AMC Loews Lincoln Square 13 with IMAX

1998 Broadway,
New York, NY 10023

Unfavorite 54 people favorited this theater

Showing 1 - 25 of 891 comments

xbs2034
xbs2034 on January 14, 2017 at 7:11 am

Yeah, no significant ghosting with Rogue One. As far as seating goes, I think I was 6 or 7 rows back and pretty close to the middle of the screen (maybe slightly to the left, but not by much). I am a bit concerned about these issues if you had them and I did at another theater. If the final Resident Evil plays here (set to be in IMAX, but don’t think locations/showtimes are announced yet) I’ll see that and look out for good seating and these issues.

alpinedownhiller
alpinedownhiller on January 13, 2017 at 9:37 pm

As far as reflections, I did notice the Boston glasses seemed very reflective and recall being worried at first, with the house lights up it seemed worrisome, but then when the movie started they turned off every single last light to zero and it was like pitch black at that theater so no issues whatsoever.

At Lincoln Square they seemed reflective, maybe a bit less so though than Boston I think, but it was a year apart, can’t be sure, the Boston glasses might have been smaller and a bit more reflective but man they worked so much better and with the lights all off who cares about the reflections IMO. They also made it pretty dark here too, don’t recall seeing any lights in my direct line of view at all. I think they kept a few dark ones in the stairs on but couldn’t see them from our dead center (and 2 rows from the back) seats. So I had zero reflection problems here with the movie going.

Maybe the SanFran theater kept some of the line of sight lights on and that gave you the trouble there.

alpinedownhiller
alpinedownhiller on January 13, 2017 at 9:33 pm

@xbs2034 – huh but no bad ghosting and dbl images or loss of detail etc at Rogue one here at all? Not maybe sitting off to the left and forced to look through them to the right (which might mask some of the issue)?

Ah man, if you actually had working glasses then I’m really bummed I hadn’t known what was going on in time to get new pairs and see if they worked. Had really been looking forward to this (plus the expense and trouble of getting to NYC) so quite the bummer. Was really counting on a great experience, biggest Star Wars fan around. :(

Anyway I’d still be cautious about this theater for now. We had two for two identically bum glasses and even if ‘only’ 50% of the glasses here are bum that would mean we had only ¼ chance to both get bum pairs so I wonder if maybe even more than 50% are bum. Who knows. Darn.

xbs2034
xbs2034 on January 13, 2017 at 3:43 pm

@alpinedownhiller- the two issues I had with the laser glasses in SF were the size and I got a small reflection effect with my prescription glasses in the brightest shots (not often, maybe a half dozen times throughout the movie)

vertigoman
vertigoman on January 13, 2017 at 3:28 pm

I also had a lot of difficulty with the new 3D glasses. They weren’t physically uncomfortable to wear, but they were highly reflective – so reflective that I saw everything. Besides the 3D image on the screen, every bit of stray light in the theater (like the blue light that spills in from the entranceways to the side of the screen) reflected off the lenses. My own eyes and face reflected within the glasses.

When they showed trailers in 2D, the image was fine, but the 3D glasses ended up reflecting every single bit of stray light in the theater and ended up reflecting the sides of my face into the lenses too.

I wrote to the IMAX CQO using the email address provided at the end of the feature (they put this onscreen at the end of every IMAX showing), and they conceded that they were aware of the issue with the glasses and hoped to make improvements in the future, but didn’t have an immediate fix either.

I’ve simply never experienced a glasses issue like this with any other 3D showing using any other 3D technology at any other venue. Not at home on my active TV and projector, not at RealD theaters with circular polarization, not at digital and film venues with linear polarization, and not even at Dolby Digital 3D venues which use similar lens technology but smaller lenses.

I think what happened was that IMAX wanted to have larger lenses that the standard Dolby 3D glasses so they enlarged the eye holes (on standard Dolby 3D glasses, the viewable area is much smaller), but the lens material is so reflective that with the increased size, they’re just reflecting everything. It’s probably something that wasn’t as apparent in a test environment but is unavoidable in the real world.

