The single projection system supports 3D by, IIRC, using a splitter (rather than alternating frames for left/right eye) and so that means the resolution is cut in half. I think it's intended for use on screens up to maybe 80ft. wide. The installs to date in the UK have all been in purpose-built multiplex auditoria with 70ft. or so wide screens.

Note also that you'll need to visit an IMAX with Laser venue for IMAX's 12 channel sound format (adds 4xoverheads, 2xsides.)

There have been endless discussions about "resolution"--the GSA spec. linked to above suggests 8K minimum is needed to satisfy human visual acuity at the front row (0.35x screen width away from the screen in a conformant IMAX or GSA-spec. auditorium.)

Suffice it to say, "resolution" with film is difficult because it doesn't have an absolute hard cut-off as digital does--instead one has to look at "modulation transfer function" plots. Moreover, though, the "real-world" resolution of IMAX, by the time the image gets to release prints, through the projector's lens and on the screen, is nothing like the "theoretical" figures that you'll see for the raw film stock. (Plus, as mentioned, visual acuity, so it becomes akin to "can artifacts be heard at -200dBr?")

(There are other factors in perceived resolution, particularly contrast rather than "pixels" per se. And, with its deep blacks, that's an advantage that laser light source projection has.)

Besides this, most films go through digital intermediates, not to mention are chock full of digital composites and CGI, so any "theoretical" resolution provided by 15/70 is, well, just that. IMO either of the laser systems are fantastic, even for 3D with the single projector "COLA" system, and 15/70 is overrated.

As for the other aspects of whether an auditorium is "IMAX-spec." in other respects, particularly the auditorium's geometry/layout, please see my previous posts. If you want to be absolutely sure, then a purpose-built venue, whether the "institutional" or "multiplex" type, is the best bet. But in the two "iconic" historic venues I mentioned that have had IMAX conversions, both of which are equipped with the IMAX with Laser GT system, a good seat would be fine.

I have never been the ontario musuem to see the super wide pano imax screen, but I don't think it's possible for them to show regular movies there.

All IMAX screens are "slightly curved" (as IMAX say.)

Most venues that had 15/70 projection will, if not upgraded to IMAX with Laser, will have IMAX Digital (Xenon) projection capability alongside it, and quite possibly non-IMAX (DCI-spec.) projection too. If nothing else, 15/70 projection alone is mostly pretty useless when hiring out the venue for corporate events and the like!

As to whether full length "Hollywood" feature films are shown, that's a matter of local programming policy and whether distributors are willing to book releases there. Sometimes they programme mixed content with some division between documentaries and feature films, or if there is a particularly high demand release, or they have 15/70 projection and there is a film that has been released in that format, then for a period the screen will be programmed for that. Interstellar is a good example where this has happened, for instance, at London's Science Museum. (Albeit I hear that's about to upgrade to IMAX with Laser.)

Finally, even though 1.43:1 was supposed to be deprecated, some films do make use of the "full height" format and so in these cases it may be worth seeking out a venue that supports that aspect ratio.

 

[Koeitje]

With regards to resolution: don't forget most movies used to have their CGI done at 2K. But I'm not sure if that is still the case.

 

[xr100]

With regards to resolution: don't forget most movies used to have their CGI done at 2K. But I'm not sure if that is still the case.

Many still are. Render time and all that. (More detailed manual work is needed.) Also, the textures used in CGI are of finite resolution. (Or bluntly put: Don't bet that the textures don't suck.) In fact, I think IMAX actually has a patent relating to processing "bad" regions of CGI with textures that don't cut it.

BTW, in comparing theatrical 4K with consumer 4K (Blu-ray etc.), don't forget that consumer is 4:2:0 colour only.

 

[SIY]

I stopped going to theaters when the annoyance of people talking was overtaken by the double annoyance of people texting while they were talking.

The fact that nearly every new release was stunningly unoriginal and uninteresting didn't help.
/adjusts onion on belt

My wife and I have been enjoying re-releases from the Criterion Collection on our HDTV with Vanatoo speakers. Most are beautifully restored, and there's some gems that we hadn't seen before.

 

[xr100]

I stopped going to theaters when the annoyance of people talking was overtaken by the double annoyance of people texting while they were talking.

