Some sound reasons to go IMAX [Archive] - Audio & Video Forums

PDA

View Full Version : Some sound reasons to go IMAX



Woochifer
07-19-2005, 07:15 PM
With Charlie and the Chocolate Factory breaking all IMAX box office records last week, it seems like the practice of remastering and transferring 35mm features onto the large IMAX print format will expand. I read that IMAX anticipates releasing seven conventional feature films annually starting next year, up from the four that they will put out this year. (Harry Potter is the next feature film that will get an IMAX DMR release) IMO, this is good news because the IMAX DMR releases that I've seen thus far have shown incredible improvements to the image resolution, with none of the lighting inconsistencies and grain that I used to see whenever theaters projected 35mm prints onto the large IMAX screens using normal 35mm projectors.

Strange as it may seem in this age of megaplexes and generic cookie cutter theaters where the marquee doesn't even tell you which auditorium a movie is playing in, IMAX might be the saving grace for making moviegoing an event again. Aside from the rapidly disappearing single screen movie palaces, IMAX is really the only larger than life theater going experience that seems to have taken hold in the market in recent years. As great as it is seeing a movie on a 90' wide screen, there are several other attributes to the IMAX experience that I think make it worth the extra price of admission.

The price of admission is indeed higher, but that has side benefits of no commercials running before the main feature, and (along with my experiences at the Arclight Cinema in Hollywood, which features reserved seating, 21+ cocktail screenings, great presentations, and higher ticket prices) the audiences seem generally more considerate (fewer chatters, cellphones, and yappy teenagers).

Also, the IMAX sound format apparently uses uncompressed digital audio (24 bit?). Much is made of the 15,000 watt sound systems that are typical of IMAX installations, but in my viewings of IMAX presentations, the audio always seems to have a certain depth and clarity that I don't quite pick up on with Dolby Digital. That the audio is uncompressed with possible 24-bit depth might explain that observation.

Another interesting tidbit that I read about is that the IMAX theaters are designed with point source surround speakers like a how a home theater is setup, rather than with multiple surround speaker arrays. The surround speakers in IMAX theaters are grouped and aligned in two spots towards the back of the theater and angled down towards the audience. When I saw Batman Begins on a flat IMAX screen, I sat in an ideal spot and really noticed better directionality than I normally hear in a movie theater, which tends to diffuse the surround sound. With this kind of setup, it might not necessarily create a convincing surround effect for people sitting off-center. IMAX says that they can go with this kind of speaker setup because their theaters use identical room proportions, and they can use the same alignment for all of their installations. I posted a link with more info.

http://history.acusd.edu/gen/filmnotes/imax.html

Roger Ebert has said in the past that IMAX is the natural successor to the old 70mm roadshow presentations that conveyed movies as spectacle. I'll have my favorite theaters still, but in the mix of lookalike megaplexes, IMAX is looking more like a standout option.

paul_pci
07-19-2005, 10:10 PM
I think King Kong would be a great choice for IMAX, and since Jackson's LOTRs were all on IMAX, hopefully his remake will be also. I'm hoping to catch Charlie and the Chocolate Factory on IMAX at the Bridge in LA, but not sure if I'll make it yet.

Sir Terrence the Terrible
07-20-2005, 03:45 AM
With Charlie and the Chocolate Factory breaking all IMAX box office records last week, it seems like the practice of remastering and transferring 35mm features onto the large IMAX print format will expand. I read that IMAX anticipates releasing seven conventional feature films annually starting next year, up from the four that they will put out this year. (Harry Potter is the next feature film that will get an IMAX DMR release) IMO, this is good news because the IMAX DMR releases that I've seen thus far have shown incredible improvements to the image resolution, with none of the lighting inconsistencies and grain that I used to see whenever theaters projected 35mm prints onto the large IMAX screens using normal 35mm projectors.

