4 ms·

IMHO, the only reasons for using 70 mm IMAX are nostalgia and marketing. Digital movie cameras have far better color reproduction, more dynamic range, zero fram

by fsh 2mo ago

IMHO, the only reasons for using 70 mm IMAX are nostalgia and marketing. Digital movie cameras have far better color reproduction, more dynamic range, zero frame jitter, and plenty of resolution without grain. They are also small and silent which allows far more interesting shots than what is possible with a 70 mm monster. Kubrick and Lean used 70 mm because it was the best technology available at the time. Today, the best technology is digital.

nottorp 2mo ago
I'd say one of the advantages of analog filming is it's more expensive to "color correct" digitally after. So maybe you get less monochrome films?
- afiori 2mo ago
  I would guess that the film was still mastered/produced digitally
- dbspin 2mo ago
  Every film is colour corrected and graded digitally (in addition to all the special effects and compositing work), and this is in fact one of the cheapest parts of the process. So no, it's not remotely a consideration.
  - nottorp 2mo ago
    Sad. A little more cheap colour correction and grading and we'll be back to b&w movies.
  - tshaddox 2mo ago
    Not every film. It was widely reported that Oppenheimer was color graded photochemically, and the 65mm film physically spliced (the editor of course worked in Avid with digital film scans). This means that 70 mm screenings were projecting a fully analog end-to-end pipeline. The exception, of course, is the visual effects shots, which went through a digital intermediary. The same seems to be true of The Odyssey, although the reporting is less clear as of now, and I suspect there are many more visual effects shots than Oppenheimer.
    - KaiserPro 2mo ago
      > It was widely reported that Oppenheimer was color graded photochemically, So I'm deeply sceptical of this. There was a DI colourist in the colour department and the editorial had a digital conform team and a colourist. I'm sure there was some photochemcial fiddling. but it was all conformed digitally and lasered out to be finished. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt15398776/fullcredits/?ref_=tt_cst_sm https://www.imdb.com/title/tt15398776/fullcredits/?ref_=tt_c... Photochemical grading is hard and really sucks compared to DI. especially if you are trying to put in a butt tone of VFX.
      - tshaddox 2mo ago
        As I mentioned, they obvious did a digital intermediary for visual effects shots. For Oppenheimer I don't think they was much CGI, but at the bare minimum I sure they did some digital compositing, so they must have matched their photochemical color grading with digital color grading for some scenes. Also, they had a digital colorist to produce the grade for the DCP anyway, to match the look of the film master. But it seems to me that reputable sources have clearly stated that they did a fully analog film path all the way to release prints. There's this interview with the DP: https://fotokem.com/oppenheimer-hoytema-fotokem/ https://fotokem.com/oppenheimer-hoytema-fotokem/ > And once production began, FotoKem printed literally everything Nolan shot. Then after the edit was complete, FotoKem brought in Negative Cutter Simone Appleby from the Centre National du Cinéma et de l’image Animée in France to cut each section and glue it together, which starts with a list that comes out of the Avid that provides every single one of the over 3,000 shots. That list, coupled with a work print (a film version of the list of shots), was then rolled against the negative, using also a QuickTime reference with key numbers—all of which allowed Appleby to cut the physical negative together into the final assembly, from which final prints were made. And from there, Van Hoytema and Color Timer Kristen Zimmerman painstakingly perfected the color of each and every shot by hand. > Theodosiou’s focus was matching the color of the digital master to that of the analog film master because Nolan and FotoKem knew that not everybody in the world would be able to view Oppenheimer on analog film. “We were able to manipulate the images and make them look exactly how Christopher intended for them to look on film,” says Theodosiou. “For the final tweaks, we had to split screen the image between a digital and a film on the screen and match the film identically throughout, from reel one all the way to the end.”