Still, for $26 a ticket, I expected more.

alpinedownhiller
alpinedownhiller on January 13, 2017 at 2:18 pm

Laser 3D also should have no problems since polarization isn’t involved AFAIK. Laser lets you send out light at a very specific frequency so they can construct multiple sets of primaries that are fairly similar and, AFAIK, they use notch filters to filter out the specific primaries they use for R,G and B (and they might even use two sets of similar for each eye at least to try to get around metameric differences between people’s eyes to try to insure someone with odd cones doesn’t get left out) for the left eye signal from the right and vice versa. I could swing my head all over the place and looking through my left eye only here saw no ghosting. So you can send out strong signals, with no compromise, to each eye and just notch out 100% the left eye image from the right and vice-versa in a way that the polarized screens never quite manage. The single frequency a laser can send out lets them be able to make a basically 100% filter without having any noticeable damage to color fidelity. Unless they ended up doing something different in the end. (of course it is a bit trickier than it sounds since the eye’s response is tricky and varies a bit person to person so they probably had to do lots of tuning and testing and maybe send out double sets of primaries to each maybe and so on)

And in Boston, where the glasses seemed to be properly coated, strongly and fully edge to edge across both left and right eye lenses, it was just perfect, not even a trace of ghosting. Even regular IMAX Xenon 3D has tiny faint traces of ghosting even sitting ideally (although in most theaters it seems less to me than with Real 3D; as for Doldby 3D supposedly they don’t use polarization and use the method you mention, but I was pretty disappointed in it the one time I went, colors didn’t seem rich, contrast and brightness poor, I liked Real3D better for sure and IMAX 3D much better and in some ways IMAX 15/70 3D better still (although was mixed compared to IMAX 3D) but none of them come close to the Boston Laser 3D IMAX, that is just perfection (and I think Lincoln Square would be the same if the right lenses in some to many of the glasses here were not messed up and had the proper right eye filter coating across the entire lens and not just the center, since the 3D seemed perfect and ghost free center and right side of the screen).

So they

RobertEndres
RobertEndres on January 13, 2017 at 1:51 pm

Just as a side comment, if you remember the days of 35mm interlocked projector 3-D in the early ‘50’s, all of the complaints raised about digital 3-D were true then. If you turned your head slightly you’d lose the separation created by the Polarized light. In order to maintain the separation the screens had to be high gain and thus could display a “hot spot” when viewed off axis as well a significant light drop off in wide auditoriums or ones with a steep projection angle (that was one of the reasons the Radio City Music Hall scrapped the plan to show “Kiss Me Kate” in 3-D. They would have lost too many seats at the sides and top of the mezzanines.) Many of those conditions exist with digital 3-D as well. One exception is Dolby Digital 3-D which uses a very sophisticated variation on anaglyph 3-D. It can be projected on a matte white screen and not lose separation between the eyes. The trade off is that it does require more light than those systems which use high gain screens. With all of the digital 3-D systems the registration is better than could be achieved with two 35mm machines, and of course, there’s no mechanical motion problem such as weave to cause problems between the two images being seen as one. Digital 3-D just copied a lot of what was developed in the '50’s for film 3-D. Another case of “everything old is new again”.

markp
markp on January 13, 2017 at 12:42 pm

I remember when we ran the original Star Wars in 1977 at the GCC Menlo Park Twin. Those were some days that will never ever be duplicated

alpinedownhiller
alpinedownhiller on January 13, 2017 at 12:34 pm

@xbs2034 – what did you hate about the glasses in SF? just the small lens size (and maybe the rims cutting off FOV if you say close??) or actual visual artifacts? (I could be wrong but I thought the glasses at the Boston one had been even smaller than the ones here, but sitting near the back of the theater the small size didn’t impact anything and the way the high quality lenses just showed an utterly perfect 3D image like I’ve never seen before so I way prefer those ones)

And you really saw no double images at Rogue One here? Nothing weird at all? Not even at the edges? Were you sitting in the center (or maybe way to the left and thus naturally kind of looking sideways to the right?)?

If I turned my head even a touch to look towards the right side the double images would be over the entire left side of the screen. Some scenes hid it to an extent and you might not realize there was doubling going on or just think the area was a little blurry or OOF or something but closing one eye and then the other eye you could see all sorts of patterns and texture were doubled with the right eye and when it came to bright lines and stars it was pretty darn clear that with one eye you see a line and a star and then with the other eye you’d see two stars in the same area and two sets of lines, not all that subtle either so not like that very faint ghosting you often see in any regular 3D (15/70 3D, IMAX Xenon, Real3D, etc.) across the frame. Maybe if someone wasn’t paying attention they just think it’s a jubmle or stars and lines and textures all over and somehow not realize there is double imaging going on, espcially if they didn’t realize how utterly 100.00% perfect from ANY hint ghosting or artifact of any type laser imax 3D is when viewed with properly made glasses.