Strange as it may seem in this age of megaplexes and generic cookie cutter theaters where the marquee doesn't even tell you which auditorium a movie is playing in, IMAX might be the saving grace for making moviegoing an event again. Aside from the rapidly disappearing single screen movie palaces, IMAX is really the only larger than life theater going experience that seems to have taken hold in the market in recent years. As great as it is seeing a movie on a 90' wide screen, there are several other attributes to the IMAX experience that I think make it worth the extra price of admission.

The price of admission is indeed higher, but that has side benefits of no commercials running before the main feature, and (along with my experiences at the Arclight Cinema in Hollywood, which features reserved seating, 21+ cocktail screenings, great presentations, and higher ticket prices) the audiences seem generally more considerate (fewer chatters, cellphones, and yappy teenagers).

Also, the IMAX sound format apparently uses uncompressed digital audio (24 bit?). Much is made of the 15,000 watt sound systems that are typical of IMAX installations, but in my viewings of IMAX presentations, the audio always seems to have a certain depth and clarity that I don't quite pick up on with Dolby Digital. That the audio is uncompressed with possible 24-bit depth might explain that observation.

Another interesting tidbit that I read about is that the IMAX theaters are designed with point source surround speakers like a how a home theater is setup, rather than with multiple surround speaker arrays. The surround speakers in IMAX theaters are grouped and aligned in two spots towards the back of the theater and angled down towards the audience. When I saw Batman Begins on a flat IMAX screen, I sat in an ideal spot and really noticed better directionality than I normally hear in a movie theater, which tends to diffuse the surround sound. With this kind of setup, it might not necessarily create a convincing surround effect for people sitting off-center. IMAX says that they can go with this kind of speaker setup because their theaters use identical room proportions, and they can use the same alignment for all of their installations. I posted a link with more info.

http://history.acusd.edu/gen/filmnotes/imax.html

Roger Ebert has said in the past that IMAX is the natural successor to the old 70mm roadshow presentations that conveyed movies as spectacle. I'll have my favorite theaters still, but in the mix of lookalike megaplexes, IMAX is looking more like a standout option.

My thoughts exactly and I couldn't have said it better. I have always said that the movie industry as we know it today could be gone very soon if they do not do something that cannot be done at home. I know that my hometheater has everything that a typical movie theater could offer me. I have the huge clean picture, and big clean sound. So there is no reason to go to the theater anymore. What I don't have is a picture so huge that I get lost in it. That's what IMAX offers. You are correct, the sound is 24bit uncompressed.,


Good post bud!

JSE
07-20-2005, 06:30 AM
Another interesting tidbit that I read about is that the IMAX theaters are designed with point source surround speakers like a how a home theater is setup, rather than with multiple surround speaker arrays. The surround speakers in IMAX theaters are grouped and aligned in two spots towards the back of the theater and angled down towards the audience. When I saw Batman Begins on a flat IMAX screen, I sat in an ideal spot and really noticed better directionality than I normally hear in a movie theater, which tends to diffuse the surround sound. With this kind of setup, it might not necessarily create a convincing surround effect for people sitting off-center. IMAX says that they can go with this kind of speaker setup because their theaters use identical room proportions, and they can use the same alignment for all of their installations. I posted a link with more info.

http://history.acusd.edu/gen/filmnotes/imax.html

I have always thought this layout sounded better. Of course with IMAX, we have much shorter theaters with a steaper viewing angle so this set up works really well. I doubt the layout would work in normal, longer, flater theaters. I least I don't think it would? Hmm?

I have seen a couple of movies now in IMAX and I do agree that it's really adds to the experience. Just don't sit to low or your neck will pay the price, even more so than with a normal theater. I saw Spiderman on IMAX and on the regular screen and I can definitely say the IMAX was much better in terms of sound and picture.

JSE

Woochifer
07-21-2005, 01:48 PM
I think King Kong would be a great choice for IMAX, and since Jackson's LOTRs were all on IMAX, hopefully his remake will be also. I'm hoping to catch Charlie and the Chocolate Factory on IMAX at the Bridge in LA, but not sure if I'll make it yet.

