4 ms·

Why haven't they gone digital?

by veave 3y ago

wiseowise 3y ago
Ugly.
wmf 3y ago
IMAX has been digital for years but digital projectors haven't caught up to IMAX film resolution so they are keeping the film projectors around.
mips_r4300i 3y ago
IMAX 70mm is still the absolute benchmark for film quality, and has been so for decades. A really rough estimate is you'd need a 15-20k digital projector to approach the resolution of the film. However, IMAX tried to go mass-market around 2008 and that's why you see so many supposedly-IMAX theaters now. They typically use 2K DLP projectors. Yeah, basically the same res as a gaming PC from 2011. My theater has the crummy 2k digital, and let em tell you, you can DEFINITELY see the pixels. I would call it passable but it's not really great at all. The only benefit of these IMAX locations is that normal digital cinema can be even worse! There are newer 4k laser projectors that some theaters are retrofitting into their old huge IMAX locations, but these still aren't going to hold a candle. 4k still isn't even enough to really come close to 35mm. The digital tech just isn't there yet.
- grumpyprole 3y ago
  Consider also that resolution is only one factor. Bandwidth is another. Digital movies are often full of compression artefacts, especially when there's a lot going on in the scene.
  - CobsterLock 3y ago
    As far as I know, movie theaters do not compress video. Its seems like they have a digital surrogate for movie reals https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Cinema_Package https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Cinema_Package
    - smitelli 3y ago
      That's true; with a cap of 250 Mbps for the DCP stream, and a 4K frame size of 4096 × 2160, that's ~28 bits per pixel (if the soundtrack is disregarded). There might be a small amount of subsampling or run length encoding going on, but it's entirely plausible to distribute and play an uncompressed film on a professional projector. EDIT: Forgot to factor frame rate into the math. Divide that by 24 frames per second. That got me curious, so I looked into it and found they're using JPEG 2000 on each frame with no inter-frame deltas. Essentially like a constant stream of I-frames.
    - tehnub 3y ago
      From that link, it looks like they do compress and use JPEG2000 for it, with a max bit-rate of 250 mbit/s. IIRC 4k blu rays don't do more than 100 mbit/s, so that's quite a bit better.
      - TylerE 3y ago
        4K uses h265 though, so I’d bet it achieves quite a bit better quality per bit.
        tehnub 3y ago
        Good point, and personally I've never seen compression artifacts on well-produced blu rays.
hatsunearu 3y ago
A 135 photographic film frame (distinct from 35mm movie film) roughly has about 24MP - 48MP digital equivalent resolution. That has a photographic area of 864 square millimeters. 70mm movie film has 3395 square millimeters. That's like 943MP - 1886MP digital equivalent, if we use the same standards as 135 photographic film frame. There's no way you can replicate that amount of quality with digital cinema, at least right now. IMAX is similar in size to 6x7 medium format photography, which only recently has been fully replaced by digital cameras. The cameras that replace medium format photography (usually used for stuff like magazine cover photos, high end product photography, high end portraits and other high quality still applications) range from the sony a7r4 with a 61MP sensor, hasselblad cameras with 100mp sensors and phase one with a 150MP sensor. The digital video equivalent is 16K, which exists but it's just not common at all.
themadturk 3y ago
A lot of "IMAX" theaters (and movies) are digital...but not those films created by Christopher Nolan. I love his movies, but he's an analog snob and believes the only legitimate place to enjoy his analog tech films is in a theater. I'm not saying he's entirely wrong, 70mm IMAX is probably the best film experience out there. But it's an ideal many moviegoers can't enjoy. To be fair, he recently said that 70mm IMAX format is also ideal as master for any downstream format, because all the information you're ever going to have for that movie is in the negative. And with the length (and therefore the size) of the movie, he acknowledges he may at last have reached the limits of analog film technology.
- tehnub 3y ago
  >he's an analog snob and believes the only legitimate place to enjoy his analog tech films is in a theater He is like that in interviews, but it's worth noting that a lot of care is put into making great digital versions of his movies too. I'm not familiar with how involved he is in that process, but I would hazard a guess he's pretty involved. The Oppenheimer site mentions this: The Digital Cinema presentation of OPPENHEIMER has been created from 8k scans of the photochemically color-graded film elements, scaled to 4K, fine-tuned in the digital realm to maximize the color and contrast attributes of digital projectors, and dust-busted to achieve the cleanest and most stable image presentation possible. The film was finished in 4k for the highest digital resolution currently available. https://www.oppenheimermovie.com/tickets/formats/ https://www.oppenheimermovie.com/tickets/formats/
  - willcipriano 3y ago
    > great digital versions I find the audio mix to be horrible in his other films. Like, worst I've ever heard from a movie with a budget like he has.
    - themadturk 3y ago
      This is a prevalent problem in the industry, but perhaps he's mixing for an idea theatre setup that exists only in his screening room.

