If you've seen Both RealD3D and Imax3D versions of Avatar..

[Human Na'vi Hybrid]

I saw Avatar in the regular RealD3D version. How much better is the Imax3D from the RealD3D?? Is it much Better or just a little bit better??
There is no Imax 3D theaters anywere near my place...
I need to know because,I might actually travel by plane just to go see Avatar in IMAX 3D..

[bill smauz]

'Eh, it was all pretty much the same in Real 3D. I mean I first saw the movie in Real 3D which probably spoiled the experience I had in IMAX so yeah. IMAX has a larger screen though which only engulfs you more into the land of Pandora. I believe it also has better picture quality maybe? And maybe better sound quality. If it isn't too much of a hassle to rush out and go see it in IMAX 3D, I suggest you do it.

[Colonel]

I saw Avatar in the regular RealD3D version. How much better is the Imax3D from the RealD3D?? Is it much Better or just a little bit better??
There is no Imax 3D theaters anywere near my place...
I need to know because,I might actually travel by plane just to go see Avatar in IMAX 3D..

Lebanon? Asalamu Alykum. I would find a local theater. The movie is still very enjoyable in 2D.

[DreamWalks]

I need to know because,I might actually travel by plane just to go see Avatar in IMAX 3D..

Whoa, now that's commitment! And sorry, but I cannot help you, I have only seen the film in regular 3D.

Best wishes!

[~ViperSB1~]

Ive seen both versions 3 times. The Imax is better but also has its drawbacks. The Imax theater here said they have sold out EVERY showing since the film opened. So that means to get a good seat you have to get there 2 hours early. And this to me is the biggest drawback to Imax, YOU HAVE TO GET A GOOD SEAT! If you get a bad one it ruins the 3d effect and the picture quality is horrible. Plus you neck hurts alot from looking up at the giant screen. The RealD 3D is much more forgiving as far as seat location, looks goot from pretty much any seat. For me the hassle of Imax is not worth it, if you have one close and dont have to stand in line for 2 1/2 hours to get a good seat then yeah, Imax is better. But RealD 3D it a VERY close second. If you have FLY to see it, dont bother. Just my opinion though.

Oh, and make sure it is a true Imax, not one of the fake LieMax's that are everywhere now.

[DrNegative]

I saw Avatar in the regular RealD3D version. How much better is the Imax3D from the RealD3D?? Is it much Better or just a little bit better??
There is no Imax 3D theaters anywere near my place...
I need to know because,I might actually travel by plane just to go see Avatar in IMAX 3D..

I have seen 2D, regular 3D, and the IMAX 3D versions of this film. In my own opinion, the IMAX version was the ultimate experience. The field of view, the sound, and the brightness/clarity of the image really made the experiance more enjoyable for me. It made you feel like you were actually in Pandora with them. My mother went with me (her first IMAX viewing) and she was amazed as well.

Of course I could enjoy this movie on a handheld TV anyway....Im not saying its not good on the other versions as well because unlike most movie critics, I admired this film for its story and characters more than anything.

Note: One other thing....if you plan to see it in IMAX, I recommend you go to a site like Fandango to get your ticket days ahead of time and get there at least 30 minutes early to try and get a good seat as far to the middle as possible for the 3D effects to show at their best.

[Grif]

Same here and 3D iMax only adds emersion to the movie, not actual noticeable screen resolution difference (even though the resolution is better). I'd recommend seeing it in iMax.

[Avatarfanboy161]

IMAX 3d is not cropped in anyway, it is shown in its native resolution. Real3D is cropped and therefore less picture quality.

[Neytiri.]

I saw Avatar in the regular RealD3D version. How much better is the Imax3D from the RealD3D?? Is it much Better or just a little bit better??
There is no Imax 3D theaters anywere near my place...
I need to know because,I might actually travel by plane just to go see Avatar in IMAX 3D..

Imax has a much larger screen and like 50 more speakers behind it, so you can litterally feel the explosions.

[uniltìrantokx]

Imax has a much larger screen and like 50 more speakers behind it, so you can litterally feel the explosions.

it's sorta like that 4d thing in another thread.

[Neytiri.]

it's sorta like that 4d thing in another thread.

yah except you dont spin around in chairs the hole time lol

[archkyle]

both are about the same as far as 3D goes, i think realD3D has a bit more perspective 3D while Imax3D still seems blurry at times.

[Stanley_9875]

I think IMAX 3-D was incredible! It can't compare to regular 3-D. I saw it 2-D, then 3-D, IMAX 3-D twice, then 3-D, then IMAX 3-D and IMAX 3-D again on saturday. When I downgraded to 3-D I felt there were more boundaries, and I wasn't as close to the movie as I would've liked. I loved it, but IMAX 3-D cannot compare.

Also, IMAX 3-D has a 6 story screen and 12,000 Watts of surround sound... tiiiiiiiiight :P

[TarukMakto]

I think IMAX 3-D was incredible! It can't compare to regular 3-D. I saw it 2-D, then 3-D, IMAX 3-D twice, then 3-D, then IMAX 3-D and IMAX 3-D again on saturday. When I downgraded to 3-D I felt there were more boundaries, and I wasn't as close to the movie as I would've liked. I loved it, but IMAX 3-D cannot compare.

Also, IMAX 3-D has a 6 story screen and 12,000 Watts of surround sound... tiiiiiiiiight :P

I have seen it in Regular 3D once and Imax 3D twice....The IMAX 3D makes the regular 3D look like TV...its mindblowing if you get the middle row...but I had to buy the tickets 2 days in advance and stand in line 2 hours in my city to see it. The sound quality is about a 1000 percent better than regular 3D and pic quality is about 100 percent better. My money is on IMAX!

[Toruk Makto]

Imax is way better. go. NOW.

