The Amazing Spider-Man Might be a noobish question but...

[PSYLENTGuardian]

This all leads me to believe that TASM is going to look ****ing ridiculous on a true IMAX screen.

In a good way, or a bad way?

 

[Spiderman6592]

And since we're on the topic of resolution and clairty of picture, I thought I'd go and take screencaps from the trailers (all 1080p) of TASM, TDKR and TA of scenes in similar lighting to see if any one of them had an advantage in the department. To my pleasant surprise, TASM's picture looks leaps and bounds better than both TDKR and TA. See for yourselves:

 

[Curmudgeon]

Yeah, I'd say:

TASM
TDKR
TA

Kinda funny you put them in that order in the first place.

 

[Spiderman6592]

In a good way, or a bad way?

lol In an extremely good way.



And I agree, I think it's TASM, TDKR, TA as well.

 

[PSYLENTGuardian]

Man, you could practically see the fly's face in that shot.

Major hyperbole, I know. t:

 

[Spiderman6592]

lol But really the way I can truly discern the quality is by looking at the hair. You can distinguish every strand of hair on Andrew's head in the TASM shot. In the TDKR shot and the TA shot, Gordon and Cap's hair kind of just blends together.

 

[Curmudgeon]

Wow, you're right. It's awesome how crisp and clear the image is. I gotta stop looking at it though 'cause Andrew's expression makes me lol.

 

[flickchick85]

We haven't even seen any of the IMAX shots from TDKR, either (assuming the indoor dialogue scenes were still shot with regular cameras as before due to the sound issues).

 

[Spider-ManHero12]

I haven't either and I don't intend to. Don't wanna pay the extra money. To me, a movie probably wouldn't look any different than on a regular theater screen anyway.

My nearest IMAX theater is sort of out of the way, which is why I haven't gone to one yet.

 

[Mary Jane Watson]

^ I dont even have any IMAX in my town.....only Vancouver has it.

 

[Mace Bloodstone]

I have a few in my area.

I might be seeing it here.

I saw the original spider-man movie here on my second viewing of it when it came to imax.


I can't find the ticket stub, i know i have it... I have the others...

Spoiler

 

[Spiderman6592]

I'll be seeing it at midnight in IMAX 3D. I already have a group of 10-15 people that have said they're gonna go with me.

 

[SuperFerret]

Personally, I thought IMAX was a waste of my money when I went with friends to see the Dark Knight.

 

[Spiderman6592]

Well, did you see it in true IMAX or no? I have to be honest, I don't really see how a true IMAX experience could ever be a waste of money. It's ****ing breathtaking.

 

[SuperFerret]

You get the same story, so it's a waste to me.

 

[Spiderman6592]

Well, you didn't really answer my question. If you saw it in true IMAX I doubt you'd be saying that, and if you did see it in true IMAX and are still saying that then that's kind of mindblowing to me. When I see a film, I need to be immersed completely. Through the believability of the characters and story as well as through the visuals and audio. An IMAX viewing does ****ing wonders for both the visual and audio representation of the film. It makes it seem and sound like you could be there with the characters. I don't really see how that does nothing.

 

[Curmudgeon]

I just learned a new IMAX theater opened up in a city much closer to me. One of my sisters and her family are moving to this city which is perfect. I didn't want to have to drive from city to city after a midnight showing so I'm hoping I can just crash at her place and drive back in the morning.

 

[SuperFerret]

Well, you didn't really answer my question. If you saw it in true IMAX I doubt you'd be saying that, and if you did see it in true IMAX and are still saying that then that's kind of mindblowing to me. When I see a film, I need to be immersed completely. Through the believability of the characters and story as well as through the visuals and audio. An IMAX viewing does ****ing wonders for both the visual and audio representation of the film. It makes it seem and sound like you could be there with the characters. I don't really see how that does nothing.

I'd better have seen it in a "true IMAX" since we went to the big one in Manhattan and it cost me way too much. As for the immersion thing, I'm of the rare breed that, due to having an imagination, can be immersed in any halfway interesting film, regardless of visual quality. It does nothing because what I'm paying for is the story, acting and entertainment value, none of which are changed by tiny increments of clearer picture or sound.

 

[Spiderman6592]

Thanks for insulting my lack of imagination


Different strokes for different folks I guess, but there's no need to be a dick about it.


And I wouldn't call the size of an IMAX screen a "tiny" increment. It's like 4 times the size of a normal theater screen. Maybe more...

 

[ThePowerCosmic]

The Amazing Spider-Man looks AMAZING with that resolution. I think it's gonna be the second best looking movie next year, right behind The Hobbit which is shooting at 48 fps.

 

[Troy_Parker]

Why is Gordon so yellow? He looks like a Simpson. lol

 

[Spiderman6592]

lol I don't know but it's true. And I thought TASM was shooting at 48 fps?

http://www.fxguide.com/quicktakes/the-move-to-48-frames-per-sec/


This article makes it sound like it is.

 

[ThePowerCosmic]

lol I don't know but it's true. And I thought TASM was shooting at 48 fps?

http://www.fxguide.com/quicktakes/the-move-to-48-frames-per-sec/


This article makes it sound like it is.

I think it's just saying what RED is capable of. From what I know, The Hobbit's going to be the first movie to actually shoot at 48 fps.

 

[Troy_Parker]

Does more FPS = smoother picture and more visual detail?

 

[Spiderman6592]

Gotcha. Doesn't a higher fps mean slower though? I mean when you shoot at 5000 fps, it's like, super slo mo, so is that essentially what PJ is doing? Slowing doing the shot to ultimately lessen the blur and make the shot more clear overall?