IMAX to be used in more films

Lee Stewart · 01-05-2009, 07:16 AM

Quote:

IMAX corporation has announced that Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen will have three sequences shot with IMAX® cameras. So for those of you who like to check out the summer blockbusters on the really big screen, you’ll get at least three scenes specifically tailored for your viewing pleasure, with the rest of the film (up)converted to the IMAX format, but not shot using the special cameras.

Quote:

This news follows the trend begun by The Dark Knight having several scenes shot in this way and the news that Jon Favreau will shoot Iron Man 2 at least partially in IMAX.

http://screenrant.com/transformers-2...imax-rob-3836/

Also the new Harry Potter movie has sequences filmed in IMAX 3D.

All a step in the right direction!

teranova · 01-05-2009, 10:06 AM

Thanks for the update, Lee. I remember reading an article about two years ago that IMAX, in the future, won't be using the big, bulky and heavy 70mm cameras. Instead, they said that they were going to shoot all IMAX movies in 35 mm and blow them up to 70 mm.
Could you comment on this? Thanks

Lee Stewart · 01-05-2009, 11:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by teranova

Thanks for the update, Lee. I remember reading an article about two years ago that IMAX, in the future, won't be using the big, bulky and heavy 70mm cameras. Instead, they said that they were going to shoot all IMAX movies in 35 mm and blow them up to 70 mm.
Could you comment on this? Thanks

That is not IMAX.

IMAX is 15/70 meaning 70mm film turned sideways with each frame being 15 perfs wide.

teranova · 01-05-2009, 11:41 AM

I agree that it wouldn't be true IMAX but I'm pretty sure that's what the article said i.e. for technical and economical reasons they were going to abandon the original IMAX format and just enlarge a 35mm print to 70mm. I would guess that the resulting product wouldn't be as crisp or detailed as a genuine IMAX 70mm shot film. (I got the impression it wasn't just going to be a wide screen 70mm film, as shown in your illustration, but close to the look of an IMAX projection)
Edit: Just Googled IMAX and found that Wikipedia has a fairly long article about IMAX. They refer to the process to blow up standard 35mm films to IMAX 70 mm as DMR (Digital Re-mastering)
BTW: Thanks for your input!

Lee Stewart · 01-05-2009, 12:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by teranova

I agree that it wouldn't be true IMAX but I'm pretty sure that's what the article said i.e. for technical and economical reasons they were going to abandon the original IMAX format and just enlarge a 35mm print to 70mm. I would guess that the resulting product wouldn't be as crisp or detailed as a genuine IMAX 70mm shot film. (I got the impression it wasn't just going to be a wide screen 70mm film, as shown in your illustration, but close to the look of an IMAX projection)
Edit: Just Googled IMAX and found that Wikipedia has a fairly long article about IMAX. They refer to the process to blow up standard 35mm films to IMAX 70 mm as DMR (Digital Re-mastering)
BTW: Thanks for your input!

What you are talking about is when they "blow up" 35mm negatives to print to IMAX and call it; The IMAX Experience."

That is for presentations of Hollywood films at an IMAX theater.

IMAX has installed some digital projecters in some of their theaters - specifically the new ones. They convert the 15/70 negative to digital format and use Christie (?) 2K projecters instead of 15/70 prints.

But the taking negative is still 15/70 because most of the 900+ IMAX theatrs still use 15/70 film.

teranova · 01-05-2009, 02:00 PM

Thanks, I figured you would know! On another topic: Several years ago Roger Ebert demonstrated a new projection process called "MaxiVision 48" where the film is projected at 48 fps instead of the usual 24 frames per second. It showed a panel truck filmed at 24 fps passing from right to left and the lettering and signage on the side of the van was completely blurred. Then he showed it a 48 fps and you could read the name of the company and the decorative logo (I think it was for a flower shop)
I believe it would eliminate the wagon wheel effect where the spokes of stagecoaches and chuck wagons, in Westerns, appear to rotate backward as the camera can't capture the full motion at 24 fps. The process would also eliminate blurring that occurs in fast action scenes.
The main drawback, I would think, would be that it would use twice as much expensive film stock. I haven't heard anything more about its development or if it ever caught on with the motion picture industry.