[sullyjakes14]

i ahte that stupid red and blue glass..and the regular one.. i rather spend my money on real 3d..

[Toruk Makto]

i ahte that stupid red and blue glass..and the regular one.. i rather spend my money on real 3d..

my glasses weren't red and blue.

[~ViperSB1~]

I have seen it in Regular 3D once and Imax 3D twice....The IMAX 3D makes the regular 3D look like TV...its mindblowing if you get the middle row...but I had to buy the tickets 2 days in advance and stand in line 2 hours in my city to see it. The sound quality is about a 1000 percent better than regular 3D and pic quality is about 100 percent better. My money is on IMAX!

Man, your regular 3D theater must suck.

[sullyjakes14]

dude the sound and the 3d in imax is crazy..when i see the 4th time of avatar in imax..i saw someone was seating like no more then 5 feet from the screen and their neck must be hurt .. me i got a chair that all the way up and right next to the speaker.. i got the golden seat .. when the minute the movie start with that chanting sound oh man. i got goosebump !!

[CrashingDoors]

I'm still a bit jealous... I haven't been able to (nor probably won't ever get to) see Avatar in IMAX3D. Oh well, I guess I'll just pretend that you have all said "it's terrible in IMAX, not worth it".

[Lonespirit]

IMAX is the way to go my friend. I originally saw Avatar in normal theaters, no 3D. The second time I watched it on the big IMAX screen in NYC and I was blown away. The huge screen, the surround sound, It felt as if I was there alongside Jake throughout his entire journey. You become immersed in Pandora, you live it, breath it, you are so entangled that you think this is life, this is real! The only problem is once the glasses are removed and you exit the theater, the dream is over. Sorry for long post (first time too).

[McRawffles]

Out of my experiences, I'd rate it as:
Imax 3D >> 2D > RealD3D. The RealD3D was too blurry when not looking at the center of the picture for me.

[Robert Henry]

Seeing it in Imax tomorrow so I can make my own opinnion, saw it 3 times in Real 3D

[TarukMakto]

dude the sound and the 3d in imax is crazy..when i see the 4th time of avatar in imax..i saw someone was seating like no more then 5 feet from the screen and their neck must be hurt .. me i got a chair that all the way up and right next to the speaker.. i got the golden seat .. when the minute the movie start with that chanting sound oh man. i got goosebump !!

Thats what I'm talkin about!

[DaiTao313]

I saw Avatar in the regular RealD3D version. How much better is the Imax3D from the RealD3D?? Is it much Better or just a little bit better??
There is no Imax 3D theaters anywere near my place...
I need to know because,I might actually travel by plane just to go see Avatar in IMAX 3D..

IMAX is bigger screen so it feels more 3D and close up

[spicyapple]

IMAX 3D is much more immersive, and the depth pops out more. If I had to choose, definitely I would pick IMAX 3D.

My only problem was the IMAX projector where I saw it had a piece of hair or some string that was visible on screen. I guess they didn't clean the projectors properly and it was distracting throughout the film. RealD uses digital projectors so the image is clear and crisp.

[Humble]

So far I've seen Avatar 10 times, Imax 3d, reald 3d and 2d. Here's a technology breakdown for you:

1. I've seen it six times on the sony 4k projection utilizing circular polarized lenses for 3d, and this has been the best way to see Avatar. It's so clear it's like looking through a window. It's bright, even with the glasses, and it's very easy to see small nuances or details you might otherwise miss. Best picture quality hands down.

2. The Imax 3d (the real big screens not the knock-off little ones) were showing it in digital 3d using 2 crystie 2k projectors with horizontal polarization. That means if you tilt your head a bit you lose the 3d effect, and 2 2k projectors doesn't equal the quality of a 4k sony. It also seemed dimmer on the Imax screen, which makes sense because the screen is so much larger. However, the sound is punishing and you can feel the destruction of hometree every bit as much as the Na'vi, the sound is by far the best and unmatched.

3. Normal 2d viewing on film and by 2k prjectors. Nothing special really but it's a little nicer to the eyes and I had less eye fatigue after seeing it in 2d. After being spoiled with the 4k picture and the Imax sound it's hard to settle for a normal screen.

[titan88]

i saw this in the IMAX and was totally immersed into the univerise that i truly forgot that the movie was CG. thats why it really affected me the most seeing how real they were. i am still going to see it in normal 3d soon so cant comment on that yet, but the imax is the best i would say if becasue of the size of the screen which truly makes the world of pandora even more beautiful

[Shuriko]

To be honest I didn't find the imax version to be dramatically better, and the imax seemed like it was more blurry than the regular 3D. I don't know if that was just me though.

[intao]

IMAX is the way to go my friend. I originally saw Avatar in normal theaters, no 3D. The second time I watched it on the big IMAX screen in NYC and I was blown away. The huge screen, the surround sound, It felt as if I was there alongside Jake throughout his entire journey. You become immersed in Pandora, you live it, breath it, you are so entangled that you think this is life, this is real! The only problem is once the glasses are removed and you exit the theater, the dream is over. Sorry for long post (first time too).


I felt the same way, except i kept my glasses. :P

[Stanley_9875]

Haha but I haven't seen anything in IMAX 3-D in a while, so when they opened the doors and the closer I got I was thinking "holy crap, the top of that screen must be somewhere.... around.... here.... no.... still going.... *fully walked through door* ah there it is!

[navifox]

I've seen it 4 times, twice in 3D and twice in IMAX digital 3D (at different theaters). The first time I saw it was in regular 3D and I was blown away; the next night I drove an hour and a half to see it in IMAX 3D and was shocked at how much better it was - I really couldn't believe it. Then I saw it again in 3D where I saw it the first time in 3D and I found that the picture was darker then in IMAX (although I didn't notice it the first time - nothing to compare it to). So last night I saw it again in IMAX at a different place and I was totally blown away again - to me no comparasion to reg 3D. I would say anyone that can see it in IMAX 3D should do so, but if you can't then you will still be blown away in reg. 3D as you won't have the IMAX to compare it to.