Keep in mind that all of the LOTR movies were projected onto the IMAX screen using 35mm prints and projectors. None of them got transferred onto the large format IMAX film using their DMR process. I saw LOTR:FOTR at the Bridge at the IMAX theater and was disappointed by how grainy the picture looked and how dark the picture got around the edges. The other two LOTR movies I subsequently saw at the Village Theatre in Westwood, and the picture quality looked much better over there.

Charlie and the Chocolate Factory should look far better than any of the LOTR features did on that screen because it uses the 15 perf/70mm IMAX print format and the DMR process is supposed to enhance the image so that it does not look grainy on a large screen. Plus, the film is projected using an IMAX projector with a much more powerful lamp, and that should eliminate the dark spots that you would see with a regular 35mm projector. I saw the preview for that movie in IMAX, and it looks absolutely stunning.


My thoughts exactly and I couldn't have said it better. I have always said that the movie industry as we know it today could be gone very soon if they do not do something that cannot be done at home. I know that my hometheater has everything that a typical movie theater could offer me. I have the huge clean picture, and big clean sound. So there is no reason to go to the theater anymore. What I don't have is a picture so huge that I get lost in it. That's what IMAX offers. You are correct, the sound is 24bit uncompressed.,


Good post bud!

Thanx for confirming the info T! The surveys that I've seen about people's viewing preferences are pretty stunning. With movie theaters going to the generic megaplex layouts, raising ticket prices, charging huge amounts for snacks, AND now showing those obnoxious commercial loops before the feature, it's no wonder people no longer treat moviegoing as a special event or a community gathering, and no better than what they see at home. And with that dilution of the theatrical experience, you got people behaving like they're in their own living room -- putting their feet up on the seats in front of them, talking during the picture, chatting on their cell phones, etc.

IMAX really is the new equivalent of the 70mm roadshow. With 70mm, those prints primarily went into the biggest auditoriums with the best sound and projection systems. (and back then, 70mm was the only way to hear full bandwidth six-channel surround sound) You knew the picture and sound quality would be a big step up over the 35mm optical analog presentations, and the theaters that screened in 70mm were typically the best ones in the area. With the demise of 70mm and the rise of the megaplex, there's no longer anything that differentiates one theater from another. IMAX identifies a theater that can convey a larger than life experience (although projecting 35mm prints onto the large IMAX screens is less than satisfying). With IMAX now trying to release 7 IMAX DMR features every year (and now getting the aspect ratio right -- Apollo 13 and Attack of the Clones were released in IMAX DMR, but in a 4:3 aspect ratio with the sides lopped off), this once again establishes locations where people who want something extra in their theater experience can go.


I have always thought this layout sounded better. Of course with IMAX, we have much shorter theaters with a steaper viewing angle so this set up works really well. I doubt the layout would work in normal, longer, flater theaters. I least I don't think it would? Hmm?

I have seen a couple of movies now in IMAX and I do agree that it's really adds to the experience. Just don't sit to low or your neck will pay the price, even more so than with a normal theater. I saw Spiderman on IMAX and on the regular screen and I can definitely say the IMAX was much better in terms of sound and picture.

IMAX says that they can use point source surround because all of their flat screen theaters are built to the same proportions. I haven't heard the sound sitting off-center, but from where I was sitting for Batman Begins, the sound envelopment and directional effects were spot on, more akin to a properly configured home theater than the more diffuse sound that you typically get from an array of surround speakers along the walls.

You're definitely right about seating. Much more so than with normal theaters, you want to sit fairly far back in an IMAX theater to get keep your neck from straining. And in a dome IMAX theater -- you'd better be in the last row and right in the middle! (might be fine with a normal full frame IMAX movie, but with a widescreen movie, it doesn't quite look right)

Sir Terrence the Terrible
07-22-2005, 04:50 AM
Have you ever noticed how much better sounding the DVD's from IMAX releases sound over their normal hollywood based cousins? I think that has alot to do with the fact they are mixed in a environment simular to most hometheaters. I seem to have alot of IMAX DVD's in my collection.