The first time I went to the refurbished Odeon Leicester Square--which was the first Dolby Cinema installation in the UK (behind rest of World for Dolby Cinema installs, alas)--the auditorium was almost empty but someone was sitting two seats away. As soon as the end credits rolled, they whipped out their phone and started watching YouTube videos. Yes, really!

I don't generally find people talk or use phones, for the most part, during the main feature. It is irritating during the trailers and adverts. But what's more irritating is the "munch bunch" of people nibbling away at popcorn after the main feature has started; it ruins the first act. And some people have a bad habit of eating one piece of popcorn at a time, constantly reaching into the container and slowly moving each piece to their mouth throughout the entire duration of the film! This is extremely distracting should that person be sitting adjacent.

The answer is, if you can, don't visit during peak times. And it depends on the film and the venue, too. During the Star Wars sequel triple-bill I attended last month, the audience was absolutely silent, and the auditorium was well-filled, too.

My wife and I have been enjoying re-releases from the Criterion Collection on our HDTV with Vanatoo speakers. Most are beautifully restored, and there's some gems that we hadn't seen before.

Perhaps you'd like to offer some examples that you consider to be particularly good?

 

[SIY]

Perhaps you'd like to offer some examples that you consider to be particularly good?

I'm embarrassed to admit that we had not previously seen the Leslie Howard version of Pygmalion. We corrected this oversight last week. Absolutely superb.

On our Leslie Howard kick, we also saw the propaganda 49th Parallel and the always delightful Petrified Forest.

 

[xr100]

I haven't seen a 3D movie in a theater before....just some in my olde LG hdtv unit at home. So, is it worth it to see a 3D movie in a theater?

Yes. Go to a cinema that has "6P" laser projection--that means that there are 3 primary colours at one wavelength for one eye, and 3 slightly different wavelengths used for the other eye. See Wikipedia -- Dolby 3D*. It's much better than polarised 3D (RealD.)

Both Dolby Cinema and IMAX with Laser (GT--the dual laser projection version--not sure what system the single laser projection (COLA) system uses) use this system.

(*Dolby holds key patents, so, yes, IMAX has to license from Dolby! Dolby are or have been mentioned on the sides of the 3D glasses supplied.)

Failing this, you would generally be better off in locations with dual projection, two projectors, one for each eye in 3D "mode." This helps maintain screen brightness, and "flipping" between frames for L/R eyes, as is generally done with single projection systems, is one of the reasons why 3D is disliked (although of course most patrons would never know "why.")

"PLF" branded screens from various operators are more likely to use dual projection, and it's VERY easy to check for yourself by looking towards the projection porthole(s) to see if there's more than one projector in use.

Obviously you'd want to choose a movie that offers high-quality 3D, rather than, say, a bodged post-conversion...

 

[xr100]

Well I think it’s akin to a loudness war with some blockbusters that are basically a 2 hour subwoofer massage

That said we have reference level for a good reason so it should be used otherwise the sound would not be rigth in the subtler moments and it is done rigth in many movies so it’s not all lost it’s frankly much better than most music recordings.

The problem is that the reference level, apart from providing consistency from mixing to theatrical screenings, is foremost there to provide a satisfactory level for dialogue intelligibility. The idea is to have a large amount of "headroom" on top which can be used for "punctuation" at peak moments, not to go "Michael Bay" crazy with wall-to-wall "megablast."

So, if the majority of cinemas play somewhere rather below reference level, the whole system can "break" in respect of dialogue level.

The loudness war has definitively been a problem with trailers. What can be done about that is (digital projection systems are all automated) to reduce the level during the trailers, then raise it back up for the main feature.

I'm not sure what the "loudness war" situation is like with main features. The movie industry has generally been good at creating and, to an extent, adhering to standards.

Although it's generally more effective to make full use of the available dynamic range, I don't mind "megablast"-style wall-to-wall LOUD sound. I mostly visit decent cinemas, many of which are in London's West End and used for premieres etc. and so the systems tend to be well specified and maintained, and can cope with generating very high SPL's without excessive harshness. And you're only in for a couple of hours; constant use of head/earphones is a far greater risk for hearing loss. (Albeit that is a problem, say, for engineers who spend all day mixing sound for movies...)

 

[direstraitsfan98]

The LF Examiner page to which Blumlein88 linked is probably the best bet, although I wouldn't necessarily count on it being absolutely up-to-date. The "Fmt" column tells you what kind of projection system(s) is (are) installed--15/70 IMAX, D (Xenon) or DL (Laser.)