Lee Stewart · 01-05-2009, 02:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by teranova

Thanks, I figured you would know! On another topic: Several years ago Roger Ebert demonstrated a new projection process called "MaxiVision 48" where the film is projected at 48 fps instead of the usual 24 frames per second. It showed a panel truck filmed at 24 fps passing from right to left and the lettering and signage on the side of the van was completely blurred. Then he showed it a 48 fps and you could read the name of the company and the decorative logo (I think it was for a flower shop)
I believe it would eliminate the wagon wheel effect where the spokes of stagecoaches and chuck wagons, in Westerns, appear to rotate backward as the camera can't capture the full motion at 24 fps. The process would also eliminate blurring that occurs in fast action scenes.
The main drawback, I would think, would be that it would use twice as much expensive film stock. I haven't heard anything more about its development or if it ever caught on with the motion picture industry.

Today - each frame of film is shown 2X for 48FPS. If it was 24 FPS you would see very bad flicker.

IMAX made a short once in 48FPS and called the process IMAX HD

Showscan was 70mm @ 60 FPS.

The original Todd-AO (70mm) was 30 FPS (each shown 2X).

They will be moving away from film and using digital cameras once the number of digital cinemas increases sharply.

My Avatar is the Panavision digital camera.

Here is a link to some of the digital cameras in use now:

http://cinetaur.googlepages.com/hd-2...roduction-link

Lee Stewart · 01-06-2009, 06:59 PM

Tentpole directors see Imax in future

Quote:

'Dark Knight' starts growing trend in Hollywood

By MARC GRASERMore Articles:

Directors have a new perk to demand of studios when it comes to tentpole pics: sequences shot using Imax cameras.
The six Imax sequences that Christopher Nolan directed and integrated into "The Dark Knight" have encouraged other filmmakers to get studios to pony up the production dollars for similar shots.

Michael Bay will film at least three action setpieces using Imax cameras for "Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen," which is lensing.

Jon Favreau has discussed using Imax cameras in filming "Iron Man 2," while "Eagle Eye" director D.J. Caruso has expressed interest in doing so for future projects such as "Y: The Last Man."

Filmmakers have long preferred sequences shot using Imax cameras because the quality of the 70mm images surpasses those of more traditional 35mm footage.

But the large Imax cameras have often proved too unwieldy, or the conversion process to traditional 35mm too costly, to make it worth shooting an entire film in the format. There are also fewer theaters to play the pics.

But lensing several high-profile sequences in the bigger format is proving lucrative at the B.O.

Studios are looking for ways to boost attendance and sell more tickets as auds increasingly opt to watch movies at home.

Warner Bros. successfully used the six sequences in "Dark Knight" as a promotional tool to get auds to check out the pic in Imax theaters, where tickets cost more, thus putting more money in the studio's coffers.

Studio films have been shown in Imax theaters, but "Dark Knight" was the first to have scenes shot using Imax cameras.

To date, "Dark Knight" has earned a record $60 million from large-format theaters.

"We become a way to get (people) out of the house and into theaters," said Greg Foster, chairman and prexy of Imax Filmed Entertainment.

As of June 30, there were 302 Imax theaters operating in 40 countries.

Although Imax provides the cameras to productions, it does not further offset the costs of the production of the sequences, the company said.

In 2007, the first "Transformers" hit large-format screens after the pic's summer theatrical run.