[xcrunner08]

I have seen in 3 times in IMAX and twice in RealdD as well as once in 2D. I can safely say IMAX is better. It is not a HUGE difference but really makes you feel like you are there. It is a great experience and I recommend everyone try to see it once that way if you can.

[Neytiri.]

Imax hands down, you can feel hometree being blown away, you can feel the missiles exploding its insane.

[Kxanì Kato]

Imax hands down, you can feel hometree being blown away, you can feel the missiles exploding its insane.

agreed. ive seen it twice in RealD and once in IMAX. I legitimately FORGOT WHERE I WAS when i came out of the Imax theater. I was that immersed. Imax just draws you in to the point where your mind is 100% there. Only part of you that isn't there is your body, sadly :(

[Slick_42]

It depends on what IMAX. RealD has the better 3D effect but when you have a big, and i mean BIG IMAX screen it is probably better there. Unfortunate we only have some crappy 175m² IMAX

[THORx14]

I prefer reald. Imax was just too much. The only thing I liked about imax was that the glasses weren't as dark so you could see more of pandoras color. The sound and visuals actually made my brain melt so i couldn't actually enjoy the movie.

[H-Mac]

Imax is definitely the best way to watch avatar, and I would know cuz I watched it in 2d , real 3d and Imax ,and Imax was just crazy . Going to watch it for the fourth time this weekend , in Imax ofcourse

[n0ckturn4l]

I feel the IMAX version was so much better, more colorful and the sound was incredible.

[Grif]

I saw it in 3D in a great theater (leather seats and real food) and thought it was great. Then I saw it in iMax in probably the worst iMax theater in the US. It is part of a regular movie theater. I ended up sitting in the front row, far left seat, next to a large man who breathed loudly. It was not as pleasant as the first theater. Yes you are immersed more and it is higher quality, but I really recommend that you see it in 3D in the best theater possible, because nothing takes you out of the experience like another member of the audience distracting you.

[Stanley_9875]

Plus I got a free poster after my 1st/3 times in IMAX :D

[n0ckturn4l]

Plus I got a free poster after my 1st/3 times in IMAX :D

I want a free poster!! lol

[topgear]

i've seen avatar three times. twice in Cinemark XD Real D 3D and once in IMAX. I don't know if anyone else has seen it in a Cinemark XD theater, but it is their version of a "IMAX sized" screen using Real D 3D. The thing I like about the Cinemark XD is that the seats are much nicer than where I saw it in IMAX, plus there's more seats, which gives you more opportunities to have own space to yourself, rather than being crowded up in an IMAX theater.

Don't get me wrong, the IMAX was great, but I sat near the edge of the theater, would have preferred the middle someplace.

[Gurnblansten]

it totally ruins your movie experiance when you have really bad seats (im talking realy, realy, REALY bad seats) i hate it.

[topgear]

it totally ruins your movie experiance when you have really bad seats (im talking realy, realy, REALY bad seats) i hate it.

couldn't agree more. i was in the back row for Avatar when i saw it in IMAX, but I was way over to the side, and the image just didn't look right due to that, if you know what I mean.

[Leonopteryx]

Imax 3D is the only way to see it IMHO. the 5 by 7 story screen, its just so immersive, and wonderful... i saw it in imax, then reald3d, and i was not nearly as immersed as i was in imax, in imax the screen took up my entire field of vision, whereas normal screens dont, you just dont get that same feel

[aoitennyo]

I saw it first in IMAX 3-D and was completely immersed in the world. I usually eat popcorn through the intense action scenes out of nervousness, but the chase scene with the Thanator was SO crazy I couldn't even eat! I think it's worth the extra buck or two--it's so amazing and the picture quality was much better than real 3-D (I've seen two movies in real 3-D and it was blurry both times) it was almost too much for me, lol. Ah! I wanna see it (and Jake as an avatar, lol) again!

[Pasow]

i saw it first in Real3D (regular), but i had the greatest seats in the world so it was out of this world still. i went back for the IMAX one and was still blown away. get close seats no mater which showing you go to. Pandora is the best when its all that you see!

the biggest difference comes from the amount of detail that can be seen and the sound quality. IMAX just cant be beat for its massive amount of sound power, and picture clarity.

the IMAx one is funner to go and see a few times because theirs so much more to be seen!

(just a side note, IMAX is in the 4:3 format so its not wide screen... where as the Real3D is in the 16:9. i found that you needed to sit closer to the IMAX screen to get the same effect as the real3D)

[Vandil]

I've seen it on Imax, real3d and real3d ultra screen now.

Honestly liked the real3d ultra screen showing the best. The screen is about 4 times the size of a standard 16:9 theater screen and has about 4x the wattage in its sound system. It also did not suffer from IMAX's linear polarization effect so you could turn your head to look at 3d effects and not blur out or fade out.

Both the Imax and Real3d Ultra were top end viewing experiences compared to real3d on a normal theater screen.

[looper]

I didn't see a big difference between the Imax and Real 3D. Imax was better with the song effect and big screen, but graphicly i didn't see a big difference. If you have the chance to see it at Imax go for it, but real 3d is great to!

[Modsquad]

I saw both versions and to be perfectly honest, I much preferred the RealD version. This depends heavily on how your theater is setup though. Every single IMAX theater has pretty much the exact same setup but RealD ones don't. That being said, my local RealD Room is magnificent, humongous screen and great stadium seating. The resolution and brightness and 3 dimensional depth was far greater than IMAX's.