Just wondering if they actually do have some good glasses here. Sure wishing if good glasses do exist here I had known and kept going back until I got good ones at the start.

Currently I couldn’t recommend the IMAX here for 3D since I don’t trust the odds to get a good pair and to have to dash back and forth possibly trying 2,3,10,20 pairs during the short 3D previews and the start of feature film would be an annoying mess.

Unless our luck was so monstrously bad that they only have like say 20 bad pairs out of 480 or something and we got 2 of the 20.

alpinedownhiller
alpinedownhiller on January 13, 2017 at 12:18 pm

@makrp – you can laugh at digital 3D and digital in general, but let me tell you the laser IMAX 3D they have up Boston with the glasses there was utterly mind-blowing, so far superior to 15/70 3D, better contrast, better brightness with darks probably even darker, zero ghosting, the 3D was so utterly naturally and smooth like infinite levels of subtle depth you literally felt like you were not wearing glasses and simply there in person on scene in a way I’ve just never felt with Real 3D/Dolby 3D/IMAX 15/70 3D/IMAX Digital Xenon 3D, even more subtle as well as richer colors; it was the most mind-blowing revolutionary new feeling I’d had in a theater since my first 3D movie ever (Avatar in 15/70 3D) and the original Star Wars on a giant screen with 70mm projection and Dolby Surround way back in ‘77 in the huge 2000 seat Stanley Warner Paramus.

but as with anything things can be messed up, I’ve seen there are a couple auditoriums at my local theater where the regular digital projectors appear to become uncalibrated and they have a bit of loss of detail and color fringing; but don’t forget the ways film projection could be messed up at times and the the way prints would look so faded so quickly so there was always the rush to get in a good viewing right away, with digital you can still enjoy the same quality if you go back and get in a final viewing 4 weeks later as on the first few days. And the 4k projectors when given 4k material definitely show more detail than the 35mm projection ever did (unless maybe you are some big wig and get a special more direct copy print unlike any regular theater ever gets and even then the detail would be probably the same at best even if a K64/K25 slide might have more tha 8MP detail but you never get to see that projected as a movie).

and sadly, at least with the glasses we got for Rogue One at Lincoln yesterday. I wish I knew it was the glasses that were the issue earlier on and had run back and tried a bunch more pairs. It seemed too disruptive to try that half way in and with my friends pair seeming the same I had figured all were bad, but maybe not.

Also, film also can and has been shown in 3D and you get into wanting to be centered in the theater and so on there too. And the new laser imax can also do 2D of course and even here with the 3D sadly messed up (at least for some decent number of the glasses here) and i haven’t seen 2D laser imax ever get messed up (not that I’ve seen it a lot).

xbs2034
xbs2034 on January 13, 2017 at 8:58 am

@markp, as I said I get the love for film, especially as a capture method but even in projection I would still like to see film prints from time to time. The problem is nowadays you basically need to see a brand new print at a special venue to find pristine quality and people who can project it right. In places with very talented protectionists like Film Forum, Museum of the Moving Image, and NYFF, new prints can look great but often archival ones have damage either from someone else or just normal wear and tear, and in the years where the industry was heavily transitioning to digital projection but still could find plenty of new releases projecting on film (basically 2010-2013) the difference was apparent with film prints usually having significant scratches and faded colors even for titles 1-3 weeks into their release.