There is a list on Wikipedia, too, although it varies in accuracy and the level of information. In particular, I'd caution against taking any screen sizes listed as accurate. But, as I mentioned, it's the geometry that makes it an IMAX, e.g. last row no more than 1x screen width from the screen, rather than getting bogged down in whether it's 85ft. wide or 90ft. wide etc.

Having said that, the Giant Screen Association has published its own specifications, in which 70ft. wide is the minimum "giant" screen width.



15/70 IMAX as a distribution format is deprecated. The projectors are no longer manufactured, and remanufacture of key replacement parts is not possible, requiring the cannibalisation of existent (but disused) projectors.

A brief overview of the main projector types:

• IMAX GT (Grand Theatre) - Xenon light source 15/70 projection used in the "classic"--typically "institutional" (museum etc.)--venues that were purpose-built to IMAX spec. with 1.43:1 screens.
• (IMAX SR, MPX - Smaller scale 15/70 projectors used in e.g. early multiplex installs. I don't think any of them are in use today.)
• IMAX Digital - Xenon light source DLP dual projection. 1.9:1 maximum ratio; 1.43:1 not supported. At least the original version of this was 2x2K, although IMAX has their own proprietary system which allowed for pixel-level alignment, including auto recalibration with slightly "warped" image data being fed to one projector to achieve this. The pixel-level alignment is slightly offset, so the "fill" is better, i.e. a reduction of gaps between pixels on the DLP "grid," and that's the key to achieving smooth "cinematic" images. The "image enhancer" in the projection system "watches" the screen (via cameras) for this. At best, very good. Earlier installs in less ambitiously scaled multiplex conversions... eh. OK.
• IMAX with Laser GT - Laser light source DLP dual projection. 2x4K. It's not possible to align to pixel-level at 4K, so instead the system feeds one projector a lower resolution image than the other, IIRC using wavelet-based processing. Again, proprietary to IMAX (and patented.) Using vertical anamorphic lenses, it's able to fill a 1.43:1 screen. This is the replacement system for IMAX GT 15/70 projection, and many venues have done just that, removing the old 15/70 projection.
• IMAX with Laser "COLA" (Commercial Laser) - Laser light source DLP single projection. 1x4K. Intended for "multiplex" type locations. 1.9:1 maximum ratio; 1.43:1 not supported. The single projection system supports 3D by, IIRC, using a splitter (rather than alternating frames for left/right eye) and so that means the resolution is cut in half. I think it's intended for use on screens up to maybe 80ft. wide. The installs to date in the UK have all been in purpose-built multiplex auditoria with 70ft. or so wide screens.

Note also that you'll need to visit an IMAX with Laser venue for IMAX's 12 channel sound format (adds 4xoverheads, 2xsides.)

There have been endless discussions about "resolution"--the GSA spec. linked to above suggests 8K minimum is needed to satisfy human visual acuity at the front row (0.35x screen width away from the screen in a conformant IMAX or GSA-spec. auditorium.)

Suffice it to say, "resolution" with film is difficult because it doesn't have an absolute hard cut-off as digital does--instead one has to look at "modulation transfer function" plots. Moreover, though, the "real-world" resolution of IMAX, by the time the image gets to release prints, through the projector's lens and on the screen, is nothing like the "theoretical" figures that you'll see for the raw film stock. (Plus, as mentioned, visual acuity, so it becomes akin to "can artifacts be heard at -200dBr?")

(There are other factors in perceived resolution, particularly contrast rather than "pixels" per se. And, with its deep blacks, that's an advantage that laser light source projection has.)

Besides this, most films go through digital intermediates, not to mention are chock full of digital composites and CGI, so any "theoretical" resolution provided by 15/70 is, well, just that. IMO either of the laser systems are fantastic, even for 3D with the single projector "COLA" system, and 15/70 is overrated.

As for the other aspects of whether an auditorium is "IMAX-spec." in other respects, particularly the auditorium's geometry/layout, please see my previous posts. If you want to be absolutely sure, then a purpose-built venue, whether the "institutional" or "multiplex" type, is the best bet. But in the two "iconic" historic venues I mentioned that have had IMAX conversions, both of which are equipped with the IMAX with Laser GT system, a good seat would be fine.



All IMAX screens are "slightly curved" (as IMAX say.)

