my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Digital Cinema Forum   » Worst Imax Digital Ever (Page 1)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Author Topic: Worst Imax Digital Ever Carlos Villalpando Film Handler Posts: 21 From: Villa de Álvarez, Colima, México Registered: Jan 2013 posted 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!  |  IP: Logged Monte L Fullmer Film God Posts: 8367 From: Nampa, Idaho, USA Registered: Nov 2004 posted 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.  |  IP: Logged Paul H. Rayton Expert Film Handler Posts: 210 From: Los Angeles, CA , USA Registered: Aug 2003 posted 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.  |  IP: Logged Marco Giustini Film God Posts: 2713 From: Reading, UK Registered: Nov 2007 posted 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.  |  IP: Logged Carlos Villalpando Film Handler Posts: 21 From: Villa de Álvarez, Colima, México Registered: Jan 2013 posted 04-13-2013 10:50 AM                     - Thanks Paul! I'm happy you think that, I plan on taking the Toefl in May 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.  |  IP: Logged Carsten Kurz Film God Posts: 4340 From: Cologne, NRW, Germany Registered: Aug 2009 posted 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  |  IP: Logged Marco Giustini Film God Posts: 2713 From: Reading, UK Registered: Nov 2007 posted 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  |  IP: Logged Carlos Villalpando Film Handler Posts: 21 From: Villa de Álvarez, Colima, México Registered: Jan 2013 posted 04-13-2013 03:57 PM                     Marco, that looks like the smile I saw, but, what is it for? 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"?  |  IP: Logged Jonathan Goeldner Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1360 From: Washington, District of Columbia Registered: Jun 2008 posted 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.  |  IP: Logged Marcel Birgelen Film God Posts: 3357 From: Maastricht, Limburg, Netherlands Registered: Feb 2012 posted 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.  |  IP: Logged Marco Giustini Film God Posts: 2713 From: Reading, UK Registered: Nov 2007 posted 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.  |  IP: Logged Marcel Birgelen Film God Posts: 3357 From: Maastricht, Limburg, Netherlands Registered: Feb 2012 posted 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 .) "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.  |  IP: Logged Monte L Fullmer Film God Posts: 8367 From: Nampa, Idaho, USA Registered: Nov 2004 posted 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.  |  IP: Logged Jarod Reddig Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 513 From: Hays, Ks Registered: Jun 2011 posted 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?  |  IP: Logged Monte L Fullmer Film God Posts: 8367 From: Nampa, Idaho, USA Registered: Nov 2004 posted 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  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.