Superman Returns How do they adjust the film for IMAX?

[Fanticon]

I got into a way longer than normal talk with a cashier at the video store as we are both excited about this movie...but he's convinced that to fit movies on IMAX screens its done in the same way "pan and scan" is used for formatting a movie to fit your TV screen for the full screen effect...I was trying to tell him that they have the technology to show these movies in its widescreen format on IMAX...but I've never seen any regular movies in an IMAX...just movies made for IMAX at like museums...so how does it work? Do they infact crop and zoom in and utilize pan and scan or is the movie untampered with? (not including 3D moments)

 

[DvilDog]

Damn good question and a good thread too. I have always wondered that.

 

[Katsuro]

The movie is in full widescreen, if that's what you're asking. I've seen a couple of regular films in IMAX, and they're in Widescreen.

 

[Dugath]

I am pretty sure they just use a Imax Camera to film the movie, there is no adjusting and such to make it "fit". They use a Camera such as this one below, you can not make Imax from exsisting film I am pretty sure, so it has to be already shot with Imax film which has the frames you want, Imax has way way more frames per second than normal film, and i dont think you can transfer one to the other.. Course i am no expert. I just quickly looked it up through google

 

[DvilDog]

nice

 

[AsteroidMan]

you can not make Imax from exsisting film I am pretty sure, so it has to be already shot with Imax film which has the frames you want, Imax has way way more frames per second than normal film, and i dont think you can transfer one to the other.. Course i am no expert. I just quickly looked it up through google

Not true, IMAX developed the DMR technology which allows them to scan a 35mm film, clean it up digitally and blow up to the 15/70mm IMAX film (10 times the frame surface!).

In the case of Superman Returns, I am not sure they will be going through a 35mm print, since the source is already available in digital format (DPX files which are a special version of the Kodak Cineon format specifically designed for digital film. Each frame is about 8 MB at 1920 res.). So I *assume* they will use the digital source to print the 70mm film.

An IMAX frame, if produced digitally specifically for IMAX, would be rendered at 4096x3003 pixels, 1.36397 image aspect.

The original frames of SR are 1920x1080, 1.7777 aspect, which is compatible with 16:9 HDTV and would be visible on the upcoming HD DVDs. But when printed to 35mm film, only a portion of the vertical resolution is being used (the image aspect of the safe area printed is 2.35, IIRC). This means the frames contain more info outside of the safe frame than seen on a widescreen 35mm print. I could imagine the IMAX print could be using this additional information to reduce the widescreen appearance, although still not coming close to the 1.36397 aspect which would require the frames to be 1408 pixels high to cover the whole sceeen. So we might see some black areas on top and bottom, but taking into account how big the IMAX sceen is, you will probably not notice...

 

[CGHulk]

When I saw AOTC back in 2002 the widescreen image was converted to pan and scan for the square IMAX screen, at the Studio City, City Walk.

 

[Fanticon]

source?
do you know where i can find this out?

 

[Triligors]

It depends on what Imax you are talking about.

There is sometimes regular Imax- sometimes Blockbusters are just put on the Imax screen.

Then you've got the Imax Experience. Imax quality screen. Imax quality sound. And after seeing Poseiden- I could definitely see that the technology improved ALOT- and that wasn't using the digital camera. The picture resolution is really going to be amazing.

I think you might have seen AOTC2 in Imax, but not Imax Experience- I might be wrong though.

 

[Steelsheen]

Not true, IMAX developed the DMR technology which allows them to scan a 35mm film, clean it up digitally and blow up to the 15/70mm IMAX film (10 times the frame surface!).

In the case of Superman Returns, I am not sure they will be going through a 35mm print, since the source is already available in digital format (DPX files which are a special version of the Kodak Cineon format specifically designed for digital film. Each frame is about 8 MB at 1920 res.). So I *assume* they will use the digital source to print the 70mm film.

An IMAX frame, if produced digitally specifically for IMAX, would be rendered at 4096x3003 pixels, 1.36397 image aspect.