Not to say digital projection can’t have problems (I’ve had bad showings, and like with film the risk increases with multiplexes vs special venues), but the number of times I’ve seen significant projection issues has gone down in recent years, and IMAX laser and even a regular 4K projector are capable of producing high quality images that means image detail and sharpness doesn’t have to be compromised for the stability and print savings of digital.

markp
markp on January 13, 2017 at 8:37 am

Once again I will say, all you folks with the 3D and 3D glasses and laser etc really cracks me up. Give me a good old 35MM or 70MM film presentation that I can sit anywhere in the theatre and not worry about right eye left eye, turning my head, filters not being removed and all the other crap digital has brought about. Maybe its because I ran film for 41 years, but at least you guys give me a good laugh.

xbs2034
xbs2034 on January 13, 2017 at 7:24 am

I remember thinking the IMAX Laser 3D glasses were pretty poor when I saw Force Awakens in San Fran, and while it didn’t ruin the movie, it did bug me in a few scenes. But they didn’t bother me with Rogue One here, I don’t know if they were slightly redesigned or I just got used to them.

I will also say from Force Awakens that I thought the 1.43 15/70 shot sequence looked stunning and was a huge jump in quality from the already good looking 35mm DMR footage (I had previously seen the film in Real D at 84st and Dolby Cinema at the Empire 25 and that scene didn’t really stand out from the rest there). It probably was some blind digital hater who trashed it (and I get the love and nostalgia for film, but digital is clearly where things are going, and particularly on the projection side I’m very impressed by some of the things they can do now digitally), cause the idea that IMAX wouldn’t let that their native aspect ratio and footage look anything less than great with the biggest R&D endeavor in company history is nonsensical.

alpinedownhiller
alpinedownhiller on January 12, 2017 at 10:32 pm

@Imax123 – “I’ve also heard IMAX laser has a better picture quality at 1:90 than at 1:43 because it’s native aspect ratio is 1:90 like the IMAX digital,”

That definitely was not my impression at the Boston 3D IMAX. Someone at the DC Laser IMAX was claiming they just digitally zoomed in for the 1.43 screens with the projector and it looked all pixelated, giant visible pixels and terrible, but I think that guy either didn’t know what he was talking about or was making stuff up to trash digital since he came across as an extreme film lover. Or maybe somehow they totally messed up the install down there.

At the Boston 3D IMAX though the 1.43 scenes in TFA were AMAZING! If anything I thought they even seemed to have crisper detail, at the least I sure didn’t see anything to complain about. The 2.35:1 stuff and the 1.43:1 stuff both looked amazing.

alpinedownhiller
alpinedownhiller on January 12, 2017 at 10:09 pm

@Movie_time – hmm so you think your left had the issues? not left side of screen but left eye? are you sure it was not left side of screen but issue caused by the right eye? what side of the theater did you sit at? left, center, right? on my friend and I’s glasses I managed to clearly see a major defect of similar nature on both right lenses (the left looked a little dodgy since the coating seemed to fade from green to near clear at the far edges but that said the left eye seemed to work totally fine as far as I could tell; the right lens though didn’t just fade from pink to clearer it faded from pink to starting to shade green like the eye eye is supposed to be; also note these colors only apply to looking at the spectrum of the fluorescent light bulbs they have there, under full spectrum light or with laser primaries there is no tinting)

was it really just a little blur and ghosting at the left corner or over a much wider area of the screen if you looked all around?

if yours was just a left eye problem and just on one corner then maybe my friend and I simply got a really, really bum pair here and wished we’d known in time to go ask for a new pair.

at the very least it seems the QC for their glasses here is dodgy. And the 3D part of the previews is show sort it doesn’t give a lot of time to go down ask for another pair and perhaps repeat a few times. what a mess that would be too, disturbing everyone again and again and if half the theater is needing to do that….

alpinedownhiller
alpinedownhiller on January 12, 2017 at 10:02 pm

OK, slightly more briefly this time.

The long and short of it is I was super looking forward to getting to Rogue One on a giant screen with Laser 3D IMAX but this theater has messed up glasses! As best as I can tell they only applied all the proper notch filters to a thin band on the right eye lenses here so the left side and right side of the right lenses in the glasses here let through at least one and think more of the primaries that only the left eye should see to some degree. With how far away from your eye the glasses here sit that thin band isn’t nearly enough to cover your eye’s FOV. You’d need to sit 10 rows behind, at the least, the back row here on a screen half the size for it to work. This means that for most people the left side of the screen will exhibit moderate to extreme ghosting effects or minor to considerable sort of odd dusty loss of detail when you are facing straight forward and looking straight forward (facing right and looking back left the entire screen would look bad, facing left and looking back right most of the screen would look fine, maybe just a bit on the left edge still off a little). They need to give refunds and fix this ASAP. It’s crazy this premier location might give Laser 3D IMAX a bad name over them having either cheaped out on the glasses at this installation or not bothered to test them. Really disappointed after having planned this and looked forward to it for so long.

