WorstPreviews.com Logo Join the community [Login / Register]
Follow WorstPreviews.com on Twitter
What\ News Coming Soon In Theaters On DVD Trailer,Posters,Pictures,Wallpapers, Screensavers PeliBlog.com Trivia/Quizzes
News/Headlines
Trailer for "Midnight Special" Sci-Fi Film, with Michael Shannon and Joel Edgerton
Nov 23rd, 2015
Trailer for "Central Intelligence" Comedy, with Dwayne Johnson and Kevin Hart
Nov 23rd, 2015
Trailer for Melissa McCarthy's "The Boss" Comedy
Nov 23rd, 2015
Trailer for Juan Antonio Bayona's "A Monster Calls"
Nov 23rd, 2015
First Look at "Central Intelligence" Comedy, with Dwayne Johnson and Kevin Hart
Nov 19th, 2015
Trailer for "Zoolander 2" Arrives Online
Nov 19th, 2015
Official Trailer for "Now You See Me" Sequel
Nov 19th, 2015
Trailer for Chris Hemsworth's "The Huntsman: Winter's War"
Nov 19th, 2015
Trailer for Keanu Reeves' "Exposed" Thriller
Nov 19th, 2015
First Look at Chris Pine on "Wonder Woman" Set
Nov 16th, 2015
Ridley Scott Reveals Another Title for "Prometheus" Sequel
Nov 16th, 2015
Gerard Butler is a God in "Gods of Egypt" Posters
Nov 16th, 2015
First Look at Liam Neeson in Martin Scorsese's "Silence"
Nov 16th, 2015
New Trailer for "The Divergent Series: Allegiant"
Nov 16th, 2015
Trailer for "Moonwalkers" Comedy, with Ron Perlman and Rupert Grint
Nov 16th, 2015
Trailer for Charlie Kaufman's "Anomalisa" Stop-Motion Film
Nov 3rd, 2015
Poster for "Warcraft" Arrives Online, Trailer Coming on Friday
Nov 3rd, 2015
There's a Good Reason Why Luke Skywalker Isn't on "Star Wars: The Force Awakens" Poster
Nov 2nd, 2015
First Trailer for Sacha Baron Cohen's "The Brothers Grimsby" Comedy
Nov 2nd, 2015
"Spectre" Breaks Box Office Records Overseas
Nov 2nd, 2015
Final Trailer for Ron Howard's "In the Heart of the Sea," with Chris Hemsworth
Nov 2nd, 2015
New Photos From "Warcraft" Video Game Movie
Nov 2nd, 2015
Lots of New Photos From "Suicide Squad"
Oct 30th, 2015
Trailer for "Dirty Grandpa" Comedy, with Robert De Niro and Zac Efron
Oct 30th, 2015
Sandra Bullock to Star in Female Version of "Ocean's Eleven"
Oct 30th, 2015
Trailer for Jared Hess' "Don Verdean" Comedy, with Sam Rockwell
Oct 30th, 2015
"Indiana Jones" Producer Says Harrison Ford Will Not Be Recast
Oct 28th, 2015
Trailer for Adam Sandler's "The Ridiculous 6" Comedy
Oct 28th, 2015
"The Walking Dead" Fan Kills Friend Who Turned Into a Zombie
Oct 28th, 2015
Another "Monopoly" Movie in the Works
Oct 28th, 2015
"Jumanji" Remake Hires "Con Air" Writer
Oct 26th, 2015
Disney's "Tower of Terror" Park Ride Movie Moving Forward
Oct 26th, 2015
Johnny Depp and Edgar Wright Team for "Fortunately, the Milk"
Oct 26th, 2015
Previous News Stories Next News Stories

IMAX Defends Smaller Screens

Posted: September 2nd, 2009 by WorstPreviews.com Staff
IMAX Defends Smaller ScreensSubmit Comment
Back in May, comedian Aziz Ansari (Funny People) wrote about going to see "Star Trek" in an IMAX theater and paying $5 more for the experience, only to end up feeling fooled when he was presented with a screen that was a quarter of size of the standard IMAX screens. [view screen comparison]

He later found out that the IMAX Corporation calls those screens IMAX Digital, but does not promote them as smaller screens. Popular Mechanics has now sat down with Brian Bonnick, a senior executive vice president of technology at IMAX, to find out why the company promotes the giant screens but provides something completely different.

