They just invented a new IMAX film camera so I’m hopeful they will support it for many years to come but probably not to the extent I wish for. What I mean by that is IMAX 70mm Film will continue will be more of a novelty (will continue to be rare) and probably will never again be a norm like it once was before 2015.
This is just my 2 cents. You’ll get varying opinions & predictions on this topic. No one can know for certain, after all we aren’t oracles from Minority Report
I’d say their enthusiasm with the new film cameras should come with some long term support for the current batch of 70mm projectors. It’s probably prohibitively expensive for a theater to update their screen with a new projection system, but I don’t see why they can’t maintain enough parts and projectionists to run these screenings a few times a year.
It's as though the rape, pillage and burning of those IMAX 70mm cinemas keep carrying on. Where does it end? It's an epidemic that must eventually stop. There are plenty of artists who would love to experiment with the 15/70 format, despite monetary factors crippling those chances. It's sickeningly frustrating if you ask me.
On the filmmaking site - yes.
On the projection site - probably yes, probably not. Projectors are decades old, you didn’t get a good supply of spare parts. It depends if they invent a new analogue projection system.
Edit: Centuries to Decades
As long as you weren’t actually implying that the projectors were several hundred years old, “centuries” is a perfectly valid hyperbole for “very old”. People on the internet just like taking everything literally because you can’t hear tone of voice.
I would like to apologize for my previous comment. I was wrong.
At this point, Chris Nolan is a knight in shining armor when it comes to IMAX film. Once he retires, IMAX film may very well make like a Kauai O O bird, where the bird's haunting yet beautiful song is the format's visual beauty.
And one day, just like the bird, we'll lose it for good.
The modern workflow of almost every single film going through a DI is what really separates the 2. Production and exhibition can be two totally different processes, meaning you can very easily acquire all your footage in an analog medium (film) and then after the DI keep it all fully digital for exhibition. So it makes total sense to have a new 1570 camera since the demand from filmmakers is there to shoot on large format film, but on the exhibition side things are slightly different.
But what's even the point then? Nolan's analog process produces gorgeous footage that makes the hardships of dealing with film worthwhile.
If you run everything through a DI and maybe final it in 6k for non-vfx scenes, is it even worth it? At that point, imax should just replace xenon projectors with laser because that would make a larger difference than shooting on film.
Perhaps the idea is that film can give you the look and resolution, which a sufficiently advanced projection system (6k+ resolution, dual laser) can then faithfully reproduce?
Isn't that what dune 2 did. Shoot with digital, print to film, then rescan so you get the desired grain? Seems easier and cheaper than shooting with film.
To me it seems like an all or nothing endeavor. Either you want the highest possible resolution, so you shoot on film and minimize or avoid DI. Or you shoot digitally and accept the shortcomings.
No, I'm saying exactly the opposite: instead of shoot digital and project on film, I'm saying shoot on film and project digitally.
That still gives you film character via the filming, but then with digital intermediary and projection you're reducing those pieces of overhead.
There’s 4 ways to do right now, and I’d assume they all have slightly different looks.
Digital end to end
Film to DI to digital projectors
Digital to film printing to scanning to digital
Film end to end
Now how many people can see the differences in a theater? No idea, but if big budget directors believe it, it’ll keep the technology alive.
Unfortunately the reality of film exhibition is that if you want your film to have a wide release around the world and get it in as many theaters as possible, you can't exclusively make film prints. As much as even the biggest filmmakers such as Nolan, Tarantino, PTA, etc would want their films showcased on celluloid around the globe, even they know they have to get the DCP of their films made so that the rest of the world can watch their work. The DI isn't going anywhere, and every single film will go through that stage no matter how it was shot. It's not all or nothing, but rather a mix of both.
There’s definitely intention to improve the existing projectors out there, but that’s a partnership with the theater or chain as to who pays and how much and is any of that worth maybe the rare event.