I watched it 2x in IMAX and I was pulled away from the immersion both times because I could readily tell I was still staring at a screen. It felt like I was viewing this 3 dimensional world through a hazy window while Real D felt like an actual portal. The resolution and contrast just startled me, it was probably the best moving image I've ever seen, barring the huge LED screens you can find in autoshows. IMAX has too much ghosting issues with the 3d image too, I couldn't even tilt my head just a little bit, otherwise ghosting appears. Now a native 70mm stereoscopic footage, that would probably induce heart attacks from sheer excitement. That will be the next step once the 4K standard comes rolling around in a few years!

[iocaine]

I think the reason why most people are blown away by the IMAX presentation, is because of the incredible sound system, and the extra image area. RealD 3D on the other hand is cropped. Leyshan's Latest Find (http://www.leyshan.com)

[BlueMonkeyBoy]

I didn't notice too big of a difference resolution-wise, but the sound was definitely better and the screen was just so frigging huge. IMAX is def. the way to go if you can, I drove two hours to see it in IMAX (but I was kinda mad. On an earlier post, I said I had seen it 5 times, and 4 times I was stoned as ****? Well, the one time I go to see it in IMAX, I ran outta bud!!! Yeah, it sucked and all, but I wasn't even that mad, cuz I was like "You know what? screw it, I'm still seeing Avatar in IMAX 3D nigga!"). But yeah, if you can, it is definitely worth the road trip to see it in IMAX. Of course, I may be biased seeing as how I love road trips and I make crazy trips for kind of pointless reasons all the time (I drove 6 hours to see Boondock Saints 2 in theaters, cuz I was worried it wasn't showing at any theater around me. Then, I heard that it was becaause they were waiting for the wide-release. So, yeah, I drove 6 hours to see a movie when a month later it was in my theater thats 20 mins away. You can bet I felt like a shaved tail louie)

[Rubicon]

The first time I saw it was on Imax and I was in a really bad seat. I was on the far left over the theater entrance. The picture and sound was great though. The second was in read d 3d, again good but screen size didn't give me the same immersion.

Again I saw it in Imax and this time I was in a better seat. I sat in the second row right in the middle. The screen filled my whole view. There were several points in the movie I actually felt like I was moving, and that by far added to the experience.

[BlueMonkeyBoy]

The first time I saw it was on Imax and I was in a really bad seat. I was on the far left over the theater entrance. The picture and sound was great though. The second was in read d 3d, again good but screen size didn't give me the same immersion.

Again I saw it in Imax and this time I was in a better seat. I sat in the second row right in the middle. The screen filled my whole view. There were several points in the movie I actually felt like I was moving, and that by far added to the experience.



Yeah, the huge IMAX screen is the ****. I sat right in the middle, baked as hell, and just let myself kind of float into the movie. The place that I saw it had a crazy sound set-up too, and that coupled with the huge screen, ahh man, I felt like I was on pandora for the 3 hours I was there. I mean, if you have an IMAX anywhere within 2 hours of you and you haven't seen it yet in IMAX, I definitely recommend you pick up a fat sack and making the road trip. It will be so worth it, trust me. And make sure you show up like 15 min to half an hour early, so you can get a good seat, because it does make all the difference

[Shatnerpossum]

I saw it in IMAX 3D and RealD (at a nice AMC). Both were awesome.

[Tireatsahaylu]

I think the reason why most people are blown away by the IMAX presentation, is because of the incredible sound system, and the extra image area. RealD 3D on the other hand is cropped. Leyshan's Latest Find (http://www.leyshan.com)

The realD in Galaxy theatres here isnt cropped.

[freelife]

ive seen it 5 times in normal .. i want to go see it in imax soo bad but like i ran out of people to go with haha

[IkranTswonyä]

I've seen it in 2D, ReadD 3D, and IMAX 3D. If you have the option, IMAX is the way to go.

As a side note, did anyone notice minor differences between the 2D/RealD versions, and the IMAX version. I've seen it six times now, and it was 1:30am, but I could swear that the IMAX version had a second here and there. I will freely admit that I'm probably totally wrong about it though. :P

[Gogo]

Bigger is better in this case. Provided you have good centered seats. If you saw the Dark Knight in IMAX and then in regular as an example - the Hong Kong tower screen was simply grander because of the scope and size. Its my opinion and I have seen in all formats including yucky 2D.

[Friend of Pandora]

Not sure if this is the right thread or not (if not, sorry and please point me to the right one)...

I've seen it in IMAX 3D (two different theater types) and want to try regular 3D. Apparently I have a choice of RealD 3D, Dolby 3D, and possibly some other kind of 3D (local theater has 3D, but isn't listed on either RealD or Dolby's site, so no idea what they're using).

Which one should I go for? Is RealD better than Dolby or v.v.?

[Spartan Tickler]

Not sure if this is the right thread or not (if not, sorry and please point me to the right one)...

I've seen it in IMAX 3D (two different theater types) and want to try regular 3D. Apparently I have a choice of RealD 3D, Dolby 3D, and possibly some other kind of 3D (local theater has 3D, but isn't listed on either RealD or Dolby's site, so no idea what they're using).

Which one should I go for? Is RealD better than Dolby or v.v.?
Nothing beats IMAX really, better sound, better and larger screen and bet5ter overall experience and is well owrth the small amount more it was(at least compared to prices in my area).

Also on a little side note the Dolby 3D glasses I got at my theater were much smaller and cheaper than those at IMAX. The lens in the glasses at IMAX are bigger and they are more comfortable, important if you're going to be watching a film for two and a half hours, it's the little things that add up to a superior experience.

[eger_666]

Lol I didn't even hear about RealD3D :D

[Fosus]

I have a feeling I should go see Avatar in IMAX 3D NOW.

