![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
How big are the movie screens in the digital Imax theaters? I've read that they just remove the first few rows in the theater and move the screen closer, to make it appear bigger. But is it actually bigger than standard movie screens, or is it the same size? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.183.108.200 ( talk) 08:27, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
In this subject, the actual units used (originally) are important. The auto-translation should be turned off or fixed to make clear what the units were (and their precision) before the translation. Does anyone know? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.73.178.144 ( talk) 22:30, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
It's stated in the first paragraph that IMAX means Image MAXimum. I worked for IMAX Corporation and I will say here that no one (high up) was able to say if IMAX is an acronym or if, like "Kodak," the word was merely created because it sounded imposing. This could be a fluke, but I'd love to see actual documentation for the word, especially if Graeme Ferguson or one of the original creators stepped forward with an announcement. More specifically, "Image MAXimum" was suggested by board members as a possible meaning for the word IMAX, but this would be more of a reverse acronym and not linked to the creation of the word. — Keraunoscopia (talk) 20:58, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
Hello, I'm a current IMAX employee and I'd like to request an edit to the page to remove the language that states that IMAX is an acronym for "Image Maximum".
Graeme Ferguson (IMAX co-founder) also discussed how they came up with the IMAX name in an article with Northern Stars. An excerpt from his interview below:
Where in the name IMAX come from? That came a year or two later. We first called the company Multiscreen Corporation because that, in fact, was what people knew us as. But the main thing is that we called the system Multivision because we saw it as a large–screen way of showing multi–image films. It was with multi–image that we had a great success in, and we thought that was the central thing to do. Not the only thing, but the central thing. After about a year, our attorney informed us that we could never copyright or trademark Multivision. It was too generic. It was a descriptive word. The words that you can copyright are words like Kleenex or Xerox or Coca-Cola. If the name is descriptive, you can’t trademark it so you have to make up a word. So we were sitting at lunch one day in a Hungarian restaurant in Montreal and we worked out a name on a place mat on which we wrote all the possible names we could think of. We kept working with the idea of maximum image. We turned it around and came up with IMAX. [1]
Mary Ruby, IMAX's Chief Administration Officer, has been quoted in an article with INTA Daily News from Managing IP discussing the origin of IMAX and how the name was made up as opposed to the common belief that it is an acronym. See the excerpt below:
What is the history of the IMAX brand? The IMAX projection system is a Canadian invention pioneered in the late 1960s. The IMAX brand was the brainstorm of the original founders of the company. Although many people may think "IMAX" is an acronym, it is in fact a made-up word. [2]
Thank you, D Jones 47.18.246.4 ( talk) 18:08, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
References
What? No mention of the OMNIMAX theater at Caesar's Palace? Japanimation station ( talk) 23:38, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
A screen? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.28.72.87 ( talk) 00:57, 20 June 2010 (UTC) rar —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.212.250.165 ( talk) 19:20, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
I see the company infobox was added to this article as well. Is that really necessary, if this article is about the IMAX format and IMAX Corporation has its own article? Should we make that distinction clearer? ("This is about the IMAX motion picture format. For the company, see IMAX Corporation.") 109.204.158.195 ( talk) 10:05, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
It's a bit weird that there is no link to Showscan here. Also no mention of competition between the two formats. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.38.196.235 ( talk) 13:44, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
![]() |
An image used in this article, File:IMAXScreenComparison.jpeg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status
Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
This notification is provided by a Bot -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 23:15, 25 November 2011 (UTC) |
If it wasn't on one platter, I couldn't tell; the whole presentation was completely seamless when I went to the IMAX screening. -- Ryanasaurus007 ( talk) 01:43, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
If "IMAX" is a contraction of "image maximum," and not an acronym or initialism, then, per WP:MOSCAPS, shouldn't it be spelled "Imax"? Trivialist ( talk) 20:39, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
I'd like to see a section on the reception of IMAX films, if the spectator views them differently, if the impact is different, if people tend to go to IMAX venues more than non-IMAX. Was there a poll conducted on the IMAX? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.220.62.242 ( talk) 10:08, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
"Another disadvantage is a lower resolution than normal IMAX film, estimated to be about 12,000 × 8,700 theoretical pixels or 6,120 × 4,500 actually discernible pixels (27 megapixels)"
Source doesn't explain how it got this figure -- Randomoneh ( talk) 23:59, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
Star Trek Into Darkness is not the first film to have IMAX sequences post-converted to 3D. It has been done at least once before with Tron Legacy in 2010. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.68.186.127 ( talk) 22:23, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
I heard that, too. Interestingly, I thought Star Trek Into Darkness had the best 3D I've seen yet in the theater. The post process may work better now than filming it. I also noticed, though, that they used special glasses that were both slightly anaglyph AND polarized. Man of Steel had much weaker 3D in comparison. -Benjamin Goulart — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.210.188.98 ( talk) 19:28, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
The article doesn't seem to mention some of the sound technology or design used with IMAX, Sonics-DDP. More info here (List of films with "Sonics-DDP" sound mix) and here ("In 1988, Imax acquired Sonics Associates Inc. as an affiliate. Alabama based Sonics is a world leader in sound system design and offers customers the benefits of more than 26 years of research and hands-on experience in the IMAX theatre network."). -- Katana ( talk) 13:16, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
Why does IMAX have so much difficulty with dialogue? I've noticed this in multiple of the newer digital and 3D IMAX auditoriums, and at the same cineplex's non-IMAX theaters I find the sound quality actually more pleasant. New IMAX installs seem to be designed purely for dynamics, yet without a capability for nuance or delicacy. The midrange often seems brash, shouty, and inarticulate. I have no problem in THX, DD 24/96, DTS, or SDDS-rated auditoriums from any of the major install/theater chains. In fact, I find the non-IMAX ones superior. We missed seeing Pacific Rim in IMAX 3D, and yet once again I was shocked how much better the 2D non-IMAX was. And I’m an audiophile and DJ with a great many hi-fi and pro speakers, headphones, amps, and source components. Considering the human ear/brain system hears best and flattest in the 85dB c-weighted range, IMAX having the superior SPL capability may be a waste of tailoring the sound system to one aspect while neglecting the rest of sonic characteristics. Furthermore, theater sound in the other formats is so highly standardized and the mixing studios are of such high caliber for them (such as Sony's), that IMAX might not be translating even as intended. -Benjamin Goulart — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.210.188.98 ( talk) 19:23, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
At the end of this section, it is stated that China is the second largest market for IMAX outside the USA and has 25 IMAX cinemas. This is not correct, the second largest market is the European Union (there are 26 IMAX cinemas in the United Kingdom alone according to IMAX.com).