"The analogy I could use is that if I gave you a screen that was a mile wide, but I put it far away from you, it would look small," he said. "But it's still a big, big screen. But that screen, to be big, also has to be close to the audience."

Bonnick continued: "It turns out that in our large theaters, the field of view in the front row seat happens to be the same as in our [smaller] digital theaters, more or less. In a typical theater we [converted], the original screen was 44 feet wide, with a field of view of 41 degrees from the center seat. We removed 4 rows of seats, we put in our proprietary screen, which was 23 percent larger, and 12 feet closer to the audience. That manifested itself as a screen area increase of over 225 percent, and an increase of field of view of 59 percent. Those are massive numbers."

Got all that?

Bonnick went on to say that there is no problem since IMAX theaters are constantly sold out. "We're providing an immersive experience, and yes, while the screen might not physically be as large, we're still filling that peripheral vision," he said.

Source: Popular Mechanics


Bookmark and Share
You must be registered to post comments. Login or Register.
Displaying 24 comment(s) Profanity: Turn On
mdp711 writes:
on September 2nd, 2009 at 7:37:12 PM

I agree with Aziz. Don't call it IMAX if it ain't.
SpookyCupcakes writes:
on September 2nd, 2009 at 7:39:12 PM

Imax can suck a d*ck, their bootlegs look mighty fine on my computer.
vwkombi writes:
on September 2nd, 2009 at 7:44:58 PM

$10 DVD's look fantastic on my $90 TV. IMAX can suck it.
SACdaddy writes:
on September 2nd, 2009 at 7:47:14 PM

Ha! This guy just told us in a very technical way to the shut the f*ck up and pay the extra $5. As long as he calls it IMAX you should be satisfied. FU "imax" guy!
triggax writes:
on September 2nd, 2009 at 7:50:34 PM

"Imax can suck a d*ck, their bootlegs look mighty fine on my computer."

What a d*ck comment.

Ted Mosby writes:
on September 2nd, 2009 at 7:50:52 PM

I still back Aziz Ansari 100%
SpookyCupcakes writes:
on September 2nd, 2009 at 7:58:52 PM

"What a d*ck comment."


What a d*ck poster.
BondMcClane007 writes:
on September 2nd, 2009 at 8:16:11 PM

aziz ansari is a funny ass dude.. and i wud have 2 agree w/ the corp. guy bonnick o w.e. cuz ur paying for the experience and if its convenient 2 replicate the experience w/ a smaller size screen in a smaller theatre then wats the problem.. ur still paying for the experience.. not the priviledge to say "i saw it on a screen that big" thats a retarded thing 2 pay 6$ extra for.. of course he is a corp. guy so he cud b full of sh*t but if he is being truthful then there shuddnt b a problem b.c. the science behind the experience and its replica wrks perfectly (or @ least it used 2 now empire 25 cinema goers will always b disappointed knowing lincoln has bigger screens than they do.. its a mental thing)
Ronsauce writes:
on September 2nd, 2009 at 8:51:25 PM

BondMcClane007, please learn to f*cking type properly. I started reading your abortion of a post and got a headache from trying to decipher it. Also, Bonnick is full of sh*t. Even if you are sitting a bit farther away in a real IMAX theater, it still looks monstrously larger than sitting closer with this fake IMAX Digital garbage. I haven't seen a movie yet in IMAX Digital that was worth the extra money.
FBO writes:
on September 2nd, 2009 at 9:06:42 PM

@BongMcClain, I mean BondMcClain - I've told you before, You have a full F**KING keyboard. Don't be afraid to use the whole damn thing.