  - e0 2mo ago
    In his 60 Minutes profile, Nolan shows how The Odyssey was color corrected optically https://youtu.be/1GEqDZ3hQSo?si=8AP4TI9iY9otLrjM&t=271 I had the same question. I wondered why seeing a 70mm print was supposed to matter if it was going to get digitally edited and color graded anyhow. The answer turned out to be that neither of my speculations were true.
    - dbspin 2mo ago
      That's fascinating - presumably a facet of the IMAX process. The majority of films shot analogue are graded digitally. Because the most popular film stock they use (Kodak Verita 200D, employed for it's 'classic' look, good skin tones and modern niceties like anti static and anti halation) requires a digital stage in development [1]. [1] https://www.kodak.com/content/pdfs/motion/KODAK-VERITA-200D-5206-7206-technical-information.pdf#:~:text=Post%2DProduction.%20KODAK%20VERITA%20200D%20is%20intended%20for,to%20a%20range%20of%20flesh%20tones.%20www.kodak.com%2Fgo%2Fscanning. https://www.kodak.com/content/pdfs/motion/KODAK-VERITA-200D-...
  - qingcharles 2mo ago
    I thought I saw a video showing they were color-grading The Odyssey in analog using old style color filters? edit, this user found the video: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49127489 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49127489
tshaddox 2mo ago
I think it's misguided to say things like "IMAX 70 mm has an equivalent of 18k resolution." But have you seen a 70 mm IMAX projection? In my experience, the 70 mm image looks noticeably sharper than an equivalent 4K digital IMAX projection. 1.43 IMAX 4K is also a great experience, but its resolution is a meaningful and noticeable limitation given its massive angular image size. It's a compromise compared to a more traditional 4K cinema screen (like a typical Dolby Cinema screen): with IMAX 4k you gain angular image size and lose "pixels per degree of visual angle." And both are noticeable! I agree with you that the latter has all the advantages you listed, but there is still something truly special about the apparent resolution of IMAX 70 mm projection.
- satvikpendem 2mo ago
  I just watched Odyssey in IMAX 70 mm. It looked noticeably blurrier than even 4k, much less supposed 18k. The image was simply not crisp, perhaps due to all the grain.
aulit 2mo ago
Digital cinema projectors are mostly stuck to narrow colour spaces so most often than not people will have better colours on film projections rather than digital. Same thing for dynamic range. Keep in mind that DCP standards have really not been updated since like 2010.
- kridsdale1 2mo ago
  There are still no digital cameras matching the highlight DR of film. And the human eye is a million times better than that.
  - fsh 2mo ago
    That's not true. Digital movie cameras have a few stops more dynamic range than any analog film or the human eye. Of course this doesn't really matter since analog projectors are astronomically worse than digital on that front. This shouldn't be too surprising considering that they are literally shining a lamp though a piece of plastic.
twothreeone 2mo ago
I agree, I actually saw specks when viewing the Odyssee on 70mm IMAX. Sorry, but how is that "better" than any clean, digital projection? And the hoops they apparently jump through to make it work during the shoot to get to that point. Pure nostalgia hysteria.
- kridsdale1 2mo ago
  Digital is not clean. Noise exists whether molecular or voltage on a sensor. The clean you are used to is likely a compression or digital filter result.

