4 comments

  • lemoncookiechip12 minutes ago
    This is purely my opinion. I see 70mm as mostly a movie scam to extort exorbitant amounts of cash from a ticket for something that&#x27;s vaguely noticeable outside the aspect ratio itself.<p>Note that I&#x27;m not disputing that there is a visual difference, there is, the image is clearer, shaper, with better darks, but the entry fee paired with how out of the way 70mm is, it&#x27;s just ends up feeling like FOMO.<p>My opinion doesn&#x27;t hold much value since I just dislike the cinema experience in general. I like being able to control the environment I&#x27;m in when watching something (pausing, eating, loudness...) and whenever I go to cinemas I have to deal with people having their smartphones screens brighten up, people yapping and laughing at things that aren&#x27;t funny, eating noises, etc...
  • yread3 minutes ago
    I&#x27;ve recently been to a planetarium which was pretty cool. It has in theory even better specs: 45 million pixels (8K has 33 million), ~500nits, 60Hz. It did seem to use PWM at very low brightness though<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;planetariums-database.org&#x2F;list_projectors.php?menu=list_projectors&amp;brand=Evans_and_Sutherland&amp;model=Digistar" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;planetariums-database.org&#x2F;list_projectors.php?menu=l...</a>
  • nntwozz11 minutes ago
    I go to IMAX to see less smartphones show up during the movie.<p>The rest is just icing on the cake.
  • gempir27 minutes ago
    I&#x27;m curious about the opinions on 70mm (non-IMAX) vs Digital IMAX.<p>What do you prefer if you have tried both. Because those are the only mostly accessible options around the world.<p>Sound is also something to consider, because depending on the Theater they might have wildy different sound setups even different audio standards.
    • throw0101a21 minutes ago
      I&#x27;ve seen non-IMAX 70mm referred to 5&#x2F;70 because the image uses five perforations per frame; IMAX 70mm is then 15&#x2F;70 because it uses fifteen perforations.<p>Digital IMAX is much bigger:<p>* <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;old.reddit.com&#x2F;r&#x2F;imax&#x2F;comments&#x2F;pysn87&#x2F;tremendously_helpful_imax_ratio_guide&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;old.reddit.com&#x2F;r&#x2F;imax&#x2F;comments&#x2F;pysn87&#x2F;tremendously_h...</a><p>* <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;old.reddit.com&#x2F;r&#x2F;imax&#x2F;comments&#x2F;1405mz0&#x2F;standard_70mm_nonimax_vs_dual_laser_imax_on&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;old.reddit.com&#x2F;r&#x2F;imax&#x2F;comments&#x2F;1405mz0&#x2F;standard_70mm...</a>
      • mort9616 minutes ago
        How much can we trust the &quot;Reddit IMAX community&quot;? The people heavily invested in a technology as their hobby aren&#x27;t always the best sources of objective technical information; is &#x2F;r&#x2F;imax more of an &quot;audiophile forum&quot; or more of a forum of people who actually know their stuff?
        • throw0101a12 minutes ago
          What is inaccurate about this size comparison?<p>* <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;old.reddit.com&#x2F;r&#x2F;imax&#x2F;comments&#x2F;1tw4jyy&#x2F;psa_70mm_and_imax_70mm_are_not_the_same_thing&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;old.reddit.com&#x2F;r&#x2F;imax&#x2F;comments&#x2F;1tw4jyy&#x2F;psa_70mm_and_...</a><p>* <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=4KBEcjZN8io" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=4KBEcjZN8io</a><p>Certainly we need to be mindful of biases, but you can also simply be falling into a <i>tu quoque</i>, <i>ad hominem</i> fallacy.<p>At the end of the day, are these &#x27;fancy&#x27; theatre experiences (IMAX and the others out there) worth the extra ticket price to you? Certainly Christopher Nolan thinks so since he was willing to put up with the hassle of the IMAX gear for months on end (including airlifting them up to top of mountains), but what will you get out of it watching is something on you can answer.<p>Of course the largest complaint I tend to hear about Nolan films is the audio mixing, not the visuals.