The original frames of SR are 1920x1080, 1.7777 aspect, which is compatible with 16:9 HDTV and would be visible on the upcoming HD DVDs. But when printed to 35mm film, only a portion of the vertical resolution is being used (the image aspect of the safe area printed is 2.35, IIRC). This means the frames contain more info outside of the safe frame than seen on a widescreen 35mm print. I could imagine the IMAX print could be using this additional information to reduce the widescreen appearance, although still not coming close to the 1.36397 aspect which would require the frames to be 1408 pixels high to cover the whole sceeen. So we might see some black areas on top and bottom, but taking into account how big the IMAX sceen is, you will probably not notice...

great post dude

so let me see if i understand this correctly: you'll actually get to see more of each frame of the film in an IMAX rather than in a regular theater? what about ratio/ proportionality? i havent seen a hollywood movie on an IMAX before (SR will be the first time), but of those folks that i've spoke to who has, they said that it feels like things gets a little "smooshed" at the ends/ corners. not something most folks would notice but a film fan would. any truth in that?

 

[Fanticon]

So then the filmmakers aren't concerned with how the transfer to the IMAX screen goes, even if the finished product is tampered with?...unless ofcourse there is footage that was specifically shot for the IMAX screens with IMAX technology and the 3-D technology...its really that WB knows not many other movie studios are sending thier pictures to IMAX screens and with that in mind they are making the extra cash since ticket sales are in decline in recent years...I guess they knew it would earn them the extra buck (or million).

 

[AsteroidMan]

great post dude

so let me see if i understand this correctly: you'll actually get to see more of each frame of the film in an IMAX rather than in a regular theater? what about ratio/ proportionality? i havent seen a hollywood movie on an IMAX before (SR will be the first time), but of those folks that i've spoke to who has, they said that it feels like things gets a little "smooshed" at the ends/ corners. not something most folks would notice but a film fan would. any truth in that?

Well, truth is I don't know how they will be transfering it. I guess the IMAX guys know what they are doing. They have only 3 options:
*Use the full height of the frame and cut some of the picture left and right to get the IMAX image aspect, but losing info (I guess Singer & Co. wouldn't like that, the epic feel of the movie comes mainly from its widescreen wide shots).
*Use the full height of the frame and keep the original width, introducing some black bars on top and bottom.
*Use the safe frame area of the 35mm print, introducing even larger black bars on top and botton.

Since IMHO the middle approach gives you the most of the original frame with less side-effects, I assumed they would do that.
Unless I have no idea what I am talking about or there is some other reason to pick one of the other approaches...

 

[Havok85H]

Not true, IMAX developed the DMR technology which allows them to scan a 35mm film, clean it up digitally and blow up to the 15/70mm IMAX film (10 times the frame surface!).

In the case of Superman Returns, I am not sure they will be going through a 35mm print, since the source is already available in digital format (DPX files which are a special version of the Kodak Cineon format specifically designed for digital film. Each frame is about 8 MB at 1920 res.). So I *assume* they will use the digital source to print the 70mm film.

An IMAX frame, if produced digitally specifically for IMAX, would be rendered at 4096x3003 pixels, 1.36397 image aspect.

The original frames of SR are 1920x1080, 1.7777 aspect, which is compatible with 16:9 HDTV and would be visible on the upcoming HD DVDs. But when printed to 35mm film, only a portion of the vertical resolution is being used (the image aspect of the safe area printed is 2.35, IIRC). This means the frames contain more info outside of the safe frame than seen on a widescreen 35mm print. I could imagine the IMAX print could be using this additional information to reduce the widescreen appearance, although still not coming close to the 1.36397 aspect which would require the frames to be 1408 pixels high to cover the whole sceeen. So we might see some black areas on top and bottom, but taking into account how big the IMAX sceen is, you will probably not notice...

Actually, 1920x1080 is the resolution size for D5 HD. It's not even a 2k resolution (which is what digital intermediates use, 2048x1536). So actually, the resolution of the Genesis cameras is much higher--it's a 35mm sized CCD (or series of CCDs). The resoultuion will be closer to 4k, which is about 3656x2664 I believe.

If the resolution were only 1920x1080, it wouldn't look very good, even with enhancement, when blown up to IMAX. ALso, the reason they have to essentially use hard drives for mags on the genesis cameras is because there is no tape mechanism right now that can hold tape big enough to record higher than 1920x1080. So the Thompson Viper and the Genesis cameras record straight to hard drive.

In terms of how they blow it up, they scan the negatives at around like 10 or 15 frames per second. It used to take like 8 seconds a frame, but they've cut that time down by a TON. We're getting a few Arri film scanners soon, so we've been working with the manufacturers to speed it up. Once the film is scanned, it's run through some advanced algorithims to degrain it so it looks nice and pretty for the 70mm release. It's also matted so it will fit on the 4:3 screen without having to pan and scan. The audio is typically remixed for the IMAX sound system.