(I have never seen any movie in IMAX 3D) :nsad:

[Taw tìran]

I have seen it in RealD four times and I'm still waiting to see it in IMAX. I live in London and the Waterloo IMAX is so popular that when I booked my tickets 2 weeks ago, the first showing they had with good seats available was on Feb 21st! I booked anyway of course but I'll probably see it another few times in RealD before that.

[Jan_Jurgen]

Well, Imax 3D is way better b/c you get the immersive effect...plus, bigger screen and better sound. RealD has smaller screen, sound isn't as loud but the glasses are a lot more comfortable. You can't tell the difference in picture quality though.

[JamesCameronBlogspot]

Pretty much every post here seems to say that IMAX is better than RealD....and I definitely agree. In my opinion, the image is indisputably brighter and more crisp and, what's more, I believe that IMAX has fairly strict quality control procedures so the sound is much better (by comparison, the RealD screens here in Livonia, Michigan, for whatever reason, have sound so low that you literally can't hear Grace making the joke about Jake's queue, "Don't touch that, you'll go blind.")

Also, Avatar was natively filmed in 16:9, which is what IMAX screens display it in, whereas RealD has it cropped to 2.35:1. So....

http://www.avatar-forums.com/images/imported/2010/01/1209.jpg

Having said all of that, I firmly believe that it makes little difference - even between 2D and IMAX! I really think that the jump from 16mm film to 35mm film is substantial, and every presentation advancement after that is incremental. I strongly suspect that if there was a blind test done between ALL the formats of 'Avatar', the audience responses would be the exact same in every single report card.

On opening day, I saw it back-to-back in IMAX and then RealD. The difference was very, very noticeable. But you know what? The audience at the RealD screening was far more enthusiastic - clapping and hooting at several points during the movie.

So it's kind of like the difference between a BMW and a Mercedez. Is the latter better? Yeah, sure. But does it really make any substantive difference? No.

[Friend of Pandora]

Pretty much every post here seems to say that IMAX is better than RealD....and I definitely agree. In my opinion, the image is indisputably brighter and more crisp and, what's more, I believe that IMAX has fairly strict quality control procedures so the sound is much better (by comparison, the RealD screens here in Livonia, Michigan, for whatever reason, have sound so low that you literally can't hear Grace making the joke about Jake's queue, "Don't touch that, you'll go blind.")

Also, Avatar was natively filmed in 16:9, which is what IMAX screens display it in, whereas RealD has it cropped to 2.35:1. So....

http://www.avatar-forums.com/images/imported/2010/01/1209.jpg

Having said all of that, I firmly believe that it makes little difference - even between 2D and IMAX! I really think that the jump from 16mm film to 35mm film is substantial, and every presentation advancement after that is incremental. I strongly suspect that if there was a blind test done between ALL the formats of 'Avatar', the audience responses would be the exact same in every single report card.

On opening day, I saw it back-to-back in IMAX and then RealD. The difference was very, very noticeable. But you know what? The audience at the RealD screening was far more enthusiastic - clapping and hooting at several points during the movie.

So it's kind of like the difference between a BMW and a Mercedez. Is the latter better? Yeah, sure. But does it really make any substantive difference? No.

Welcome, JamesCameronBlogspot, and thanks for such a thoughtful post!

FWIW, I agree that IMAX 3D should be the ultimate viewing option. And in my case, I thought I'd picked out perfect seats (middle of the screen, row G - midway up). But the 3D wasn't as impressive as in the baby IMAX. I wonder if it's possible the projection system was misaligned or slightly out of focus (it's an old theater)? Viewing quality aside, the audio was fantastic in the big IMAX theater - far better than baby IMAX.

At any rate, thank you very much for the comparison images - it's great to see the difference between IMAX and other formats for this film.

[JamesCameronBlogspot]

Welcome, JamesCameronBlogspot, and thanks for such a thoughtful post!

FWIW, I agree that IMAX 3D should be the ultimate viewing option. And in my case, I thought I'd picked out perfect seats (middle of the screen, row G - midway up). But the 3D wasn't as impressive as in the baby IMAX. I wonder if it's possible the projection system was misaligned or slightly out of focus (it's an old theater)? Viewing quality aside, the audio was fantastic in the big IMAX theater - far better than baby IMAX.

At any rate, thank you very much for the comparison images - it's great to see the difference between IMAX and other formats for this film.
Ah, you're welcome, and thanks to you for the kind words. (Also, is you're birthday REALLY August 24 or are you just living vicariously through Jake Sully? 'Cause, of course, that's his "birthday" too!)

Just to again be clear: despite the graphic I did there, I strongly believe that it makes little difference.

I always remember that I grew up watching 'Star Wars' in pan-and-scan on a 13" TV....and I liked them every bit as much as the super-duper DVD's with Dolby Surround and all the rest. Here's what James Cameron himself said back in '91:

http://www.avatar-forums.com/images/imported/2010/01/1213.jpg

[BlueMonkeyBoy]

I have a feeling I should go see Avatar in IMAX 3D NOW.

(I have never seen any movie in IMAX 3D) :nsad:



Yes, yes you should. As a matter of fact, go now! Like, as soon as you read this post rush out the door and into your car. You can thank me when you get back in a completely mind-blown state of mind

[oolong]

Hands down Imax 3d. I first saw the movie in regular 3d, then again in Imax 3d. I will never see another movie in regular 3d. I can see the little hairs on the seed of the sacred tree individually, the pores on her skin individually, the little loose hair that wasn't bound into the braids of their hair individually. The faces clearly of the humans controlling the Amp suits when they are far away and in the suit. Forget all the technical terms of the camera. The experience alone made me feel so insignificant, because I felt like the technology has advanced so much that I was a cave man to not have seen this before. I was so impressed with Imax 3d, when I got home, I went and bought IMAX's company stocks! But one advice I have to make sure you heed, you have go line up early and get the seat in the middle.