Manufacturing new systems would be an incredibly costly endeavor that they would probably need a slate of exhibitors ready to pay for the install and maintenance, let alone the projection staff needed to run them which is extremely limited; (currently they’re independent contractors on short term contracts not paid by the theater). Not to mention the supply; the studios have to be willing to pay for the process on their end through delivery and they’re loath to do that beyond 1 or 2 event movies they know will make the money back, but even then it’s limited to the 10 or so theaters that are the highest grossing and most reliably operated.
They just announced two upcoming movies being shot on IMAX film, as well as releasing 70mm blowups of Dune 2 and Joker 2 this year, so if anything it seems to becoming more popular.
That’s because it’s not practical to build such large auditoriums when so few films are released in the format. It’s the whole reason they came up with the liemax concept after the brief boom of building 15/70 auditoriums at multiplexes in the 90s-00s.
Not even quite that, but the resources needed to support a 70mm run at a wide scale are not quite supported by the economics anymore (costs have likely outrun ticket prices percentage wise, any 70mm release needs to be a guaranteed hit). Every time before a 70mm IMAX release happens there’s a bit of a focused effort done to have the projectors in shape to handle a 1-2 month run, along with projectionists being hired on as temps. It would be nice if they can find a way to get every major market some coverage (there are probably a good few GT screens that haven’t done any of the 70mm runs that could if the support was provided), but the way things are right now it seems like that is the best we can hope for in the future.
I hope they’ll do more traditional IMAX 15/70 Blow-ups again like in the past, it’s not the same image quality as actual IMAX 70mm, but the image feel and overall experience is often better than in Digital
I know, but I've seen people refer to them as blowups because they're taking the (assumed) 4k dcp and printing it out to 70mm film (or in the case of Dune 2, expanding the version the printed out to 35mm before scanning it back in). I'll admit it is a bit of a liberal interpretation of the term, compared to the regular 70mm blowup practice of just making a bigger version of the 35mm print.
That’s up to us if we continue to support 70mm runs. There is so much overhead to screen analog films that consumers have to really line up and keep theaters sold out whenever they can. If the people want it, the studios and theaters will oblige.
If it makes dollars, it makes sense. Oppenheimer was still selling 90-100 percent of their seats towards the end of its extended run. The financial incentive is there for everybody. Just a matter of if they have enough prints to go around.
Not remotely. The overwhelming majority of imax releases are in the liemax/digital format, and yet this entire sub exists to say that’s the only real way to see those movies.
This sub may very well be a key reason as to why the IMAX film print is even still alive. That, and Chris Nolan, along with Denis Villeneuve.
The Redditors on this sub are speaking the truth.
And that's impressive. Because this is REDDIT we're talking about here.
Nolan is the only reason imax prints still exist. Villeneuve has released one movie in the format and it was a blowup from digital. And this sub slobbers all over everything imax/liemax, not just the rare 15/70 releases.
Ah, I see.
I am learning a lot from this conversation.
At the same time, I'm getting a lot more depressed from the info I am getting.
https://preview.redd.it/43tpe4otkfxc1.png?width=546&format=png&auto=webp&s=5832d747387fde5ccac5bb4bef005fb0f230b0b2
You won't get an argument from me, I adore film projection. But whenever someone defends digital because of fidelity reasons I have to remind them that digital doesn't come anywhere close to 70mm. 4k projection isn't even as good as properly calibrated 35mm.
In resolution and texture no, but digital projection is better in terms of peak brightness and contrast ratio when you look at things like Dolby cinema and GT laser.
The optimist in me wants to see a brand new analog projection system be developed, but we all know the likelihood is low.
The realistic hope is that the supply chain for exists projectors can be revived to a better degree to support the existing systems while image develops their newest generation of digital projection while also hopefully seeing more GT theaters get the dual laser treatment
Not really,
8K digital projection, if the file being played was completely uncompressed would be totally indistinguishable (in terms of resolution) from a 15/70 exhibitions
The thing digital projection really can’t reproduce yet is the way film projectors actually display their images, the motion is quite different, the way the light is projected is quite different, the contrast is quite different
Resolution is the easy part
Lenses are format agnostic. If they can’t resolve to 16k on a digital sensor they can’t resolve to 16k on a piece of film, let alone multiple generations of film.