The 3D release is interesting. In the past, 3D has never really looked that great for me--it's always looked like theres still 2 images, a ghosting almost. That's because film, when projected, has a slight weave to it, so when you're creating and projecting multiple layers, they won't be 100% on top of each other. With digital projection, that changes. theres a GREAT little documnetary with the 11 clips that were released yesterday on IMAX 3D.

 

[AsteroidMan]

Actually, 1920x1080 is the resolution size for D5 HD. It's not even a 2k resolution (which is what digital intermediates use, 2048x1536). So actually, the resolution of the Genesis cameras is much higher--it's a 35mm sized CCD (or series of CCDs). The resoultuion will be closer to 4k, which is about 3656x2664 I believe.

While you are right that the Genesis can capture up to 4K resolution, all SR plates were delivered to VFX vendors as 1920x1080 DPX files. All visual effects and post production work were applied at that resolution (and rescaling the plates in any way was a big no-no).

 

[dabilee01]

Check out the last clip on the iesb site. i believe it's title "IMAX Featurette" or something like that. It gives you some exposure to how they go from 2-D to 3-D.

Here's the link: http://latinoreview.com/films_2006/wb/superman/srimaxlr.wmv

 

[VGPOP]

Can someone actually has a picture of a IMAX screen?

I'm very interested.

 

[J.Howlett]

The DMR technology used with IMAX releases for theatrical films will be in widescreen now. In the past, they weren't. Now, all the films should be shown in widescreen.

The last three IMAX films I've seen (V for Vendetta, Batman Begins, and Goblet of Fire) were all in widescreen so that shouldn't be a problem.

 

[explode7]

Yeah does anyone have a pic of an IMAX screen so I will know what I'm missing when I go see SR in normal theaters.

 

[Havok85H]

While you are right that the Genesis can capture up to 4K resolution, all SR plates were delivered to VFX vendors as 1920x1080 DPX files. All visual effects and post production work were applied at that resolution (and rescaling the plates in any way was a big no-no).

I take it you do this for a living? I don't follow why that would happen--1920x1080 doesn't even have enough resolution to print to 35mm film--sure, it's done, but it's noticeable. It makes no sense that they'd shoot on a camera that can do 4K, and do VFX work at 1920x1080.

As far as I knew, VFX houses typically worked at 2K. I would figure they'd do all their offline work at 1920x1080, but that makes no sense to do the finished product (even the plates) at that resolution if you're going back to ANY sort of film. You lose way too much resolutin and quality. I've gotta be missing something here

 

[explode7]

Damn you guys are nerds.

 

[Havok85H]

Damn you guys are nerds.

I'm a film major in LA... I gotta know this stuff

 

[AsteroidMan]

I take it you do this for a living? I don't follow why that would happen--1920x1080 doesn't even have enough resolution to print to 35mm film--sure, it's done, but it's noticeable. It makes no sense that they'd shoot on a camera that can do 4K, and do VFX work at 1920x1080.

As far as I knew, VFX houses typically worked at 2K. I would figure they'd do all their offline work at 1920x1080, but that makes no sense to do the finished product (even the plates) at that resolution if you're going back to ANY sort of film. You lose way too much resolutin and quality. I've gotta be missing something here

You should ask N.T.Sigel why they went with this format. The high quality and lack of grain in the digital plates might have been one of the reasons (compared to same resolution scans of regular film plates). I assume they tested all possible formats and decided for the one that gives enough quality with the least amount of data per frame (8,296,448 bytes, to be exact). Since the VFX vendors were all over the world (Australia, Canada, UK, USA), having to transfer less data must have been an important point. In addition, generating 3D elements at 4K would mean at least 4 times longer render times and thus resulting in less iterations.
I could be missing something, but I would be very surprised...

 

[ZGibbs]

The Genesis Camera does not have a 4k resolution, that technology does not exist yet. There aren't even 4K projectors yet except, perhaps, in prototype form. Genesis shoots at the Hi-def standard of 1920x1080 and it's the first camera than can do so animorphically. Thus it uses the entire resolution as opposed to Star Wars II and III which had to mat it's frame to 1920x800ish. If those movies looked good to you then Superman Returns will look better.

 

[Havok85H]

I suppose that makes more sense. I don't know why I kept being told it could do higher resolutions... For some reason i thought it could do at least 2k. I guess having that big a chip plus the recording medium had me thinking it could go higher...

 

[J.Howlett]

ZGibbs,

Episode III used the entire resolution from publish reports. I know Episode II didn't.