[Eywa is # 1]

How much does an IMAX ticket cost?

[Vauktu]

How much does an IMAX ticket cost?

It depends on where you live. You can find ticket prices by going to the IMAX theater's website or to the IMAX theater itself and asking.

I bought my IMAX tickets from Fandango.com (http://www.fandango.com/)

[BlueMonkeyBoy]

How much does an IMAX ticket cost?

As the guy above me said, it varies. But for me, my local theater was charging 12 dollars for the 3D movies (a 2.50 extra charge for the glasses), where as when I saw it in IMAX it was only 10 bucks (reason being at IMAX they make you return the glasses, so they don't have to charge you for them. You know where it says to "recycle" your regular 3D, non-IMAX glasses? I have no doubt they just sterilize them and re-use them. All they'd have to do to help keep cost down would be to just have somebody standing at the exit of the theater ro make you return them)

[aoitennyo]

Well, when I saw it in real3-D I noticed: the screen was smaller, the picture was blurry in fast action scenes, it had a slight "ghosting" effect, alot of the details were lost, and I did notice it was cropped. I found those little things to be pretty distracting and it kind of ruined the immersion effect for me, plus the volume in the theater I saw it in was lower than I'd like (much quieter than in IMAX 3-D, which was almost too loud at times, but in a good way). If you have the money (like, $1-2 US more for me), seriously, go IMAX!

[RJ100]

I have an IMAX question.. are the so-called "fake" IMAX theaters really all that different than the "real" ones?

I've seen Avatar twice in Real3D and I wanted to see it once more in IMAX cuz I heard it was amazing. I found out this morning that the IMAX theater closest to me is considered a "fake" IMAX. Apparently the screen isn't as big or something. How much differnece is there between the two theaters? I want to see Avatar as good as it gets, so if it's not as good I'd rather drive a little farther and see it in a "real" IMAX.

[Friend of Pandora]

I have an IMAX question.. are the so-called "fake" IMAX theaters really all that different than the "real" ones?

I've seen Avatar twice in Real3D and I wanted to see it once more in IMAX cuz I heard it was amazing. I found out this morning that the IMAX theater closest to me is considered a "fake" IMAX. Apparently the screen isn't as big or something. How much differnece is there between the two theaters? I want to see Avatar as good as it gets, so if it's not as good I'd rather drive a little farther and see it in a "real" IMAX.

Well as one who's seen it in both IMAX theaters, yeah, I think there's a big difference. One, I'm almost certain that the screen format is different (but I hope someone with more knowledge will refute this if untrue). Two, the audio was inferior at the "fake" IMAX. That said, and probably just me, but the 3D effect was better at the fake IMAX than the big one.

Of course, others who have gone to the same theater as I have said the 3D was fine, so I wouldn't sweat that too much.

If it's not a ridiculous drive for you, go for the "real" IMAX - the screen is SO much larger and audio SO much better.

FWIW, here's some information from Wikipedia referring to the "fake" IMAX:


Despite those advantages, one big disadvantage is the resolution of the picture is much lower than normal IMAX. The screens used by digital IMAX installations are also much smaller (28 ft × 58 ft/8.5 m × 18 m) than those found in traditional IMAX cinemas. The digital installations have drawn some confusion based on poor consumer differentiation to the traditional 15/70 IMAX.

You can read more at IMAX - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IMAX)

[RJ100]

Thanks for the response, Friend of Pandora.


but the 3D effect was better at the fake IMAX than the big one.Hmm.

I wanted to see it in IMAX because of the screen size and plus I'd heard that the 3D was even more amazing than the Real3D. HOWEVER.. I'm not sure if the people that told me that saw it in a "fake" IMAX or a real one, so..

/sigh

[Friend of Pandora]

Thanks for the response, Friend of Pandora.

Hmm.

I wanted to see it in IMAX because of the screen size and plus I'd heard that the 3D was even more amazing than the Real3D. HOWEVER.. I'm not sure if the people that told me that saw it in a "fake" IMAX or a real one, so..

/sigh

No problem... :nsmile:

The only solution to your dilemma is to see it in each IMAX to compare. :ntongue:

But seriously, most people said the 3D at the "regular" IMAX was just fine, and I'd been up for 16 hours when the movie started, so it's entirely possible it was just me.

[Arthur]

> I saw IMAX screening rooms here on São Paulo only once. I mean the thing is huuuge, and the room is proportionally small. And unfortunately, there are only two IMAX rooms on São Paulo, and the closes one would require me a 20-min subway trip to reach, so I think I'll stick to RealD3D for now.
> But whats the big difference between IMAX and RealD?

[picoreefvase]

too bad our imax only shows documentaries and never full movies, you are lucky we can't even see it and there is a great big screen just here and waiting...

[last shadow]

After 3 viewings in real3D Ive recently watched it in IMAX, and Im also regretting that I didnt see it in IMAX the first time

[~ViperSB1~]

I've seen both many times. I think the RealD is better but Imax is much bigger. Gonna see the XD 3D next weekend... it's supposed to be the BEST!

[Friend of Pandora]

Just returned from another IMAX viewing (traditional theater - not baby one).

IMHO, nothing truly compares. Yeah, it's not as bright as MasterImage. The glasses aren't quite as good as RealD's. But the audio is simply out of this world. You feel Hometree fall. You feel it in your bones, your lungs, your heart. You don't get that in RealD or MasterImage theaters, and I highly doubt Dolby 3D does it better.

The screen is simply massive, and at the originally-filmed aspect ratio, so there's no loss of filmed content.

Given the massive screen size, the additional feeling of "being there" courtesy the incredible audio system, and the 3D projecting outward instead of inward, I think IMAX has the competition beat.