E-Stat
07-22-2005, 05:36 AM
Have you ever noticed how much better sounding the DVD's from IMAX releases sound over their normal hollywood based cousins? I think that has alot to do with the fact they are mixed in a environment simular to most hometheaters. I seem to have alot of IMAX DVD's in my collection.
I've noticed that too as I have a number of their DVDs as well. I'm a sucker for the ones NASA shot like "Dream Is Alive" and "Blue Planet". Although an IMAX theatre cannot even come close to producing the awesome sound of a Shuttle launch (I watched the Apollo 11 launch at the Cape when I was 12), watching those films even at home can bring a tear to my eye in amazement.

rw

Woochifer
07-22-2005, 01:21 PM
Have you ever noticed how much better sounding the DVD's from IMAX releases sound over their normal hollywood based cousins? I think that has alot to do with the fact they are mixed in a environment simular to most hometheaters. I seem to have alot of IMAX DVD's in my collection.

I've only seen IMAX produced films at the theater -- haven't bought any of those movies on DVD yet, just hadn't thought about it. Good to know though that their sound mixes on DVD capture much of what I've heard at the IMAX theaters. But, now that you bring it up, next time I'm DVD shopping I might need to give the "Special Interest" section another look -- and look past all of the "Girls Gone Wild" and naked cigar smoking videos that seem to dominate that section! (How did you manage to acquire a collection of IMAX DVDs without also buying a boatload of "Hip Hop Chicks Gone Bad" or "Naked Police Chases With Wild Animals Wrestling Paraplegic Penthouse Pets In Hot Oil" videos? ... Or am I being presumptuous here?)


I've noticed that too as I have a number of their DVDs as well. I'm a sucker for the ones NASA shot like "Dream Is Alive" and "Blue Planet". Although an IMAX theatre cannot even come close to producing the awesome sound of a Shuttle launch (I watched the Apollo 11 launch at the Cape when I was 12), watching those films even at home can bring a tear to my eye in amazement.

I've only experienced the sonic booms from the shuttle re-entries, when they used to land at Edwards AFB in the California desert. I can only imagine what the rumble must be like at take off! I've heard that the fundamental wave length goes far beyond anything that any speaker on this planet can reproduce.

BTW, I've been curious about those Spacecraft Films DVDs that have the television coverage and other film footage from the Apollo, Gemini, and Mercury missions. Do you know if they're worth getting? Thanks!

agtpunx40
07-22-2005, 04:06 PM
I've heard that many IMAX screens were actually in trouble because of the lack of source material that was "acceptable" to their audiences. In certain religious areas of the country, people were complaining about the science movies that IMAX traditionally show, for example that James Cameron one "Aliens of the Deep" or something. Apparently in some parts of the country enough people complained about references to evolution as fact, and the age of the earth that they stopped showing many of the science movies. The theaters were looking for more material, so they started to put more hollywood movies on in IMAX. Don't know if that's true, or if it had a big influence since they have been showing more hollywood movies on IMAX screens for a while.

Woochifer
07-24-2005, 12:42 PM
I've heard that many IMAX screens were actually in trouble because of the lack of source material that was "acceptable" to their audiences. In certain religious areas of the country, people were complaining about the science movies that IMAX traditionally show, for example that James Cameron one "Aliens of the Deep" or something. Apparently in some parts of the country enough people complained about references to evolution as fact, and the age of the earth that they stopped showing many of the science movies. The theaters were looking for more material, so they started to put more hollywood movies on in IMAX. Don't know if that's true, or if it had a big influence since they have been showing more hollywood movies on IMAX screens for a while.

I think it's disgraceful that some people in those areas have taken it upon themselves to start complaining about documentary movies that discuss evolution. Then again, some people just have a problem with science in general (as evidenced by the pressures on school boards to teach creation alongside evolution in some areas).

