Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

IMAX vs. IMAX 70mm: The difference between these two cinema formats

engadget.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 152 posts

Re: IMAX vs. IMAX 70mm: The difference between these two cinema formats

#121

Post by 7373737373 »

I wonder when there will exist camera and (laser) projection systems - and with that, movies - that cover even more of the human visible color gamut

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2015/10/imax-with-laser-supe... mentions that with IMAX Laser:

> Colour-wise, the full Rec. 2020 gamut/space is available—though we weren’t shown any films/trailers that actually made use of this larger colour space; they all used the DCI’s standard P3 colour space.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rec._2020

I have no idea how well the analog film compares there

https://moultano.wordpress.com/2026/06/19/where-to-find-the-...

Re: IMAX vs. IMAX 70mm: The difference between these two cinema formats

#122

Post by toast0 »

bob1029 wrote: post #53

I find the sound system to be more compelling than the projection system. The audio amplification in some IMAX venues are rated for more power consumption than their projector lamp. 15kW across 12 channels in some cases. You could never recreate this part of the experience at home. The power you could replicate but not the acoustics of a gigantic auditorium combined with that power. You can get 20hz floor shaking in…

Underseat subs should get you pretty close, if that's a priority. My home theater seats came with them, but you have to pay extra for the driver(s). Maybe eventually, the single big sub seems fine so far.

Re: IMAX vs. IMAX 70mm: The difference between these two cinema formats

#123

Post by KaiserPro »

tshaddox wrote: post #117
KaiserPro wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It was widely reported that Oppenheimer was color graded photochemically, So I'm deeply sceptical of this. There was a DI colourist in the colour department and the editorial had a digital conform team and a colourist. I'm sure there was some photochemcial fiddling. but it was all conformed digitally and lasered out to be finished. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt15398776/fullcredits/?ref_=tt_c... Photochemical gradin…

As I mentioned, they obvious did a digital intermediary for visual effects shots. For Oppenheimer I don't think they was much CGI, but at the bare minimum I sure they did some digital compositing, so they must have matched their photochemical color grading with digital color grading for some scenes. Also, they had a digital colorist to produce the grade for the DCP anyway, to match the look of the film master. But it…

> so they must have matched their photochemical color grading with digital color grading

The VFX would be matched to what ever the spec would be.

Your argument would hold more water if it wasn't the _editorial_ department that had the DI in it.

In that video from the linked article is them playing back the film on a baselight with a blackboard 2 https://www.filmlight.ltd.uk/products/control/range_cn/index... (it might be a black magic board though)

I mean yes, they _did_ do a photochemical grade. But the edit was assembled digitally, the shot conformed, sent to be cut manually, and then final grade was done photochemically. The Person who assembled the film in 65 said "I get an EDL from avid and assemble to the print"

Conforming film colour in analogue is _massively_ hard. its time consuming and generally not fun to do. so it makes so much more sense to do that digitally.

it would also explain the number of editorial team doing colour, because normally they don't do any of that shit.

Re: IMAX vs. IMAX 70mm: The difference between these two cinema formats

#124

Post by cindyllm »

PaulHoule wrote: post #108
rayiner wrote: post #23

I enjoyed the Odyssey movie, but didn't think it looked that good. Too sharp and kind of fake looking, almost like TV. (To be fair, I don't live in a real city so we just have LieMAX.) Disappointing visually, but I did quite enjoy the "Braveheart meets Greek myth meets Jason Bourne" aspect of the whole thing.

Given that Hollywood is struggling to produce movies that people want to watch I don't think it is in their best interest to allocate much headspace at all to an experience just a few people will experience in a few Capital-C Capital Cities.

[dead]

Re: IMAX vs. IMAX 70mm: The difference between these two cinema formats

#125

Post by kridsdale1 »

SirMaster wrote: post #99
davidferguson wrote: post #14

If you want a very in depth technical look at the differences between IMAX 70mm, 70mm and 35mm for _The Odyssey_, I wrote an article about this last month. https://www.theppt.org/rewind/articles/where-can-you-watch-t... But here are my nit-picks from the article linked here. I'm only commenting on the 15/70mm IMAX parts, because I'm not knowledgable enough about the digital IMAX foramats. > The extra resolution, up t…

I am not even sure why the theoretical resolution matters when they seem to have so much trouble pulling focus on the actors on an old film camera like the IMAX cameras they use to where the footage is fairly blurry in a lot of cases. If they used a 6.5K or 8K digital cinema camera they would get all the advanced autofocus abilities those camera have nowadays to keep the actors sharply focused and would end up with m…

Sensor size. Depth of field is optically different on large frame cell size or sensor size vs 35mm.

