I've seen non-IMAX 70mm referred to 5/70 because the image uses five perforations per frame; IMAX 70mm is then 15/70 because it uses fifteen perforations.

Digital IMAX is much bigger:

* https://old.reddit.com/r/imax/comments/pysn87/tremendously_h...

* https://old.reddit.com/r/imax/comments/1405mz0/standard_70mm...

▲

mort96 8 hours ago | parent [-]

How much can we trust the "Reddit IMAX community"? The people heavily invested in a technology as their hobby aren't always the best sources of objective technical information; is /r/imax more of an "audiophile forum" or more of a forum of people who actually know their stuff?

▲

throw0101a 8 hours ago | parent | next [-]

What is inaccurate about this size comparison?

* https://old.reddit.com/r/imax/comments/1tw4jyy/psa_70mm_and_...

* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4KBEcjZN8io

Certainly we need to be mindful of biases, but you can also simply be falling into a tu quoque, ad hominem fallacy.

At the end of the day, are these 'fancy' theatre experiences (IMAX and the others out there) worth the extra ticket price to you? Certainly Christopher Nolan thinks so since he was willing to put up with the hassle of the IMAX gear for months on end (including airlifting them up to top of mountains), but what will you get out of it watching is something on you can answer.

Of course the largest complaint I tend to hear about Nolan films is the audio mixing, not the visuals.

▲

mort96 7 hours ago | parent | next [-]

The interesting question isn't "what's biggest" but what's the best viewing experience.

▲

ramesh31 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

>"Certainly Christopher Nolan thinks so since he was willing to put up with the hassle of the IMAX gear for months on end (including airlifting them up to top of mountains), but what will you get out of it watching is something on you can answer."

The 70MM IMAX showings at Lincoln Square are still completely sold out 4x/day for the next month. People are filling the theater at 6AM on a Saturday to see it. The market has clearly spoken.

▲

phoghed 7 hours ago | parent | next [-]

4x a day for a month on so few screens isn’t even that many tickets comparatively.

▲

7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

[deleted]

▲

dudefeliciano 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I think that has to do with the marketing and all the memes about how much "less" of the film you see if not watching it on 70mm IMAX

▲

scrlk 6 hours ago | parent | next [-]

1.43 IMAX isn't exclusive to 15/70mm, it can also be screened with IMAX's dual laser projection system.

▲

AdamN 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Which is true. He didn't shoot in 35mm so if you want to get the full shot on the screen you must go to an IMAX theater.

	▲	rpdillon 6 hours ago \| parent [-]
		It's an interesting choice as an artist to produce work for mass consumption that 99% of the population will never be able to experience as intended.

▲

jl6 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Passionate hobbyists are often a great source of technical information, and usually more objective than industry sources. The thing to watch out for is people who have become so absorbed by their hobby, they start to put great subjective weight on distinctions that would be without difference to a "normal" person. Audio gear, gourmet food, fine wine, running shoes... It's XKCD 915 all the way down. I also recommend Penn & Teller: Bullshit! S03E12 ("The Best") on this subject.

Good for the hobbyists, if it enhances their enjoyment, but if you're a casual, microscopic variations are going to be dwarfed by other factors.

	▲	mort96 7 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I think we're giving too much credit to audiophiles. We're talking people who might have discussions on their forums about whether audio buffers in memory allocated with malloc or in memory allocated with C++'s `new` sounds best. Stuff which doesn't have "microscopic effects dwarfed by other factors" but stuff which has literally no effect.