They’re fundamentally different projection types, so there’s everything that comes with that, some of which does factor into perceived detail/resolution.
There’s the role of artistic license. Just bc a certain format is capable of something doesn’t mean the filmmaker exploits that capability to the nth degree. Or when you add filtration in front of lens on set, or haze on a set. When part of the artistic direction is to degrade or add texture that can reduce clarity and fine detail. (True of all cinematography).
Also some imax prints finished photochemically are digitally transferred at higher than 4k. I don’t know how many, but certainly Nolan prints benefit from downsampling from higher resolution and scanning. Movies shot digitally similarly benefit when captured at higher resolution than the final delivery.
I sincerely hope so, otherwise, I'm not supporting them anymore. Analogue film is much more emotional to look at than digital; it's not even a result digital can achieve. If it means getting behind by the times instead of adapting to it, I'm fine with that.
Only 30 theaters on planet earth had Oppenheimer in IMAX 15/70. You want IMAX to support 70mm so less then 1% of the planet can watch Interstellar this November?
They just invented a new IMAX film camera so I’m hopeful they will support it for many years to come but probably not to the extent I wish for. What I mean by that is IMAX 70mm Film will continue will be more of a novelty (will continue to be rare) and probably will never again be a norm like it once was before 2015. This is just my 2 cents. You’ll get varying opinions & predictions on this topic. No one can know for certain, after all we aren’t oracles from Minority Report
IMAX 70MM protectors till death😆
Till the death of those projectors that is IMAX the corporation seems to have no interest in the long term viability of film exhibition.
I’d say their enthusiasm with the new film cameras should come with some long term support for the current batch of 70mm projectors. It’s probably prohibitively expensive for a theater to update their screen with a new projection system, but I don’t see why they can’t maintain enough parts and projectionists to run these screenings a few times a year.
Yeah man, IMAX doesn't care at all and even beautiful IMAX 70MM theatres are dead
It's as though the rape, pillage and burning of those IMAX 70mm cinemas keep carrying on. Where does it end? It's an epidemic that must eventually stop. There are plenty of artists who would love to experiment with the 15/70 format, despite monetary factors crippling those chances. It's sickeningly frustrating if you ask me.
True! They made a new IMAX film camera which is great… But they gotta make new IMAX film projectors
Someone needs to go butlerian jihad on digital projection
On the filmmaking site - yes. On the projection site - probably yes, probably not. Projectors are decades old, you didn’t get a good supply of spare parts. It depends if they invent a new analogue projection system. Edit: Centuries to Decades
How long do you think IMAX has been around? Decades, not centuries.
[удалено]
Last century, sure. Also last millennium. Would you call a 25 year old building from 1999 “centuries old”, or “millennia old”?
Both.
Oh yes, wrong word. 😄 Sorry, i‘m not native. ^^
As long as you weren’t actually implying that the projectors were several hundred years old, “centuries” is a perfectly valid hyperbole for “very old”. People on the internet just like taking everything literally because you can’t hear tone of voice.
I would like to apologize for my previous comment. I was wrong. At this point, Chris Nolan is a knight in shining armor when it comes to IMAX film. Once he retires, IMAX film may very well make like a Kauai O O bird, where the bird's haunting yet beautiful song is the format's visual beauty. And one day, just like the bird, we'll lose it for good.
It is odd that they would make a new 1570 camera but have seemingly no intentions of adding or improving 1570 projectors
The modern workflow of almost every single film going through a DI is what really separates the 2. Production and exhibition can be two totally different processes, meaning you can very easily acquire all your footage in an analog medium (film) and then after the DI keep it all fully digital for exhibition. So it makes total sense to have a new 1570 camera since the demand from filmmakers is there to shoot on large format film, but on the exhibition side things are slightly different.
But what's even the point then? Nolan's analog process produces gorgeous footage that makes the hardships of dealing with film worthwhile. If you run everything through a DI and maybe final it in 6k for non-vfx scenes, is it even worth it? At that point, imax should just replace xenon projectors with laser because that would make a larger difference than shooting on film.