@Bonn(d)ick - WHO THE HELL WANTS TO SIT CLOSER? Why do you think that the first people in a theater always take center - middle and then work their way back? Ain't nobody wants the first row, retard.
FBO writes:
on September 2nd, 2009 at 9:07:25 PM

*McClane* my bad
TH3D4RKKN1GH7 writes:
on September 2nd, 2009 at 9:16:49 PM

If the film isn't shot on IMAX it doesn't really matter to be honest so I don't care. If the directing team actually bothers to use IMAX then go to a REAL IMAX theater. However, whoever thought this was a great idea at IMAX should be decapitated in front of the staff.
murphyslaw93 writes:
on September 2nd, 2009 at 9:18:37 PM

Just as I can see Avatar in 3D on a huge screen then I dont care what the exact dimensions are.
jjjjjoey writes:
on September 2nd, 2009 at 9:52:41 PM

lol @sacdaddy

I don't care. There is a genuine IMAX 15 mins from where I live so I have to see a movie there I will.
minkowski writes:
on September 3rd, 2009 at 1:06:15 AM

I understand what the fool is saying, but something bothers me. How do you get a similar IMAX experience with a smaller screen, no matter how close to the audience, if the screen ratio for the larger screen is still significantly *larger* than the smaller one? The screen ratio for the large screen is 0.7 something whereas the smaller one has a 0.4 something ratio. And the 'something' is about twenty insignificant digits.

So part of the IMAX experience, namely the towering height of the larger screen, is getting totally lost by tricking around with the smaller one. I guess that's what Bonnick means when he says 'more or less'.
minkowski writes:
on September 3rd, 2009 at 2:08:26 AM

"IMAX Defends Smaller Screens"

Yeah, and Ron Jeremy tried defending a smaller d*ck. It didn't work then and it won't work now.
VDODSON writes:
on September 3rd, 2009 at 2:24:59 AM

Mink-lol, funniest thing I've heard this week. Jeremy is a small d*ck bastard.
VDODSON writes:
on September 3rd, 2009 at 2:25:48 AM

MDP711- Everytime you post a comment, I keep picturing that dog your using as the avatar mouthing the words. Its starting to creep me out sir.
Kid_A writes:
on September 3rd, 2009 at 4:12:36 AM

When IMAX releases a movie in 3D -which is the best thing it can do- I call that movie "IMAX". I also watched a movie about Earth on IMAX, without 3D, and I couldn't be sure if I was watching it on IMAX or not. It's just when I watch a movie on my PC, 16:9, there are two black lines at the top and at the bottom, and IMAX only minimizes them, which is not worth for what I pay for. IMAX should donate more for 3D, not for "bigger screens", because as the president of it calls so, bigger screen is relative for a front seater and back seater.
Planetastudios writes:
on September 3rd, 2009 at 1:15:09 PM

If im not happy, then im not paying.
TH3D4RKKN1GH7 writes:
on September 3rd, 2009 at 4:11:27 PM

Kid_A, that's not IMAX's fault the black bars are there. They are there for every single film not shot using IMAX technology (which is the large very large majority of films that are in IMAX theaters). The Dark Knight is the most known example of a film which had sequences shot for real on IMAX cameras with the full resolution and the image filled the entire screen.
manichispanic writes:
on September 3rd, 2009 at 7:06:42 PM

sounds like bullsh*t!
padfootbob writes:
on September 3rd, 2009 at 7:51:02 PM

... I wonder which IMAX i've been going to all this time..
minkowski writes:
on September 5th, 2009 at 12:20:53 AM

"The Dark Knight is the most known example of a film which had sequences shot for real on IMAX cameras with the full resolution and the image filled the entire screen. "

Set piece scenes, I'm sure.

There's a Good Reason Why Luke Skywalker Isn't on "Star Wars: The Force Awakens" Poster

"The Walking Dead" Fan Kills Friend Who Turned Into a Zombie

"Indiana Jones" Producer Says Harrison Ford Will Not Be Recast

Ridley Scott Reveals Another Title for "Prometheus" Sequel

Johnny Depp and Edgar Wright Team for "Fortunately, the Milk"

"Spectre" Breaks Box Office Records Overseas

"Star Wars: The Force Awakens" Demolishes Pre-Sale Records

Paul Bettany Responds to Jason Statham's "Avengers" Insult

Daniel Craig Would Rather Commit Suicide Than Return as James Bond

Marvel Has Contingency Plans In Case It Regains Rights to Superheroes
Lace Wedding Dresses from ViViDress UK online shop, buy with confidence and cheap price.
WorstPreviews.com hosted by pair Networks WorstPreviews.com
Hosted by pair Networks
News Feeds | Box Office | Movie Reviews | Buzz: Top 100 | Popularity: Top 100
Poster Store | About Us | Advertising | Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Web Tools | Site Map
Copyright © 2009 WorstPreviews.com. All rights reserved