That camera you reference is not optically equivalent.

Re: IMAX vs. IMAX 70mm: The difference between these two cinema formats

#126

Post by kridsdale1 »

7373737373 wrote: post #121

I wonder when there will exist camera and (laser) projection systems - and with that, movies - that cover even more of the human visible color gamut https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2015/10/imax-with-laser-supe... mentions that with IMAX Laser: > Colour-wise, the full Rec. 2020 gamut/space is available—though we weren’t shown any films/trailers that actually made use of this larger colour space; they all used the DCI’…

I suspect a lot of this is just established convention in production pipelines.

You can get a Canon R5C and shoot log, and develop in Resolve for Rec2020 today. Hell, an iPhone pro probably can, and show it with the OLED.

Re: IMAX vs. IMAX 70mm: The difference between these two cinema formats

#127

Post by kridsdale1 »

twothreeone wrote: post #104
fsh wrote: post #9

IMHO, the only reasons for using 70 mm IMAX are nostalgia and marketing. Digital movie cameras have far better color reproduction, more dynamic range, zero frame jitter, and plenty of resolution without grain. They are also small and silent which allows far more interesting shots than what is possible with a 70 mm monster. Kubrick and Lean used 70 mm because it was the best technology available at the time. Today, th…

I agree, I actually saw specks when viewing the Odyssee on 70mm IMAX. Sorry, but how is that "better" than any clean, digital projection? And the hoops they apparently jump through to make it work during the shoot to get to that point. Pure nostalgia hysteria.

Digital is not clean. Noise exists whether molecular or voltage on a sensor.

The clean you are used to is likely a compression or digital filter result.

Re: IMAX vs. IMAX 70mm: The difference between these two cinema formats

#128

Post by kridsdale1 »

aulit wrote: post #98
fsh wrote: post #9

IMHO, the only reasons for using 70 mm IMAX are nostalgia and marketing. Digital movie cameras have far better color reproduction, more dynamic range, zero frame jitter, and plenty of resolution without grain. They are also small and silent which allows far more interesting shots than what is possible with a 70 mm monster. Kubrick and Lean used 70 mm because it was the best technology available at the time. Today, th…

Digital cinema projectors are mostly stuck to narrow colour spaces so most often than not people will have better colours on film projections rather than digital. Same thing for dynamic range. Keep in mind that DCP standards have really not been updated since like 2010.

There are still no digital cameras matching the highlight DR of film.

And the human eye is a million times better than that.

Re: IMAX vs. IMAX 70mm: The difference between these two cinema formats

#129

Post by anfractuosity »

danielthor wrote: post #26

An IMAX 70mm drama is by necessity blurry because of the low depth of field you get with such a large image frame. IMAX is great for flyover films, but a movie filmed in it will look amateurish compared to a standard RED digital camera. That said, the Odyssey is a perfectly decent film. It would have looked better if captured with more appropriate technology, but it's an entertaining and uniquely American spin on the…

Isn't the depth of field primarily determined by the aperture of the lens and focal length.

Re: IMAX vs. IMAX 70mm: The difference between these two cinema formats

#130

Post by anfractuosity »

prmoustache wrote: post #119
davidferguson wrote: post #14

If you want a very in depth technical look at the differences between IMAX 70mm, 70mm and 35mm for _The Odyssey_, I wrote an article about this last month. https://www.theppt.org/rewind/articles/where-can-you-watch-t... But here are my nit-picks from the article linked here. I'm only commenting on the 15/70mm IMAX parts, because I'm not knowledgable enough about the digital IMAX foramats. > The extra resolution, up t…

There is no such thing as resolution in films. There is accutance and sharpness, but it is not resolution.

Wouldn't line pairs / mm count as resolution.
Post reply on HN