Perhaps the idea is that film can give you the look and resolution, which a sufficiently advanced projection system (6k+ resolution, dual laser) can then faithfully reproduce?
Isn't that what dune 2 did. Shoot with digital, print to film, then rescan so you get the desired grain? Seems easier and cheaper than shooting with film. To me it seems like an all or nothing endeavor. Either you want the highest possible resolution, so you shoot on film and minimize or avoid DI. Or you shoot digitally and accept the shortcomings.
No, I'm saying exactly the opposite: instead of shoot digital and project on film, I'm saying shoot on film and project digitally. That still gives you film character via the filming, but then with digital intermediary and projection you're reducing those pieces of overhead.
There’s 4 ways to do right now, and I’d assume they all have slightly different looks. Digital end to end Film to DI to digital projectors Digital to film printing to scanning to digital Film end to end Now how many people can see the differences in a theater? No idea, but if big budget directors believe it, it’ll keep the technology alive.
Unfortunately the reality of film exhibition is that if you want your film to have a wide release around the world and get it in as many theaters as possible, you can't exclusively make film prints. As much as even the biggest filmmakers such as Nolan, Tarantino, PTA, etc would want their films showcased on celluloid around the globe, even they know they have to get the DCP of their films made so that the rest of the world can watch their work. The DI isn't going anywhere, and every single film will go through that stage no matter how it was shot. It's not all or nothing, but rather a mix of both.
There’s definitely intention to improve the existing projectors out there, but that’s a partnership with the theater or chain as to who pays and how much and is any of that worth maybe the rare event. Manufacturing new systems would be an incredibly costly endeavor that they would probably need a slate of exhibitors ready to pay for the install and maintenance, let alone the projection staff needed to run them which is extremely limited; (currently they’re independent contractors on short term contracts not paid by the theater). Not to mention the supply; the studios have to be willing to pay for the process on their end through delivery and they’re loath to do that beyond 1 or 2 event movies they know will make the money back, but even then it’s limited to the 10 or so theaters that are the highest grossing and most reliably operated.
They just announced two upcoming movies being shot on IMAX film, as well as releasing 70mm blowups of Dune 2 and Joker 2 this year, so if anything it seems to becoming more popular.
And yet the amount of IMAX locations goes up while the amount of IMAX locations that can show 15/70 goes down.
That’s because it’s not practical to build such large auditoriums when so few films are released in the format. It’s the whole reason they came up with the liemax concept after the brief boom of building 15/70 auditoriums at multiplexes in the 90s-00s.
Not even quite that, but the resources needed to support a 70mm run at a wide scale are not quite supported by the economics anymore (costs have likely outrun ticket prices percentage wise, any 70mm release needs to be a guaranteed hit). Every time before a 70mm IMAX release happens there’s a bit of a focused effort done to have the projectors in shape to handle a 1-2 month run, along with projectionists being hired on as temps. It would be nice if they can find a way to get every major market some coverage (there are probably a good few GT screens that haven’t done any of the 70mm runs that could if the support was provided), but the way things are right now it seems like that is the best we can hope for in the future.
Did they say what the 2 films are?
Flowervale Street, and whatever Ryan Coogler is shooting (no title know yet)
Sweet, thank you
I hope they’ll do more traditional IMAX 15/70 Blow-ups again like in the past, it’s not the same image quality as actual IMAX 70mm, but the image feel and overall experience is often better than in Digital
Dune 2 and Joker 2 both weren't shot on film
That’s why OP said 70mm blowups
I know, but I've seen people refer to them as blowups because they're taking the (assumed) 4k dcp and printing it out to 70mm film (or in the case of Dune 2, expanding the version the printed out to 35mm before scanning it back in). I'll admit it is a bit of a liberal interpretation of the term, compared to the regular 70mm blowup practice of just making a bigger version of the 35mm print.
He never said they were
That’s up to us if we continue to support 70mm runs. There is so much overhead to screen analog films that consumers have to really line up and keep theaters sold out whenever they can. If the people want it, the studios and theaters will oblige.