Like Viper, I hope to see Avatar in XPanD in the next couple of days to see how it compares.

Does anyone know if any of the IMAX dome-style theaters are playing Avatar in 3D? I thought I read that the projector used for the dome-format theaters couldn't do 3D, but I may have just made that up.

[Avatarguy004]

Both 3D's are great in my opinion. I would see those before the 2D myself. However, I felt that the Imax 3D was better. I felt it was more clear and combined with the larger frame I don't think you can go wrong. Though, it does increase the ticket price as well.

[will]

The realD in Galaxy theatres here isnt cropped.

No, only IMAX isn't cropped.

Hint: Easy way to see if you're viewing it in croppo-vision, when Jake is listening to Quaritch giving the rules of the camp - 'You're not in Kansas anymore', look for the 'Welcome to Pandora' sign at the top of the screen on the wall behind Jake. If you see it - then you're getting the full frame. If you don't - you're in croppo-vision and should demand you 25% discount on ticket! :)

Will

[Friend of Pandora]

No, only IMAX isn't cropped.

Hint: Easy way to see if you're viewing it in croppo-vision, when Jake is listening to Quaritch giving the rules of the camp - 'You're not in Kansas anymore', look for the 'Welcome to Pandora' sign at the top of the screen on the wall behind Jake. If you see it - then you're getting the full frame. If you don't - you're in croppo-vision and should demand you 25% discount on ticket! :)

Will

Hah - I noticed that sign last night in the IMAX theater, but it seemed an odd place for it - after all, that's the cafeteria, right?

[SilentEagle]

The difference I found between IMAX and Real3D is crispness of the image on the screen. While Real3D can be a bit blurry sometimes, IMAX is always clear and the 3D is much much better.

[amabhy]

Huh, I didn't notice too much of a difference between the two. I actually liked the Real3D glasses more, they were more comfortable.

[Dusso Janladde]

Does anyone know if any of the IMAX dome-style theaters are playing Avatar in 3D? I thought I read that the projector used for the dome-format theaters couldn't do 3D, but I may have just made that up.

That's correct, IMAX Domes can't do 3D. They use a single IMAX film projector that rides up an elevator from the projection booth under the theater. I saw Dark Knight in one of these, and the film print on its platter was about SIX FEET across. That's because one second of IMAX film is about 5 feet long, compared to 18 inches for one second of 35mm.

Real (film) IMAX 3D uses two projectors and two film prints, one for each eye. The two film prints together cost about $50,000, but it simply doesn't get any better. Digital IMAX 3D? Not even close, and this is why:

http://www.avatar-forums.com/images/imported/2010/01/40.png

A digital projector can NEVER rightfully be called an IMAX projector unless its resolution is about 10000x8000 pixels, equivalent to IMAX film. Current digital cinema projectors, including IMAX ones, have a resolution no better than 35mm film.

[Arthur]

> I watched on IMAX yesterday. Here are my comparisons:


RealD | IMAX

Different screen ratio from the original crops parts the image | All image is seen

3D has less depth | 3D has roughly 40% more depth than RealD

You can actually read the subtitles | Subtitles are unreadable when put in front of something which 3D effect pushes closer to you than the subtitles

The glasses are lightier, sleekier, and adjustable | I left the theatre with a red mark on my nose bridge and two red dots behind my ears

Sound is perfect | Sound is perfect*

Better quality on still shots, or slow movements | Good quality

Moving shots, specially sideways, can make you lose your focus | Same quality as still shots

There are more than 1000 RealD screens on Brazil | There are TWO IMAX screens on Brazil

Audience behaves badly, sometimes | Only the medium-higher society goes to IMAX so everyone behaves accordingly

Each ticket costs R$23,00, and the according popcorn+drink pack is R$15,00 | Each ticket costs R$34,00, and the according popcorn+drink pack is R20,00

You can absorb the whole image by looking forward | There were a few points you would need to slightly turn your head to watch a scene's focus.


> My conclusion: IMAX is VERY GOOD. RealD is GOOD. If you have an IMAX close to you, watch Avatar once, or twice. If you intend on watching 20, 30 times, switch to RealD.

* As for the sound, it's mainly dependant on where you sit. On RealD theatres, if you sit on the exact middle of the room, you get a constructive interference peak. On IMAX theatres, if you sit on the center, about 2/3 up the room, you get the peak.

[Olo'eyctan]

How do you tell if a theater is "real" IMax? I saw it at AMC hamilton but it barely seemed different from RealD 3D.

[Arthur]

How do you tell if a theater is "real" IMax? I saw it at AMC hamilton but it barely seemed different from RealD 3D.
> Screen ratio. If it's obviously rectangular, it was a "fake" or "adapted" IMAX.
> Or... during the intro scene where Jake arrives during Quatrich's speech ("you're not in Kansas anymore..."), if you see a sign "Welcome to Pandora", it's IMAX. If you don't, it's not.
> Or... When Eytukan says "Tsu'tey will lead the warriors", if the screen crops right above his head, it's not IMAX. If it has some extra space above his head, it's IMAX.

[Friend of Pandora]

How do you tell if a theater is "real" IMax? I saw it at AMC hamilton but it barely seemed different from RealD 3D.

Look on the IMAX website and click "theater details" for the theater you're interested in. If it says "traditional", it's full size. If it says "multiplex", it's not.

[Arthur]

> Oh, and add to my RealD | IMAX comparison list:

You can tilt your head, look anywhere around the theatre, and you will still have the 3D effect | If you tilt your head just a bit, part of the image meant for one eye goes to the other eye, breaking the 3D effect.



Look on the IMAX website and click "theater details" for the theater you're interested in. If it says "traditional", it's full size. If it says "multiplex", it's not.

> And i think it's not only the size. Adapted IMAX theatres have a lower quality than full IMAX'es. IMO.