Most venues that had 15/70 projection will, if not upgraded to IMAX with Laser, will have IMAX Digital (Xenon) projection capability alongside it, and quite possibly non-IMAX (DCI-spec.) projection too. If nothing else, 15/70 projection alone is mostly pretty useless when hiring out the venue for corporate events and the like!

As to whether full length "Hollywood" feature films are shown, that's a matter of local programming policy and whether distributors are willing to book releases there. Sometimes they programme mixed content with some division between documentaries and feature films, or if there is a particularly high demand release, or they have 15/70 projection and there is a film that has been released in that format, then for a period the screen will be programmed for that. Interstellar is a good example where this has happened, for instance, at London's Science Museum. (Albeit I hear that's about to upgrade to IMAX with Laser.)

Finally, even though 1.43:1 was supposed to be deprecated, some films do make use of the "full height" format and so in these cases it may be worth seeking out a venue that supports that aspect ratio.

Wow. First of all, thank you so much for the most informative post about IMAX I've ever seen. Wish I could throw 1,000 "likes" at you. Please, take my thanks and a virtual high five.

I've a question about the screen at the ontario science center. Do you know how curved it is, and how it effects the picture? I've not been there but the pictures I've seen indicate it's extremely curved, to the point it might detract from the visual experience. However I'm going to the theater in the next month anyway. For the following reason:

They're playing Interstellar, The Dark Knight, Inception and Dunkirk in 70MM again next month! UN-freaking-believable. I had the very blessed opportunity to see The Dark Knight, and Interstellar in 70MM over at the Colosieum theater, back when they had the 70MM projector installed, and were still capable of showing true IMAX film. I know they switched over to Laser only in 2017. But I did see those two there. And it was, still is, some of, if not the best entertainment I've experienced in my life. Better than most of the broadway shows I've seen, or the couple of Cirque de Solois, or live concert performances I've also had the privileged to see.

And one last question, about Inception. I've never seen it in 70MM, and was wondering what, if any, scenes in that movie are shot in 70MM? I have the 4K bluray of it and if I recall none of the scenes on that particular transfer have the full(er) frame format of the Interstellar and The Dark Knight 4K UHD releases, which blow up the image to fill 16:9 televisions. I have to say, Interstellar in 4K UHD, on my 55" OLED, playing back on my JBL 4367, from 7 feet away comes to like 60% there from the full on real deal IMAX experience. Still quite a ways off, but when you're dealing with such a phenomenal experience, 60% is actually enough...

Hrm... well I've gushed on and on about IMAX and for those of you who are still reading, I implore you to listen to me. You absolutely must, must, MUST go purchase a ticket for Interstellar next month. I promise you, it's worth a several hour drive from the states to go see it. Those of you within a few hours of Toronto, BUY TICKETS NOW! You WON'T regret it.

 

[direstraitsfan98]

Also on a side note, regarding 3D, I remember seeing Harry Potter and the half blood prince and only the opening scene was in 3D. I believe it was a laser IMAX 3D movie. It was the best 3D experience I've ever had, outside of Muppets 3D in disneyworld when I was 8 years old.

 

[Icboschert]

Probably the worst recent experience I had was when the theater had powered amps or speakers behind the screen shining bright blue LEDs scattered everywhere on dark scenes. It was terrible. So glad I bought a projector and started my screen and speaker builds!

 

[direstraitsfan98]

Probably the worst recent experience I had was when the theater had powered amps or speakers behind the screen shining bright blue LEDs scattered everywhere on dark scenes. It was terrible. So glad I bought a projector and started my screen and speaker builds!

Shame on them. What theater was it?

 

[Icboschert]

Shame on them. What theater was it?

One of the Marcus theaters in Delafield, WI. Not their premiere venue but nonetheless inexcusable.

 

[bogart]

Wow. First of all, thank you so much for the most informative post about IMAX I've ever seen. Wish I could throw 1,000 "likes" at you. Please, take my thanks and a virtual high five.

