You ’ve probably seen the new phenomenon with your own eyes : A cineplex IMAX that does n’t have the monster screen you grew up with in scientific discipline - museum IMAX theatre . Here ’s the what , the how and the why .
Just last nighttime , comedian Aziz Ansari ( from Parks and Recreation ) publishedthis piecedescribing the confederacy of paying an extra $ 5 to see an “ IMAX ” motion picture that really was n’t much bigger than a normal screen .
I actually call in IMAX HQ a few weeks back , and a major point of discussion was the retrofitting process so lovingly described by Aziz . Basically , IMAX used to build their own massive theaters in their own buildings . But now , for expand , the caller has made a deals with major theater chain like AMC in which they ’ll provide and instal their proprietary mix of projector , CRT screen , speaker and hardware if the theatre will hoof the bill for the necessary structural renovations .
This plan , for better or uncollectible , is IMAX ’s only current design for enlargement in the US .
This conversion process , which has apatented geometry , includes installing a screen that ’s only slightly bigger ( as little as 10 foot wider than before ) , but this projection screen is pair off with the removal of several rows of seats which allows it to be scooted roughly 30 feet closer to the audience , creating a form of sitting too confining the television receiver effect with a screen that , I was told , is perceived as 75 metrical unit wide-cut than before .
When the process was name to me , I remember it all sound a bit hokey . But walking into IMAX ’s test multiplex , an otherwise distinctive AMC located in a Canada , I was demonstrate a side - by - side of the same theater before and after the retrofitting process .
I will say , the new concealment expect much bigger and far more imposing—”night and day ” would make for a fair analogy . My mind was n’t mentally prepped for such a palpable difference , though I ’d concord that it still fell curtly of , say , the unbelievable , multi - story beast of a screen that I find out Star Trek on several day later at a classic , standalone IMAX .
But the change I did n’t look ( and I ca n’t act to have perceive this tidbit up on my own ) was a remarkable divergence from acoustic paneling . Clapping in the original dramatics revealed a very live environment with a frightening amount of reverberation . The retrofit , however , take up the sound in a pleasant means , reminiscent of more than one acoustically - planned stage I performed on back in my band daylight .
There are other advance as well , including a specifically non - THX - certified sound system , reaching up to 14,000W , that offers 117db of uncompressed digital sound without distortion . Engineers claimed that in a normal theater , the sweet spot for audio is in the dead center , and technicians make no campaign to lean to those sitting in the back . Meanwhile , IMAX ’s system promised the same environs experience anywhere in the theater .
I tested that theory during a screening of some Rolling Stones at the Max footage by moving from the gist of the theater to the back right box . And there ’s dead no doubt , I lost a good deal of the side channels while the rearward transmission channel ( in this showcase , it was the lead guitar , I think ) , dominated the audio recording spectrum . I would n’t have expected IMAX to have achieved the unimaginable unless , you know , they claimed that they had .
The other main part of this retrofitting process is the new digital IMAX projector . Since its debut in the 70s , the Xenon - lamp - powered projector has outride mostly unchanged . But with film prints reaching around $ 40,000 apiece , IMAX has embraced the digital revolution in their theaters ( the cameras are still film with no plan mentioned to change that ) .
With the digital installations , films arrive on a standard hard effort , code with DRM provisions that province just when a dramaturgy is authorized to bet a film … errr … video .
Their projector is actually two , 2 special K Christie projector that spit out the same image at the same time . A camera is positioned in between the projector lenses , tracking covert brightness in actual clock time . An integrate server total this and other data point , adjusting both projectors for caloric shift , making sure the ikon do n’t alter as they play . There are also a slew of other , top hole-and-corner proprietary imaging adjustment go on at all times .
I have it off what you ’re thinking : Why did n’t IMAX just use a 4 K projector and preserve the hassle , peculiarly with AMC announce that all of their theaters would be equipped with4 K Sony projectors by 2012 ? IMAX does believe their projector offers a sub - pixel truth that , when combined with some extra imaging processing , looks better than Sony ’s 4K.
you could see imperfection in their digital ejection arrangement just like any digital system . The CRT screen doorway effect , while minimized , can be note in bright spots of the image — if you ’re looking as closely and skeptically as I was . And you only necessitate to move back in the theater to realize that the picture does appear sharper as you step away from the screen door . In other words , it ’s not make some theoretical maximal perceived resolution … or even the best of what IMAX film can show . ( As IMAX archives their own film into 8 K and 12 K prints , you could assume that the company feel the resolve of their intersection is much higher that their digital projectors may show ) .
The good news is that IMAX ’s digital projection system is “ projector doubter , ” meaning if a more suitable understructure projector come around ( be it 2 K , 4 super C or higher ) , the realtime syncing and adjustment system can descale accordingly . In other Book , when every AMC is stocked with 4 K projectors in a few years , hopefully IMAX will be upping the ante as necessary by dual wielding 4K+ projector instead .
So is this new IMAX , with smaller screens , with digital acoustic projection , still IMAX ? Honestly , there are probably only a small handful of technician — who are n’t exactly sharing proprietary knowledge and decisions — capable of answering that doubtfulness with complete scientific sincerity . To my optic and my gut , it ’s more IMAX Lite or Normal Theater Enhanced — which make sense , given that IMAX movie has been gauge at a theoretic 18 K resolution .
Is a retrofitted theatre of operations worth your extra $ 5 ? For the movies most likely to make it to the screen ( big budget legal action ) , I think so … though maybe not for a family of four .
The price in all probability should n’t be the same as a standalone IMAX theater , but I think that the point Ansari misses is that cineplexes are already benefiting from a pricing structure that ca-ca spectator give the same amount no matter what screenland they see a movie on ( how many times do beautiful art films get ostracize to a broom closet of a theater while summer blockbusters are played on a plex ’s largest screen ? ) . At minimum , the $ 5 IMAX premium ensures you see a motion-picture show on a sieve that ’s good than the honorable AMC or whoever has in their building .
in person , I hate to experience that we will probably never see another 12,700sqft foot IMAX screen door built ( like that discover in Mumbai ) , and that 70 millimeter movie projection is being switch for digital before digital is undeniable image perfection . But if the via media is that more people will be control movies in theaters with big video and tighter calibre control , then maybe it ’s a compromise worth making .
seem for lots more on our IMAX visit in the coming weeks .
motion-picture show
Daily Newsletter
Get the best tech , scientific discipline , and culture news in your inbox day by day .
News from the futurity , delivered to your nowadays .
You May Also Like