Unless maybe my friend and I were just that unlucky to get two of the worst pairs of glasses here. Maybe some or most are better? Two for two makes me think at least a good chunk of the glasses here are defective.

The Boston Laser 3D IMAX (quite small lenses) glasses are perfect and have none of these issues and the projection in 3D is beyond incredible. Here with the bad glasses (also smaller lenses than normal IMAX theaters, although I think larger than the ones at Boston were, not sure though, but whatever, the Boston ones, even if smaller, are so much better) here where the right eye is not coated properly, just a dab in the center, your left side FOV will be messed up to varying degrees.

I mean the center still looks pretty good for most scenes and the right side of the screen looks great and you can do the awkward thing below and still revel in the incredible Laser 3D IMAX somewhat but they gotta fix this. A disappointing disaster they have made with the glasses at this theater installation. Properly coated and kept clean. :(

(You can sort of get around the issue to a decent degree if you are sitting in center and then turn your head way to the left so it’s aiming just about at the left edge of the screen and then turn your eyes back to the right so they are looking almost all the way back to center. So long as you keep your head locked in that position facing way to the left and then and keep your eyes looking back towards the center or right most of the screen will look OK (although the very far left will still have a bit of ghosting in some scenes and maybe a few left side artifacts) as this means your eye is looking through the right lens at an angle which lets the narrow band where the notch filters were properly coated on to cover a wider part of your right eye’s FOV. But it’s kind of awkward to have to view a movie with extreme side look and not be able to move your head around. And if you were to be sitting on the left side of the theater I don’t even know what you’d do since your head would be aimed so far left how would you even see the right side of the screen much at all (unless maybe if you were that far left then you could simply face straight ahead and then naturally side look to the right??) And you have to turn your head so far to the left that the bottom right will be blocked by the edge of your glasses for your left eye.)

alpinedownhiller
alpinedownhiller on January 12, 2017 at 9:30 pm

I had been looking forward to a special trip to Rogue One in Laser IMAX for a long time and was disappointed at the total mess this new installation has made of their Laser IMAX system. During the previews (well once they switched to the 3D ones, the 2D ones looked great as expected) I was like wait what is wrong? Why do I see ghosting and lack of detail on the left side of the screen??? Laser IMAX in Boston was PERFECTION, I’d been going on about how it was literally like you were there looking with your own eyes, the most amazing and 100% ghost free 3D I’d ever seen, so great it was almost like a new experience.

So I spent the first half the movie concentrating more on what the heck was going wrong, swapped glasses with my friend a few times and the other pair was only very marginally different was really kinda stunk. That’s not was I was looking forward too and had paid for.

I was wondering if maybe they switched the lasers to new frequencies and some quirk in my right eye was somehow still registering some of the left eye frequencies since I saw it with both pairs.

Then I went to the rest room and looked at the glasses under the fluorescent light bulbs in there and noticed that the right eye lens seemed odd, it seemed like only a skinny band in the middle was pink tinted and the rest looked plain or green like the left eye lens. Then I put them on and closed my right eye and looked through the left and everything from looked green tinted, although even there some patches were a bit closer to normal, but at least anywhere at all near the center had a strong green tint and even the edges had at least some green so it seemed possibly OK (and during the movie closing my right and looking only with the left it seemed like the entire screen was pretty much ghost free). Then I closed my left eye and looked through the right and was horrified! Everything dead center looked pink but to the right it looked only slightly pink with a few hints of green and to the left it looked green! That means that large portions of the right lenses in the glasses here are missing the notch filter to cut out left eye signal for at least one or more of the primaries.

So I think they set up this premier theater location to show off their new Laser IMAX system and didn’t even bother to check the darn glasses and I wouldn’t be surprised if the entire batch they gave this center have the right eye lenses manufactured totally wrong!

If your eyes are more wide set than mine, you’d probably see ghosting on both left and right side of the screen and fine in the middle and a large area to either side around the center. If they are like mine or more narrow set though from center to the farthest right edge will look perfect, fantastic, but slightly left of center ghosting and/or general lack of detail/dusty feeling starts and it gets worse as you look farther left.

