You do have to realize, whatever format you prefer, that in 2012 theaters were required to convert to Digital. You can’t expect them to re-convert and I think that’s the part we all agree on.
I have heard of Blu-rays though. And if we improve the digital technology, we might be able to have all movies come on discs. THAT would surely be better than 35mm prints, don’t you think?
You do know that DVDs and Blu-rays are also digital files? When we talk digital we talk everything being projected ‘computerized’, examples would be discs, hard drives or satellites. Each theater has their own way of getting their files. But all of the above is considered digital, as much as I know at least.
I don’t know about this, digital files are literally just files. They are like DVDs and SD cards, which to me seems pretty reliable. They also come via satellite to some theaters, which is kind of like a TV stream. Those things seems much more reliable to me than a gigantic box of 35mm film.
Also, 2k is basically 1080p or 1440p, right? It’s just kind of hard to imagine that rusty 35mm prints could keep up with that. I even remember going to the movies thinking “Yeah the quality at the theater is even worse than at home”
70mm maybe, but as we know for every theater that is literally impossible. And even here I heard that Hateful Eight had imperfections.
Also I can imagine that some theaters still use the same digital stuff they got 8 years ago – digital projectors don’t need to be replaced that often as you might think. If you want to upgrade to 4k maybe, but that’s because technology improves, not because your projector sucks. And even here you don’t have to
upgrade to 4k.
Also, think about it this way: You don’t need to PRINT the movie, you just need to get the file. That means you just need the system and the projector. You don’t need to get new prints from the studio all the time.
How are digital files less reliable than giant film prints? Also, where is your evidence that digital projectors last less than film projectors? I
What do you mean by 2k film? You mean digital files with 2k resolution?
Honestly, looking back at the blockbusters I saw with 35mm, digital just looks so much clearer and better. I don’t know if praising 35mm, which is a pretty old format BTW, is the right thing to do right now.
We had 35mm prints for almost all blockbusters before 2012 in many theaters. Nobody cared back then. Its just your imagination that film is more cinematic, as Cliffs pointed out the 70mm version had issues that might be nostalgic but just don’t keep up with digital.
Think about cameras – they don’t run on film anymore. They run on files. And those files are just more reliable.
Film projection might have a higher resolution than laser BUT as many filmmakers have said too, contrast and brightness can matter much more than resolution AND 70mm gets worse with each screening (scratches and stuff) AND film takes more hours to set up AND film is basically obsolete with modern cameras and projectors AND 70mm prints are extremely expensive and messy.
So I’m kinda glad we get the laser which will finally fill up the screen again for EVERY movie.
Nah, that stuff should all be 3D. But that should also improve with laser since the brightness and the colors should be better with laser and that I kind of struggle with when I watch 3D. With 3D e everything just seems darker, so laser might change that.
@waterguy: They are going to close the IMAX somewhere next week and then reopen with laser for Deadpool. So after Deadpool everything should be laser. But that’s just what I heard, they might change schedule.
Also, as much as I know, laser is also digital. Just different projector, but still digital files I think.
BTW, if you wanna check out something close to laser, AMC Empire 25 has a laser in their AMC prime theater.
Well I kind of did. There was the newspaper that reported the bed bugs too. Also, if it would be fake, then why did the theater close for several days?
Personally, I just prefer a theater without a bed bug history. I don’t care if the story is fake or not, I just want to have peace in mind.
Also, btw, I had friends telling me that they felt itchy during a screening… (that wasn’t for Empire 25 though, but just saying that it’s not always competitors trying to bring down a theater.)
Kinda hard to believe that. Bed bugs seem realistic in such a crowded and dirty theater and especially if so many people post yelp pictures of their bites. I personally rather chose a theater with no bed bug posts on yelp. Bed bugs are not a joke for a regular working class guy, that’s why so many people fear them.
Even with laser there will be black bars, even with 70mm there are black bars. I don’t know – digital 3D IMAX is the standard and people know that Hollywood ain’t gonna provide 70mm films that cost 30k to print for each blockbuster. So why still call it liemax?
Technically dome would be the only ‘real’ IMAX since it fills up your whole viewing field.
Honestly, sometimes, specially in theaters like Empire 25, I would even prefer RPX or AMC prime to IMAX. Those are sometimes more advanced than a 10 or 20 year old IMAX screen.
Is digital 3D IMAX on an over 80 feet screen really considered liemax? Or is modern, brand-new and super expensive laser with the same format as film also gonna be considered liemax?
I thought liemax was just a screen that was below the IMAX average, like the ones in Midtown (Empire 25, 34th street etc.)?
Exactly. Things like Captain America Civil War and Batman vs. Superman should look nice in laser, taking that both BvS and Civl War being partially shot in IMAX I rather see those (and all those other IMAX films in 2016) in laser than ONE Star Wars movie in 70mm.
If you REALLY want to see Star Wars in 70mm, there are places in DC and Philadelphia showing it. Those are a couple hours of driving away from NYC, but it might be worth it for the hardcore Star Wars fan. But don’t forget; Laser has “the same aspect as film and is the brightest 3D in world.” So it’s something that would be a nice add to Lincoln Square’s IMAX.
Honestly, I think Lincoln Square is doing the right thing. Laser will last much longer and be used much more often that something like 70mm. Yeah we gotta see Force Awakens in regular Digital 3D IMAX, but at least we can enjoy laser films a bit sooner at Lincoln Square.
Yes, they sometimes still give out flyers over there.
You do have to realize, whatever format you prefer, that in 2012 theaters were required to convert to Digital. You can’t expect them to re-convert and I think that’s the part we all agree on.