The "Transformers" sequel will roll out wide in megaplexes and in Imax theaters on June 26. Pic will be digitally remastered into the Imax format.

http://www.variety.com/article/VR111...goryid=13&cs=1

sigill · 01-07-2009, 11:42 AM

More IMAX in movies sounds good to me. I watched the making of extras on TDK and realized how hard it must be to shoot with IMAX cameras. They said they where difficult to be used as steadicams because they weighed up to 100 pounds and could only record 3 minutes at a time!

sigill · 01-07-2009, 11:47 AM

Can i ask you Lee when they where talking about making TDK Christopher Nolan said they had 4 IMAX cameras. They damaged one accidently while filming. He then said they where the only 4 IMAX cameras in the world, is that right?

Lee Stewart · 01-07-2009, 01:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sigill

Can i ask you Lee when they where talking about making TDK Christopher Nolan said they had 4 IMAX cameras. They damaged one accidently while filming. He then said they where the only 4 IMAX cameras in the world, is that right?

I really can't say. Found this though:

Quote:

The production went forward with three MSM 9802s and one MKIII. The MSM is the lightest Imax camera; the MKIII is capable of frame rates up to 60 fps. The MKIII proved to be more durable and was used on car mounts, whereas the MSM was used on a Steadicam rig, a Libra IV head and on motorcycle rigs. Each camera was set up with a 2.40 ground glass, but this was more of a reference for the operators than actual framing parameters. The 500' magazines lasted about 100 seconds at 24 fps. “Normally, that’s considered waste, and you wouldn’t even bother loading that on a camera,” Hall points out. “Bob Gorelick, our Steadicam operator, said the MSM in its smaller configuration was only slightly heavier than a [Panavision] Genesis.”

http://www.theasc.com/magazine_dynam...ight/page1.php

sigill · 01-07-2009, 01:45 PM

Thanks for the link Lee. Very interesting read, i can't believe they load the camera up and are only able to get 100 seconds of footage!

Lee Stewart · 01-07-2009, 02:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sigill

Thanks for the link Lee. Very interesting read, i can't believe they load the camera up and are only able to get 100 seconds of footage!

When they shoot in 15/70 at 24 frames per second - you can understand why the magazines only hold 100 seconds of film:

sigill · 01-07-2009, 05:18 PM

Yeah i see what you mean . I can't believe how much bigger the image is with IMAX than on the 35mm film. The IMAX cameras are monsters aren't they!

Lee Stewart · 01-07-2009, 05:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sigill

Yeah i see what you mean . I can't believe how much bigger the image is with IMAX than on the 35mm film. The IMAX cameras are monsters aren't they!

The regular ones are a bit bigger. It's the 3D IMAX camera rigs that are huge.

That MkIII is the same size as my Avatar. The one they mentioned in the article.

How did they get a huge IMAX camera to the top of Mt. Everest?

http://entertainment.howstuffworks.com/question705.htm

01-05-2009, 11:41 AM	#4
teranova High Definition is the definition of life. Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 369	I agree that it wouldn't be true IMAX but I'm pretty sure that's what the article said i.e. for technical and economical reasons they were going to abandon the original IMAX format and just enlarge a 35mm print to 70mm. I would guess that the resulting product wouldn't be as crisp or detailed as a genuine IMAX 70mm shot film. (I got the impression it wasn't just going to be a wide screen 70mm film, as shown in your illustration, but close to the look of an IMAX projection) Edit: Just Googled IMAX and found that Wikipedia has a fairly long article about IMAX. They refer to the process to blow up standard 35mm films to IMAX 70 mm as DMR (Digital Re-mastering) BTW: Thanks for your input! Last edited by teranova; 01-05-2009 at 12:35 PM.