It was ultra noticeable on those transparent screens in the rebel base that had minty green lines and stuff on them, through the right eye you see extreme double vision on the entire left half of the screen, the a pair of minty lines and then a second, highly offset pair off off-yellow lines (which was some of what was supposed to be the signal for the left eye only).

I think they were either trying to be so cheap with the expensive coatings to try to get away with only coating them strongly in the center and way, way overdid for the right eyes or simply had a major manufacturing errors that applied the coatings to the center of the right eye and barely at all across the rest of the lens! I can’t quite remember if these were the same type the Boston Laser IMAX had. I almost thought the Boston ones had even a bit smaller and more curved lenses. Maybe people complained and they went to slightly larger ones but the Boston ones at least had proper coatings across the entire surface of each lens.! Way better. They worked so perfectly it was crazy.

I don’t know if it’s all tje glasses, some, most, just a few and my friend and I were that unlucky to both get pairs. But I’d hope our luck wouldn’t be worse than 1 in 10 in which case at least 30% of the glasses are totally messed up at this supposedly premier installation that has the most expensive tickets of probably any theater in the whole U.S. and a theater that costs a lot of money just to even get to if you come in from out of the city.

I see someone mention a problem above where they saw lower left all blurred and ghosted. Not sure if that means the really saw the upper left fine and maybe it’s random how bad and patchy the coatings are and some are perfect, some terrible, some varying degrees of inbetween.

But man, mega bummed after all that waiting and expense and time.

I did find that if I turned my head to face the left edge of the screen and then looked towards the right, so my eyes are now basically looking near dead center, looking at the screen with side look, that I was able to see the entire center of the screen fine and the whole right side fine and much of the left not too badly although a few bits woukd still have a bit of defect especially toward far left edges. So I did end up watching the last half of the movie like that. (trying to slide the glasses over left on my nose to center my right eye in the pink strip didn’t work since if I slid the glasses far enough over to rid all ghosting and defects on the left side of the screen then the right side got those problems instead since the right side of the right lenses also didn’t have all notch filters applied properly). It was sort of awkward, having to hold my eyes in extreme side look for an hour and I had to always face my head towards the left and was not free to swing my head to look around. Held like that it was sort of OK, but….

I will say where the glasses did work perfectly the display was fantastic and as I recalled from Boston te 3D was just so utterly naturally unlike anything you see in any other type of 3D projection.

It’s a huge shame and really disgrace that they have such a serious problem with the glasses at this theater. How this could pass the installation quality control I have no idea.

I have to say I shocked to not see post after post above raving about how insanely fantastic IMAX Laser projection is for 3D. Maybe this explains it. Maybe all the glasses here are bum and none of you have seen what IMAX 3D Laser is really supposed to be like. None knew how utterly perfect it is supposed to be so didn’t even try to do weird maneuvers to force the glasses to begin to sort of work correctly.

Basically if you just view through the glasses straight on normally and don’t have extra wide set eyes and just look around and view normally half your field of visions will see small to major (like larger than I’ve seen from any other 3D tech ever) ghosting and varying degrees of loss of detail and fidelity.

They need to fix this ASAP. Either stop cheaping out and use full quality glasses like in Boston or toss this perhaps simply instead bad batch of glasses in the trash and send them a new working supply. This will not show case Laser 3D IMAX the way it should be and will hurt their brand name.

People should be going insane over how beyond fanstatic the 3D is. This place should be filled with post after post raving about it. Instead I see like no raves and already a few complaints were people seem vaguely unsure what was going on.

poland626
poland626 on January 4, 2017 at 8:09 pm

@optimist008 like, a 5 second google search will show you this wasn’t a screening of the movie but 7 minutes of clips as a “teaser” for imax viewers

optimist008
optimist008 on January 4, 2017 at 5:17 pm

Was the showing of Dunkirk a test, advanced or just a private screening??? I previously went to a few tests screenngs here when they were more common, and have not seen the folks outside from NRG or wherever doing the invites lately…or maybe I am looking at the wrong time of day???