I have heard of Blu-rays though. And if we improve the digital technology, we might be able to have all movies come on discs. THAT would surely be better than 35mm prints, don’t you think?
You do know that DVDs and Blu-rays are also digital files? When we talk digital we talk everything being projected ‘computerized’, examples would be discs, hard drives or satellites. Each theater has their own way of getting their files. But all of the above is considered digital, as much as I know at least.
I don’t know about this, digital files are literally just files. They are like DVDs and SD cards, which to me seems pretty reliable. They also come via satellite to some theaters, which is kind of like a TV stream. Those things seems much more reliable to me than a gigantic box of 35mm film.
Also, 2k is basically 1080p or 1440p, right? It’s just kind of hard to imagine that rusty 35mm prints could keep up with that. I even remember going to the movies thinking “Yeah the quality at the theater is even worse than at home”
70mm maybe, but as we know for every theater that is literally impossible. And even here I heard that Hateful Eight had imperfections.
Also I can imagine that some theaters still use the same digital stuff they got 8 years ago – digital projectors don’t need to be replaced that often as you might think. If you want to upgrade to 4k maybe, but that’s because technology improves, not because your projector sucks. And even here you don’t have to upgrade to 4k.
Also, think about it this way: You don’t need to PRINT the movie, you just need to get the file. That means you just need the system and the projector. You don’t need to get new prints from the studio all the time.
How are digital files less reliable than giant film prints? Also, where is your evidence that digital projectors last less than film projectors? I
What do you mean by 2k film? You mean digital files with 2k resolution?
Honestly, looking back at the blockbusters I saw with 35mm, digital just looks so much clearer and better. I don’t know if praising 35mm, which is a pretty old format BTW, is the right thing to do right now.
We had 35mm prints for almost all blockbusters before 2012 in many theaters. Nobody cared back then. Its just your imagination that film is more cinematic, as Cliffs pointed out the 70mm version had issues that might be nostalgic but just don’t keep up with digital.
Think about cameras – they don’t run on film anymore. They run on files. And those files are just more reliable.
Film projection might have a higher resolution than laser BUT as many filmmakers have said too, contrast and brightness can matter much more than resolution AND 70mm gets worse with each screening (scratches and stuff) AND film takes more hours to set up AND film is basically obsolete with modern cameras and projectors AND 70mm prints are extremely expensive and messy.
So I’m kinda glad we get the laser which will finally fill up the screen again for EVERY movie.
I meant it probably is 3D since that’s the commercial way to got, not that I personally would insist on 3D.
Nah, that stuff should all be 3D. But that should also improve with laser since the brightness and the colors should be better with laser and that I kind of struggle with when I watch 3D. With 3D e everything just seems darker, so laser might change that.
@waterguy: They are going to close the IMAX somewhere next week and then reopen with laser for Deadpool. So after Deadpool everything should be laser. But that’s just what I heard, they might change schedule.
Also, as much as I know, laser is also digital. Just different projector, but still digital files I think.
BTW, if you wanna check out something close to laser, AMC Empire 25 has a laser in their AMC prime theater.
Well I kind of did. There was the newspaper that reported the bed bugs too. Also, if it would be fake, then why did the theater close for several days?
Personally, I just prefer a theater without a bed bug history. I don’t care if the story is fake or not, I just want to have peace in mind.
Also, btw, I had friends telling me that they felt itchy during a screening… (that wasn’t for Empire 25 though, but just saying that it’s not always competitors trying to bring down a theater.)
Kinda hard to believe that. Bed bugs seem realistic in such a crowded and dirty theater and especially if so many people post yelp pictures of their bites. I personally rather chose a theater with no bed bug posts on yelp. Bed bugs are not a joke for a regular working class guy, that’s why so many people fear them.
But by that logic, IMAX on 34th or 42nd street is better than Lincoln Square because that one doesn’t have bars on the side.
Actually theaters are supposed to cover the bars on the sides with a curtain so that you won’t notice them. Many don’t do that however.
Even with laser there will be black bars, even with 70mm there are black bars. I don’t know – digital 3D IMAX is the standard and people know that Hollywood ain’t gonna provide 70mm films that cost 30k to print for each blockbuster. So why still call it liemax?
Technically dome would be the only ‘real’ IMAX since it fills up your whole viewing field.
Honestly, sometimes, specially in theaters like Empire 25, I would even prefer RPX or AMC prime to IMAX. Those are sometimes more advanced than a 10 or 20 year old IMAX screen.
Is digital 3D IMAX on an over 80 feet screen really considered liemax? Or is modern, brand-new and super expensive laser with the same format as film also gonna be considered liemax?
I thought liemax was just a screen that was below the IMAX average, like the ones in Midtown (Empire 25, 34th street etc.)?
Exactly. Things like Captain America Civil War and Batman vs. Superman should look nice in laser, taking that both BvS and Civl War being partially shot in IMAX I rather see those (and all those other IMAX films in 2016) in laser than ONE Star Wars movie in 70mm.
If you REALLY want to see Star Wars in 70mm, there are places in DC and Philadelphia showing it. Those are a couple hours of driving away from NYC, but it might be worth it for the hardcore Star Wars fan. But don’t forget; Laser has “the same aspect as film and is the brightest 3D in world.” So it’s something that would be a nice add to Lincoln Square’s IMAX.
Honestly, I think Lincoln Square is doing the right thing. Laser will last much longer and be used much more often that something like 70mm. Yeah we gotta see Force Awakens in regular Digital 3D IMAX, but at least we can enjoy laser films a bit sooner at Lincoln Square.
Does anyone know if there are still signs of bed bugs in the theater?