Not sure why this comment is even relevant to the History section. Shall we correct or delete it?! Zctyp18 ( talk) 23:57, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
In the section "Analog technical aspects", under "Camera", it explains that:
To achieve such increased image resolution, 65mm film stock passes horizontally through the movie camera, 15 perforations at a time, resulting in a filming speed of 102.7 metres per minute. In a 65mm camera, the film passes vertically through the camera, 5.0 perforations at a time, resulting in a filming speed of 34 metres per minute."
Which is it? These explanations seem at odds with one another, given that they both describe how 65mm passes through a camera. Perhaps there's a type and the second sentence means to describe something other than a 65mm camera? Willgmcc ( talk) 20:01, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
IMAX. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers. — cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 00:08, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
No such thing as open matte. A film is either matted, or it's not. By the same token, you wouldn't call a film "Non-Dolby," "Non-dbx," or "Non-Mono." You describe what it is, not what it is not.
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 8 external links on IMAX. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 23:46, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
The article was originally written when the IMAX corporation only produced film. The lead seems to suggest that IMAX theatres still use film, whereas my understanding is that they have been converted to digital. I think the lead needs to make a clear distinction and the article structure should be sectioned and headed accordingly. At the moment it is a bit like a page on railway locomotives suggesting they are all steam trains, with diesel and electric getting minor sections near the end. Is there a case for two articles: IMAX film system and IMAX digital projection system? (The new system also has different sound technology which does not even allow local cinema staff to turn down the sound volume - everything is set by IMAX.) Chemical Engineer ( talk) 19:50, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on IMAX. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 06:01, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
![]() | Part of an edit requested by an editor with a conflict of interest has been implemented. See below for additional information. |
Hello,
I am an employee of IMAX and would like to propose some updates to this entry.
Thank you,
CDuke10 (
talk)
19:27, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
In the opening “IMAX” section, please update the last sentence to the following:
“As of September 2017, the IMAX theatre network consisted of 1,302 theatres in 75 countries.”
[1]
At the end of the opening “IMAX” section, please add the following sentence:
“The Chief Executive Officer of IMAX is Richard L. Gelfond (2009-present).”
[2]
References
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on IMAX. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://riverfrontparknow.com/redevelopment/u-s-pavilion-shelters/{{
dead link}}
tag to
https://imaxshift.com/imaxshift-journey-comes-to-an-end/When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 15:32, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
![]() | Part of an edit requested by an editor with a conflict of interest has been implemented. Please see information below regarding your request. |
Hello,
I am an employee of IMAX and would like to propose some updates to this entry based on the previous feedback above.
Thank you,
CDuke10 (
talk)
22:10, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
In the “History” section, please update the last sentence to the following to match the updated number of theatres and countries in the lead section:
“As of September 2017, there were 1,302 IMAX theatres located in 75 countries, of which 1,203 were in commercial multiplexes.”
[1]
At the end of the lead “IMAX” section, please add the following sentence:
“The Chief Executive Officer of IMAX is
Richard Gelfond (2009-present).”
[2]
[3]
References
![]() | This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest was declined. Please see the Reply section below for more information about your request. |
Hello,
I am an employee of IMAX and would like to propose some updates to this entry.
Thank you,
CDuke10 (
talk)
22:04, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
At the end of the lead “IMAX” section, please add the following sentence:
“The Chief Executive Officer of IMAX is
Richard Gelfond (2009-present).”
[1]
[2]
This information should be included in the lead paragraph similarly to PepsiCo's Wikipedia page that lists PepsiCo’s Wikipedia lists Indra Krishnamurthy Nooyi as the chief executive of PepsiCo since 2006. [3] — Preceding unsigned comment added by CDuke10 ( talk • contribs) 22:56, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
After the fourth paragraph of the “History” section, please add the following two sentences:
“In 1994, two investment bankers - Richard L. Gelfond and Brad Wechsler - acquired IMAX through a leveraged buyout with hopes of bringing IMAX to Hollywood and commercial multiplexes.
[4]
Please add the following two sentences in the last paragraph of the “History” section, before the last sentence about September 2017 theatre count:
“In April of 2009, Gelfond became IMAX’s sole CEO and Director of the Company’s Board of Directors and Wechsler moved into the role of sole Chairman of the Company’s Board of Directors.
[5]
[6] On October 8, 2015, IMAX China, a subsidiary of the company, was listed on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange.
[7]
[8]
References
I am starting to see references to IMAX Sapphire locations in other countries. They appear to be IMAX theatres with all premium/VIP seating, but I have not been able to confirm that. Depending on what they are, should they be included in this article under either Theatres or Variations? Harris Seldon ( talk) 10:32, 17 September 2018 (UTC)