by fsh 2mo ago

nottorp 2mo ago

I'd say one of the advantages of analog filming is it's more expensive to "color correct" digitally after. So maybe you get less monochrome films?

afiori 2mo ago
I would guess that the film was still mastered/produced digitally
dbspin 2mo ago
Every film is colour corrected and graded digitally (in addition to all the special effects and compositing work), and this is in fact one of the cheapest parts of the process. So no, it's not remotely a consideration.
- nottorp 2mo ago
  Sad. A little more cheap colour correction and grading and we'll be back to b&w movies.
- tshaddox 2mo ago
  Not every film. It was widely reported that Oppenheimer was color graded photochemically, and the 65mm film physically spliced (the editor of course worked in Avid with digital film scans). This means that 70 mm screenings were projecting a fully analog end-to-end pipeline. The exception, of course, is the visual effects shots, which went through a digital intermediary. The same seems to be true of The Odyssey, although the reporting is less clear as of now, and I suspect there are many more visual effects shots than Oppenheimer.
  - KaiserPro 2mo ago
    > It was widely reported that Oppenheimer was color graded photochemically, So I'm deeply sceptical of this. There was a DI colourist in the colour department and the editorial had a digital conform team and a colourist. I'm sure there was some photochemcial fiddling. but it was all conformed digitally and lasered out to be finished. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt15398776/fullcredits/?ref_=tt_cst_sm https://www.imdb.com/title/tt15398776/fullcredits/?ref_=tt_c... Photochemical grading is hard and really sucks compared to DI. especially if you are trying to put in a butt tone of VFX.
    - tshaddox 2mo ago
      As I mentioned, they obvious did a digital intermediary for visual effects shots. For Oppenheimer I don't think they was much CGI, but at the bare minimum I sure they did some digital compositing, so they must have matched their photochemical color grading with digital color grading for some scenes. Also, they had a digital colorist to produce the grade for the DCP anyway, to match the look of the film master. But it seems to me that reputable sources have clearly stated that they did a fully analog film path all the way to release prints. There's this interview with the DP: https://fotokem.com/oppenheimer-hoytema-fotokem/ https://fotokem.com/oppenheimer-hoytema-fotokem/ > And once production began, FotoKem printed literally everything Nolan shot. Then after the edit was complete, FotoKem brought in Negative Cutter Simone Appleby from the Centre National du Cinéma et de l’image Animée in France to cut each section and glue it together, which starts with a list that comes out of the Avid that provides every single one of the over 3,000 shots. That list, coupled with a work print (a film version of the list of shots), was then rolled against the negative, using also a QuickTime reference with key numbers—all of which allowed Appleby to cut the physical negative together into the final assembly, from which final prints were made. And from there, Van Hoytema and Color Timer Kristen Zimmerman painstakingly perfected the color of each and every shot by hand. > Theodosiou’s focus was matching the color of the digital master to that of the analog film master because Nolan and FotoKem knew that not everybody in the world would be able to view Oppenheimer on analog film. “We were able to manipulate the images and make them look exactly how Christopher intended for them to look on film,” says Theodosiou. “For the final tweaks, we had to split screen the image between a digital and a film on the screen and match the film identically throughout, from reel one all the way to the end.”
- e0 2mo ago
  In his 60 Minutes profile, Nolan shows how The Odyssey was color corrected optically https://youtu.be/1GEqDZ3hQSo?si=8AP4TI9iY9otLrjM&t=271 I had the same question. I wondered why seeing a 70mm print was supposed to matter if it was going to get digitally edited and color graded anyhow. The answer turned out to be that neither of my speculations were true.
  - dbspin 2mo ago
    That's fascinating - presumably a facet of the IMAX process. The majority of films shot analogue are graded digitally. Because the most popular film stock they use (Kodak Verita 200D, employed for it's 'classic' look, good skin tones and modern niceties like anti static and anti halation) requires a digital stage in development [1]. [1] https://www.kodak.com/content/pdfs/motion/KODAK-VERITA-200D-5206-7206-technical-information.pdf#:~:text=Post%2DProduction.%20KODAK%20VERITA%20200D%20is%20intended%20for,to%20a%20range%20of%20flesh%20tones.%20www.kodak.com%2Fgo%2Fscanning. https://www.kodak.com/content/pdfs/motion/KODAK-VERITA-200D-...
- qingcharles 2mo ago
  I thought I saw a video showing they were color-grading The Odyssey in analog using old style color filters? edit, this user found the video: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49127489 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49127489

tshaddox 2mo ago

I think it's misguided to say things like "IMAX 70 mm has an equivalent of 18k resolution." But have you seen a 70 mm IMAX projection? In my experience, the 70 mm image looks noticeably sharper than an equivalent 4K digital IMAX projection. 1.43 IMAX 4K is also a great experience, but its resolution is a meaningful and noticeable limitation given its massive angular image size. It's a compromise compared to a more traditional 4K cinema screen (like a typical Dolby Cinema screen): with IMAX 4k you gain angular image size and lose "pixels per degree of visual angle." And both are noticeable! I agree with you that the latter has all the advantages you listed, but there is still something truly special about the apparent resolution of IMAX 70 mm projection.

satvikpendem 2mo ago
I just watched Odyssey in IMAX 70 mm. It looked noticeably blurrier than even 4k, much less supposed 18k. The image was simply not crisp, perhaps due to all the grain.

aulit 2mo ago

Digital cinema projectors are mostly stuck to narrow colour spaces so most often than not people will have better colours on film projections rather than digital. Same thing for dynamic range. Keep in mind that DCP standards have really not been updated since like 2010.

kridsdale1 2mo ago
There are still no digital cameras matching the highlight DR of film. And the human eye is a million times better than that.
- fsh 2mo ago
  That's not true. Digital movie cameras have a few stops more dynamic range than any analog film or the human eye. Of course this doesn't really matter since analog projectors are astronomically worse than digital on that front. This shouldn't be too surprising considering that they are literally shining a lamp though a piece of plastic.

twothreeone 2mo ago

I agree, I actually saw specks when viewing the Odyssee on 70mm IMAX. Sorry, but how is that "better" than any clean, digital projection? And the hoops they apparently jump through to make it work during the shoot to get to that point. Pure nostalgia hysteria.

kridsdale1 2mo ago
Digital is not clean. Noise exists whether molecular or voltage on a sensor. The clean you are used to is likely a compression or digital filter result.