I've a question about the screen at the ontario science center. Do you know how curved it is, and how it effects the picture? I've not been there but the pictures I've seen indicate it's extremely curved, to the point it might detract from the visual experience. However I'm going to the theater in the next month anyway. For the following reason:

They're playing Interstellar, The Dark Knight, Inception and Dunkirk in 70MM again next month! UN-freaking-believable. I had the very blessed opportunity to see The Dark Knight, and Interstellar in 70MM over at the Colosieum theater, back when they had the 70MM projector installed, and were still capable of showing true IMAX film. I know they switched over to Laser only in 2017. But I did see those two there. And it was, still is, some of, if not the best entertainment I've experienced in my life. Better than most of the broadway shows I've seen, or the couple of Cirque de Solois, or live concert performances I've also had the privileged to see.

And one last question, about Inception. I've never seen it in 70MM, and was wondering what, if any, scenes in that movie are shot in 70MM? I have the 4K bluray of it and if I recall none of the scenes on that particular transfer have the full(er) frame format of the Interstellar and The Dark Knight 4K UHD releases, which blow up the image to fill 16:9 televisions. I have to say, Interstellar in 4K UHD, on my 55" OLED, playing back on my JBL 4367, from 7 feet away comes to like 60% there from the full on real deal IMAX experience. Still quite a ways off, but when you're dealing with such a phenomenal experience, 60% is actually enough...

Hrm... well I've gushed on and on about IMAX and for those of you who are still reading, I implore you to listen to me. You absolutely must, must, MUST go purchase a ticket for Interstellar next month. I promise you, it's worth a several hour drive from the states to go see it. Those of you within a few hours of Toronto, BUY TICKETS NOW! You WON'T regret it.

Thanks for the heads up! I wonder if I can get my wife to go see it with me...

 

[xr100]

Wow. First of all, thank you so much for the most informative post about IMAX I've ever seen. Wish I could throw 1,000 "likes" at you. Please, take my thanks and a virtual high five.

That's very kind of you to say that, thank you. You're most welcome, I'm glad you liked the post. <returns virtual high five>

I've a question about the screen at the ontario science center. Do you know how curved it is, and how it effects the picture? I've not been there but the pictures I've seen indicate it's extremely curved, to the point it might detract from the visual experience.

***BEGIN EDIT***

EDIT: Just Google'd Ontario Science Center. It is listed as an "OMNIMAX" dome... in which case, yes, being a dome, the screen is very curved. I visited an OMNIMAX some years ago in Midwestern US (there are, and have never been, any in the UK) and it was pretty cool--but, alas, it is not ideal; and you may just end up with neckache watching feature-length movie screenings! The design/geometry of an OMNIMAX is covered in the SMPTE paper that I linked to in a previous post--as noted in this paper, the "OMNIMAX" dome venues were really intended to be "planetarium"-type experiences but ended up being used for "regular" content. Related to the cross-reflection issue mentioned in the SMPTE paper, I found the absence of masking with so much "unfilled" screen area to be a real problem.

I've kept all the content below but note that it applies to "regular" (i.e. non-OMNIMAX/dome) IMAX venues only.

***END EDIT***


As mentioned, IMAX say describe their screens as being "slightly curved." For sure, they are not deeply curved as some other "large format" systems, such as Cinerama (original "3 strip" version, i.e. 3 projectors used, in the example below):

Here's a frame capture from IMAX's promotional video, "Building Movie Magic: The Installation of the Empire Leicester Square IMAX®":

This is shot looking up to the top of the screen frame, so you can see the curvature. (The "Voice of God" upper centre speaker can be seen; they are installing the subwoofers in this part of the video.)

(In the event that anyone reading this wishes to plan a visit to that venue, note it is now the Cineworld Leicester Square.)

Here's a plan of another venue, namely London's BFI IMAX (purpose-built IMAX in a circular-shaped building, 1.43:1 screen, ~87ft. wide):

Measuring on a couple of floorplans for IMAX auditoria of that size, i.e. in the 80-90ft. wide range, the length d as marked in (a cropped part of the above plan) the drawing below is ~10% of the screen width (measured by chord, i.e. straight line across, as has also been added to the original drawing.)

So, for a 90ft. wide screen, the "set back" in the centre would be ~9ft.

Hopefully, that gives some idea of the horizontal curvature that IMAX use.

ViewSonic have published some useful blurb on the benefits of curved monitors; that page also links to an academic paper. Hmm, I'll have to research the subject further at some point...

Otherwise, obviously there are lots of trade-offs and issues with projection systems in terms of locating the projection (which has to be high enough to get a clear unobstructed "view" of the screen,) getting consistent brightness and focus across the screen, screen gain/coating (trade off against off-axis brightness, 2D vs. 3D polarised, etc.), avoiding "hotspotting," achieving correct alignment and "good geometry," etc.