01-07-2009, 11:42 AM	#9
sigill High Def fan Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: United kingdom-Manchester Age: 30 Posts: 2,519	More IMAX in movies sounds good to me. I watched the making of extras on TDK and realized how hard it must be to shoot with IMAX cameras. They said they where difficult to be used as steadicams because they weighed up to 100 pounds and could only record 3 minutes at a time! __________________ Panasonic 37" LCD 720p/1080i Sony BDP-S350 Sony BDP-S300 Toshiba XDE-500 DVD player Onkyo TX-SR606 7.1 AVR KEF1005.2 speakers Latest HD movies bought - Coraline - American Gangster - Moonraker 97 Blu-rays

01-07-2009, 11:47 AM	#10
sigill High Def fan Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: United kingdom-Manchester Age: 30 Posts: 2,519	Can i ask you Lee when they where talking about making TDK Christopher Nolan said they had 4 IMAX cameras. They damaged one accidently while filming. He then said they where the only 4 IMAX cameras in the world, is that right? __________________ Panasonic 37" LCD 720p/1080i Sony BDP-S350 Sony BDP-S300 Toshiba XDE-500 DVD player Onkyo TX-SR606 7.1 AVR KEF1005.2 speakers Latest HD movies bought - Coraline - American Gangster - Moonraker 97 Blu-rays

01-07-2009, 01:45 PM	#12
sigill High Def fan Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: United kingdom-Manchester Age: 30 Posts: 2,519	Thanks for the link Lee. Very interesting read, i can't believe they load the camera up and are only able to get 100 seconds of footage! __________________ Panasonic 37" LCD 720p/1080i Sony BDP-S350 Sony BDP-S300 Toshiba XDE-500 DVD player Onkyo TX-SR606 7.1 AVR KEF1005.2 speakers Latest HD movies bought - Coraline - American Gangster - Moonraker 97 Blu-rays

01-07-2009, 05:18 PM	#14
sigill High Def fan Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: United kingdom-Manchester Age: 30 Posts: 2,519	Yeah i see what you mean . I can't believe how much bigger the image is with IMAX than on the 35mm film. The IMAX cameras are monsters aren't they! __________________ Panasonic 37" LCD 720p/1080i Sony BDP-S350 Sony BDP-S300 Toshiba XDE-500 DVD player Onkyo TX-SR606 7.1 AVR KEF1005.2 speakers Latest HD movies bought - Coraline - American Gangster - Moonraker 97 Blu-rays

01-05-2009, 10:06 AM	#2
teranova High Definition is the definition of life. Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 369	Thanks for the update, Lee. I remember reading an article about two years ago that IMAX, in the future, won't be using the big, bulky and heavy 70mm cameras. Instead, they said that they were going to shoot all IMAX movies in 35 mm and blow them up to 70 mm. Could you comment on this? Thanks

01-05-2009, 02:00 PM	#6
teranova High Definition is the definition of life. Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 369	Thanks, I figured you would know! On another topic: Several years ago Roger Ebert demonstrated a new projection process called "MaxiVision 48" where the film is projected at 48 fps instead of the usual 24 frames per second. It showed a panel truck filmed at 24 fps passing from right to left and the lettering and signage on the side of the van was completely blurred. Then he showed it a 48 fps and you could read the name of the company and the decorative logo (I think it was for a flower shop) I believe it would eliminate the wagon wheel effect where the spokes of stagecoaches and chuck wagons, in Westerns, appear to rotate backward as the camera can't capture the full motion at 24 fps. The process would also eliminate blurring that occurs in fast action scenes. The main drawback, I would think, would be that it would use twice as much expensive film stock. I haven't heard anything more about its development or if it ever caught on with the motion picture industry.

Similar Threads to IMAX to be used in more films
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Disney, Imax think 3-D	Lee Stewart	At The Movies	0	11-19-2008 08:47 AM
'Dark Knight' To Bring IMAX Home to Blu-ray	anythingwt	High Definition Media	16	07-22-2008 01:44 PM
'Dark Knight' fuels sunny day at Imax	Lee Stewart	At The Movies	0	07-22-2008 06:50 AM
Big-screen Giant Imax Eyes Digital Future	anythingwt	High Definition News & Informative Articles	0	06-23-2008 11:33 AM
Trouble brewing for Imax	ah802	Canadian Providers	1	03-09-2008 11:10 AM