Why haven't they gone digital?

by veave 3y ago

Why haven't they gone digital?

wiseowise 3y ago

Ugly.

wmf 3y ago

IMAX has been digital for years but digital projectors haven't caught up to IMAX film resolution so they are keeping the film projectors around.

mips_r4300i 3y ago

IMAX 70mm is still the absolute benchmark for film quality, and has been so for decades. A really rough estimate is you'd need a 15-20k digital projector to approach the resolution of the film. However, IMAX tried to go mass-market around 2008 and that's why you see so many supposedly-IMAX theaters now. They typically use 2K DLP projectors. Yeah, basically the same res as a gaming PC from 2011. My theater has the crummy 2k digital, and let em tell you, you can DEFINITELY see the pixels. I would call it passable but it's not really great at all. The only benefit of these IMAX locations is that normal digital cinema can be even worse! There are newer 4k laser projectors that some theaters are retrofitting into their old huge IMAX locations, but these still aren't going to hold a candle. 4k still isn't even enough to really come close to 35mm. The digital tech just isn't there yet.

grumpyprole 3y ago
Consider also that resolution is only one factor. Bandwidth is another. Digital movies are often full of compression artefacts, especially when there's a lot going on in the scene.
- CobsterLock 3y ago
  As far as I know, movie theaters do not compress video. Its seems like they have a digital surrogate for movie reals https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Cinema_Package https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Cinema_Package
  - smitelli 3y ago
    That's true; with a cap of 250 Mbps for the DCP stream, and a 4K frame size of 4096 × 2160, that's ~28 bits per pixel (if the soundtrack is disregarded). There might be a small amount of subsampling or run length encoding going on, but it's entirely plausible to distribute and play an uncompressed film on a professional projector. EDIT: Forgot to factor frame rate into the math. Divide that by 24 frames per second. That got me curious, so I looked into it and found they're using JPEG 2000 on each frame with no inter-frame deltas. Essentially like a constant stream of I-frames.
  - tehnub 3y ago
    From that link, it looks like they do compress and use JPEG2000 for it, with a max bit-rate of 250 mbit/s. IIRC 4k blu rays don't do more than 100 mbit/s, so that's quite a bit better.
    - TylerE 3y ago
      4K uses h265 though, so I’d bet it achieves quite a bit better quality per bit.
      - tehnub 3y ago
        Good point, and personally I've never seen compression artifacts on well-produced blu rays.

hatsunearu 3y ago

A 135 photographic film frame (distinct from 35mm movie film) roughly has about 24MP - 48MP digital equivalent resolution. That has a photographic area of 864 square millimeters. 70mm movie film has 3395 square millimeters. That's like 943MP - 1886MP digital equivalent, if we use the same standards as 135 photographic film frame. There's no way you can replicate that amount of quality with digital cinema, at least right now. IMAX is similar in size to 6x7 medium format photography, which only recently has been fully replaced by digital cameras. The cameras that replace medium format photography (usually used for stuff like magazine cover photos, high end product photography, high end portraits and other high quality still applications) range from the sony a7r4 with a 61MP sensor, hasselblad cameras with 100mp sensors and phase one with a 150MP sensor. The digital video equivalent is 16K, which exists but it's just not common at all.

themadturk 3y ago

A lot of "IMAX" theaters (and movies) are digital...but not those films created by Christopher Nolan. I love his movies, but he's an analog snob and believes the only legitimate place to enjoy his analog tech films is in a theater. I'm not saying he's entirely wrong, 70mm IMAX is probably the best film experience out there. But it's an ideal many moviegoers can't enjoy. To be fair, he recently said that 70mm IMAX format is also ideal as master for any downstream format, because all the information you're ever going to have for that movie is in the negative. And with the length (and therefore the size) of the movie, he acknowledges he may at last have reached the limits of analog film technology.

tehnub 3y ago
>he's an analog snob and believes the only legitimate place to enjoy his analog tech films is in a theater He is like that in interviews, but it's worth noting that a lot of care is put into making great digital versions of his movies too. I'm not familiar with how involved he is in that process, but I would hazard a guess he's pretty involved. The Oppenheimer site mentions this: The Digital Cinema presentation of OPPENHEIMER has been created from 8k scans of the photochemically color-graded film elements, scaled to 4K, fine-tuned in the digital realm to maximize the color and contrast attributes of digital projectors, and dust-busted to achieve the cleanest and most stable image presentation possible. The film was finished in 4k for the highest digital resolution currently available. https://www.oppenheimermovie.com/tickets/formats/ https://www.oppenheimermovie.com/tickets/formats/
- willcipriano 3y ago
  > great digital versions I find the audio mix to be horrible in his other films. Like, worst I've ever heard from a movie with a budget like he has.
  - themadturk 3y ago
    This is a prevalent problem in the industry, but perhaps he's mixing for an idea theatre setup that exists only in his screening room.