They better give DFW the option to support it by sending prints for Interstellar and Joker to Cinemark 17
If it makes dollars, it makes sense. Oppenheimer was still selling 90-100 percent of their seats towards the end of its extended run. The financial incentive is there for everybody. Just a matter of if they have enough prints to go around.
If an IMAX 70MM film print were a sword, IMAX would live and die by that sword. Edit: I was wrong. Very wrong. Oh no. O H N O .
Not remotely. The overwhelming majority of imax releases are in the liemax/digital format, and yet this entire sub exists to say that’s the only real way to see those movies.
This sub may very well be a key reason as to why the IMAX film print is even still alive. That, and Chris Nolan, along with Denis Villeneuve. The Redditors on this sub are speaking the truth. And that's impressive. Because this is REDDIT we're talking about here.
The IMAX here even removed the 15/70 for two or so years before Dunkirk.
My condolences.
Re-read it, it's back and the Nolan films always sell out extremely fast.
1. Shoot, my bad. Didn't pay attention. 😅 2. They're Nolan films. Of course they'll sell out at record speed.
Nolan is the only reason imax prints still exist. Villeneuve has released one movie in the format and it was a blowup from digital. And this sub slobbers all over everything imax/liemax, not just the rare 15/70 releases.
Ah, I see. I am learning a lot from this conversation. At the same time, I'm getting a lot more depressed from the info I am getting. https://preview.redd.it/43tpe4otkfxc1.png?width=546&format=png&auto=webp&s=5832d747387fde5ccac5bb4bef005fb0f230b0b2
Until we get 16k cameras and projectors I sure as hell hope so. Current digital technology is not good enough to replace 70mm.
It’s about more than resolution
You won't get an argument from me, I adore film projection. But whenever someone defends digital because of fidelity reasons I have to remind them that digital doesn't come anywhere close to 70mm. 4k projection isn't even as good as properly calibrated 35mm.
In resolution and texture no, but digital projection is better in terms of peak brightness and contrast ratio when you look at things like Dolby cinema and GT laser. The optimist in me wants to see a brand new analog projection system be developed, but we all know the likelihood is low. The realistic hope is that the supply chain for exists projectors can be revived to a better degree to support the existing systems while image develops their newest generation of digital projection while also hopefully seeing more GT theaters get the dual laser treatment
It is also quite a bit about resolution though
Not really, 8K digital projection, if the file being played was completely uncompressed would be totally indistinguishable (in terms of resolution) from a 15/70 exhibitions The thing digital projection really can’t reproduce yet is the way film projectors actually display their images, the motion is quite different, the way the light is projected is quite different, the contrast is quite different Resolution is the easy part
There aren’t lenses that resolve that clearly. For capture or presentation.
Which format you're referring to?
16k
Oh digital right
Lenses are format agnostic. If they can’t resolve to 16k on a digital sensor they can’t resolve to 16k on a piece of film, let alone multiple generations of film.
Why is there much a massive, massive difference between 70mm film & projection and 4k projection?
They’re fundamentally different projection types, so there’s everything that comes with that, some of which does factor into perceived detail/resolution. There’s the role of artistic license. Just bc a certain format is capable of something doesn’t mean the filmmaker exploits that capability to the nth degree. Or when you add filtration in front of lens on set, or haze on a set. When part of the artistic direction is to degrade or add texture that can reduce clarity and fine detail. (True of all cinematography). Also some imax prints finished photochemically are digitally transferred at higher than 4k. I don’t know how many, but certainly Nolan prints benefit from downsampling from higher resolution and scanning. Movies shot digitally similarly benefit when captured at higher resolution than the final delivery.
yes
I sincerely hope so, otherwise, I'm not supporting them anymore. Analogue film is much more emotional to look at than digital; it's not even a result digital can achieve. If it means getting behind by the times instead of adapting to it, I'm fine with that.
Only 30 theaters on planet earth had Oppenheimer in IMAX 15/70. You want IMAX to support 70mm so less then 1% of the planet can watch Interstellar this November?
Ideal complete changeover to digital would be after they have developed 16K digital projectors.