In the case of IMAX, I haven't found the curvature used "detracts" from the experience; on the contrary, it works very well.

IMAX say that they use their own "custom" lenses, and certainly the "geometry" they achieve is very good. Often with digital projection in cinemas, I've found there's rather obvious barrel distortion towards the bottom of the screen. I've also seen, for example, dual projector installations where the alignment between the two projectors is OK at the top of the screen but very clearly out at the bottom, and again, (with IMAX digital projection) IMAX's daily automatic recalibration and "image enhancer" keep screen and between projector alignment in check.

End credits are a good way to see alignment issues, focus, geometry, hotspotting and vignetting (illumination fall-off from screen centre to edge), etc.--although keep in mind that on typical content these problems would not perceptually be as noticeable.

Of course, test charts would be better, so here's one (again a frame capture from the IMAX video linked to above):

Note that the screen isn't quite fully tensioned up, and at the time of the completion of the IMAX conversion (2014), IMAX with Laser was not yet available, so (Xenon lamp) IMAX Digital projection (not quite capable of filling the screen!) was installed as a stop gap for a year or so.

However I'm going to the theater in the next month anyway. For the following reason:

They're playing Interstellar, The Dark Knight, Inception and Dunkirk in 70MM again next month! UN-freaking-believable.

Awesome!

Do you mean full IMAX 15/70? If IMAX with Laser has been installed, presumably the GT dual projection system and not the "COLA" single projector version, I assume the screen has been replaced. For polarised 3D systems, IMAX used a silver coating that was applied (sprayed on) in-situ after the screen was installed. (!)

Also, if that venue had not upgraded to IMAX's current speaker system for "GT" (full size) auditoria, then then the existing sound system would likely have been replaced also, which would yield benefits even when showing 15/70 content that does not support 12 channel sound.

As for "Inception"--see the Technical Specifications page on IMDb. Also:

https://www.slashfilm.com/christoph...ing-65mm-calls-3d-an-interesting-development/

In which Nolan confirms that "only" 5-perf 65mm film was used in shooting, not 15-perf IMAX. So, 15/70 IMAX prints are "blow-ups."

EDIT: Please do post about the experience of watching the movies you mentioned. Especially if OMNIMAX, then it should be most interesting.

 

[xr100]

Probably the worst recent experience I had was when the theater had powered amps or speakers behind the screen shining bright blue LEDs scattered everywhere on dark scenes. It was terrible.

I've never seen that! Are you sure it wasn't reflections from the nosing on the end of the steps in the aisles of the stadium seating structure?

In modern cinemas, these typically are either LEDs with a diffuser in front or fibre optic strips (lit from the ends by LED sources.)

Below is an example of the fibre-optic type. It is a rather poor quality photo that I took in London's Vue West End (flagship site!) when the house lights were not raised at the end of the feature (and therefore patrons ended up using their mobile phone torches to aid navigation out of the auditorium!):

On the bright side (pun not intended!)--on complaining to customer services, some of the lighting mess-ups have yielded complimentary ticket vouchers, one of which was used for the Star Wars triple bill in an IMAX with Laser auditorium last month.

 

[direstraitsfan98]

@xr100 , I have been meaning to respond for a while now, but I think I may do a very long post after I've seen my first standard 70MM film tomorrow. (2001 a space odyssey) But just so you know, I have seen The dark knight, interestellar and dunkirk in 70MM 15pref, I am aware of the differences, yes! I am very much looking forward to seeing how it looks on the ontario place cinesphere screen tomorrow. I believe it measures 80 feet wide, by 60 feet tall which puts it almost at 1.43:1 IMAX ratio. Will take some pictures too and share them, as well as my thoughts on how 2001 looked.

Technically I did see phantom thread in 70mm, but it was a very negative experience which I will get into later next week when I can properly respond.

 

[Eirikur]

My wife and I have been enjoying re-releases from the Criterion Collection on our HDTV with Vanatoo speakers. Most are beautifully restored, and there's some gems that we hadn't seen before.

I recently watched the restored "The Red Shoes" together with my mother (still doing ballet at 83!) - indeed far superior to any previous release.

 

[direstraitsfan98]

2001: A space odyssey in 70MM tonight. Majorly hyped.