Movie_Time
Movie_Time on January 4, 2017 at 1:47 pm

jmcr8: I agree with you completely on the new 3D glasses. Not only are they too small a field of view, I also noticed that the left side felt a bit blurry towards the bottom of my left eye. Almost as if the coating on the 3D glasses for for that side was not applied correctly. Maybe if the glasses were larger like they used to be, it would have been less noticeable. After watching for a few minutes, I noticed it less.Did any of you guys or girls happen to notice this with your 3D glasses? I would love to hear if you did. Thanks

vertigoman
vertigoman on December 31, 2016 at 10:59 am

I saw the 10:30pm showing of Rogue One on December 15th, and again, I can confirm that Dunkirk was shown in 70mm IMAX. I corresponded with IMAX CQO David Keighley after the show and he further confirmed that Dunkirk was shown in 70mm, and he was personally in attendance to supervise the first screening of it.

There was no significant delay due to the switch of projectors. The running order was such: first they played the usual AMC/IMAX trailer welcoming people into the theater. Then, it appeared that the house lights and IMAX wall lights were manually switched off (they turned off suddenly, as opposed to a slow dim), and the 70mm projector was turned on immediately. Following Dunkirk, the IMAX wall lights and house lights came back on (again, this appeared to be done manually as they simply flipped on rather than fading in), and then trailers were shown on the laser projector.

During the switch as Dunkirk began, I looked up and could see that the dual laser projectors were stationed in the center of the booth, towards the top of the glass window. The 70mm projector was stationed below the laser projectors, between the two. When on, the projection beam from the 70mm projector came from underneath and between the positioning of the laser system. So it would have appeared that it was installed below and between the two laser projectors and not on a rail. The changeover between projection systems was practically instant – it did not appear that anything was physically moved during the presentation.

The email address for the IMAX CQO is displayed following all IMAX presentations – you can write to them directly if there is still any doubt regarding whether or not Dunkirk was shown on film.

jmcr8
jmcr8 on December 30, 2016 at 3:14 pm

I think the new renovation is nice. Dunkirk preview in my Rogue One showing filled the screen but seemed to be laser projected not 70mm film. I did notice some vertical lines showing through the top portion of the screen. Not sure if this is what people reported to need correcting from the early Fantastic Beasts showings.

The one downgrade I think is the new 3D glasses. The lenses are much smaller than the old glasses and really cramp your view. Whats the point of this giant screen if you’re looking at it through these restrictive little slits of plastic. If IMAX would make the new glasses as big or bigger than the old ones to keep the black lens frames out of your view this would really capitalize on the whole IMAX concept and make a much more impactful viewing experience.

Doctor
Doctor on December 24, 2016 at 5:26 pm

with todays movie, i think i have seen all possible combinations of IMAX

1.movie shot using normal camera => projected using 70 mm IMAX projector (Inception)

2.movie shot using normal camera with some scenes shot using 70 mm IMAX camera => projected using 70 mm IMAX projector (Dark knight, Dark Knight rises, Interstellar)

3.movie shot using normal camera with some scenes shot using digital IMAX camera => projected using digial IMAX projector (Transformers 4)

4.movie shot using normal camera => projected using digital IMAX projector (Mission Impossible 4)

5.movie shot using normal camera with some scenes shot using 70 mm IMAX camera => projected using laser IMAX projector (Dunkirk Prologue)

6.movie shot using normal camera =>projected using laser IMAX projector (Rogue One)

Doctor
Doctor on December 24, 2016 at 5:07 pm

Saw Rogue One today. And they showed the Dunkirk “prologue”. I looked back in the middle of the trailer and could see two projectors being used (which would imply they used the two projector IMAX Laser system). And for those of you who are wondering, yes the laser projection of Dunkirk prologue filled the ENTIRE screen! just like how it filled during the interstellar 70 mm IMAX scenes. So i am relieved now and am ready to say goodbye to 70 mm IMAX projectors (but not to 70 mm IMAX cameras as i believe you still need those)

FDJC38
FDJC38 on December 24, 2016 at 11:13 am

Is the seating set up basically the same? Any opinions on the best rows/seats since the renovation? Wanted to check out Rogue One this Monday, but A – D only thing left with center seats. E and F could be serviceable if not too close? Last time I was there I was in row H for Batman v Superman. Saw Force Awakens in J. Stoked for the new format and the movie. Just wanna make sure nothing’s changed too much before I grab tickets (ie. Rows the same, just less seats, etc). Thanks