That said, keep in mind that IMAX screens originally went primarily into museums and amusement complexes. The pressure for more material has only come about since commercial megaplexes started adding IMAX screens to new developments. IMAX blockbusters like Everest don't come along very often, and most of their programs seem to aim for more of a niche audience. A lot of those theaters (and even some of the museum and amusement facilities) at least a decade ago started projecting Hollywood movies onto the giant IMAX screens using regular 35mm and 70mm projectors. As I mentioned on this thread, that does not necessarily work well because the IMAX screens can be 70 to over 100 feet wide (for perspective, the big 1,200+ seat auditorium at the Chinese Theater in Hollywood has a 60' wide screen and the audience does not sit nearly as close to the screen because the seating is not in a stadium configuration), which makes film grain from 35mm prints very visible.

The new IMAX DMR features (which started with Apollo 13 in 2002) address these shortcomings by transferring the feature onto the large IMAX print format and using the more powerful IMAX projectors, and give the IMAX theaters a new source of programming and revenue. Some of the museum IMAX theaters still stick with documentaries and science programs, but the commercial megaplexes obviously have been pushing for something that will sell more concessions.

Woochifer
07-24-2005, 12:47 PM
A new article in today's Washington Post on the impact and future of IMAX. Addresses a lot of what's already been discussed on this thread.

THE NEXT BIG THING
Commercial Films Find Imax Format Can Be a Huge Draw

By Dan Zak
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, July 24, 2005; N01

There was a time when we went to Imax theaters for whales and rockets.

That was when the big big screen was for shorter educational films about the deep sea, outer space and wild kingdoms -- movies shot on big Imax film with big Imax cameras.

Now we go to Imax for eccentric candymen and superheroes with bat complexes. And we're going more often.

"Charlie and the Chocolate Factory" was No. 1 at the box office last weekend with a $56.1 million take, $2.2 million of which was made on 65 Imax screens. It was Imax's biggest opening weekend ever, besting the debuts of "Batman Begins" and last winter's "The Polar Express," which eventually grossed a record-breaking $45 million on 83 Imax screens.

When "Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire" opens in November, it will be the year's fourth Hollywood feature to open simultaneously in Imax and regular 35mm theaters. There were three such releases last year ("Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban," "Spider-Man 2" and "The Polar Express") and two the year before that (the final legs of "The Matrix" trilogy). Next year there will be six, maybe more.

Imax's corporate strategy is to entice Americans happiest in front of a 60-inch plasma-screen TV, wrapped in the fuzzy warmth of a Netflix plan.

"Consumers are saying, 'In order to get me out of the home, you need to wow me, you need to give me something special,' " says Rich Gelfond, co-chairman and co-CEO of Imax, which is jointly headquartered in Toronto and New York.

"[Imax] helps 'eventize' our big movies," says Dan Fellman, president of domestic distribution for Warner Bros. Pictures, the studio behind half of the feature film releases on Imax. "And we will continue to release our big films that way." Twentieth Century Fox, Universal, Columbia and Disney have also released features in Imax.

"What's great about Imax is that in this sea of uncertainty, or seeming malaise at the box office, they're filling theaters," says Paul Dergarabedian, president of Exhibitor Relations Co., the box office tracking firm.

.... REST OF ARTICLE LINKED BELOW

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/22/AR2005072200332_pf.html

paul_pci
07-24-2005, 03:29 PM
Cool article Wooch. Man, you're on top of everything.

Woochifer
07-25-2005, 04:08 PM
T-Man and E-Stat -

I took your suggestions and got a DVD copy of Blue Planet, one of my favorite IMAX movies, over the weekend. My goodness! That is a fine sound mix on that DVD with excellent surround imaging all the way around and a lot of LFE extension. The image quality's also pretty damn good, though the environmental message of the movie had a lot more impact with how vivid the images looked on the IMAX screen (the stuff like the fires and clear cutting in the rain forests, the river erosion, the irrigation wells, etc. as seen from space). Altogether though a great suggestion!