[Fosus]

> Or... When Eytukan says "Tsu'tey will lead the warriors", if the screen crops right above his head, it's not IMAX. If it has some extra space above his head, it's IMAX.

I have watched Avatar in a Dolby 3D theater, and it was full ratio, like IMAX. Resolution was cropped ofc.

[JamesCameronBlogspot]

No, only IMAX isn't cropped.

Hint: Easy way to see if you're viewing it in croppo-vision, when Jake is listening to Quaritch giving the rules of the camp - 'You're not in Kansas anymore', look for the 'Welcome to Pandora' sign at the top of the screen on the wall behind Jake. If you see it - then you're getting the full frame. If you don't - you're in croppo-vision and should demand you 25% discount on ticket! :)

Will
Yeah....I'm sure that everybody who saw it in other formats would only enjoy it 75% as much as the people in IMAX....that explains why it's such a colossal flop overseas where there are so few IMAX's. (That's sarcasm.)

And really: if people have to be told to enjoy one thing (IMAX) so much more than another thing (other formats)....how much difference could it possibly be making?

I have a friend - name's Norm, actually - who lives in Michigan's Upper Peninsula (which is ultra rural and sparsely populated) and, so, he saw it in 2D when it first came out.

But then he hears from all the gurus and experts that he's an idiot and that he has to see it in 3D or else "You're not getting the true experience!" So, Norm goes off on a pilgrimage expecting to see God at the end. Ummmm....not quite. Here's his basic summation upon finally seeing it in 3D as opposed to 2D:

"It doesn't add much. It's just as good without it."

[ftx]

I'm surprised this conversation is about realD vs imax and nobody cares about the difference between realD and Xpand instead...

[Fosus]

I'm surprised this conversation is about realD vs imax and nobody cares about the difference between realD and Xpand instead...

That's because noone has heard of Xpand :nsmile:

[JamesCameronBlogspot]

That's because noone has heard of Xpand :nsmile:
Yeah, personally, RealD and IMAX are the only 3D screens that I've ever seen. If anybody knows of a good, technical paper comparing the various formats (rather than some dude just offering his opinion), I'd love to have a link (even though nobody besides RealD and IMAX has theaters in this area, anyway).

[ftx]

Yeah, personally, RealD and IMAX are the only 3D screens that I've ever seen. If anybody knows of a good, technical paper comparing the various formats (rather than some dude just offering his opinion), I'd love to have a link (even though nobody besides RealD and IMAX has theaters in this area, anyway).

Wow you guys are unlucky !

Here's the map to check : XpanD - XpanD World Map (http://www.xpandcinema.com/world-map/)

Don't take my word for it, go check the web and the various comparisons between both. But here goes anyway :

I've seen both and realD has some quite noticeable loss of light. Now whenever i go to see it in 3D I choose a theater that does Xpand : it's soooo much better, but hey that's me ;) !

note : Xpand are the active glasses.

I don't remember who did the red/green comparison earlier between realD and imax but you definitely should do it between readD and Xpand too :) !

[Friend of Pandora]

I don't remember who did the red/green comparison earlier between realD and imax but you definitely should do it between readD and Xpand too :) !

I believe that was Arthur, and if memory serves, he lives in Sao Paulo, Brazil. According to the map there are two XPanD theaters there, so perhaps if he has time this weekend he can do so and let us know his thoughts?

[Friend of Pandora]

Yeah, personally, RealD and IMAX are the only 3D screens that I've ever seen. If anybody knows of a good, technical paper comparing the various formats (rather than some dude just offering his opinion), I'd love to have a link (even though nobody besides RealD and IMAX has theaters in this area, anyway).

I've not seen anything in a technical paper, but I would suggest if you haven't already that you head over to avsforums.com - I think that's it. They're higher-end audio/video "nuts" who obsess on the technical details (and I mean all this in a good way). I've seen more technical discussion and debate between the various 3D display systems there than in any other single place.

[ftx]

Yeah :) Good thing Arthur will be able to check and detail it for us :) !

In the meantime you may want to check this video (http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=1271282351240) I found that explains about ghosting and issues with 3D and why their technology (Xpand) doesn't loose light when correcting this or so, or something like that, am not a technical expert ! Well they're promoting their stuff hey ;) ! But as i said earlier, i tried both and absolutely prefer this myself...

[JamesCameronBlogspot]

I've not seen anything in a technical paper, but I would suggest if you haven't already that you head over to avsforums.com - I think that's it. They're higher-end audio/video "nuts" who obsess on the technical details (and I mean all this in a good way). I've seen more technical discussion and debate between the various 3D display systems there than in any other single place.
Thanks for the link, "Friend". (I sound like one of the Arab immigrants who live in my neighborhood. They always say, "Thank you my friend!" when you go to their businesses or help them out.)

There are dozens (maybe hundreds) of RealD screens in my region alone. Looking at that map, the nearest Xpand screen is about 800 miles away in Minnesota. So that explains why people are far more familiar with RealD and IMAX than the others.

[JamesCameronBlogspot]

Yeah :) Good thing Arthur will be able to check and detail it for us :) !

In the meantime you may want to check this video (http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=1271282351240) I found that explains about ghosting and issues with 3D and why their technology (Xpand) doesn't loose light when correcting this or so, or something like that, am not a technical expert ! Well they're promoting their stuff hey ;) ! But as i said earlier, i tried both and absolutely prefer this myself...
The way that that woman described Xpand prevents ghosting - by alternating frames - is the same basic technology as RealD. Now, RealD uses a significantly different technique for blocking the left eye and right eye, but, in essence, both of them have just one frame visible at the same time. (Conversely, IMAX does show both images simultaneously. But the ghosting clearly isn't a problem because I think that the consensus is nearly unanimous that the IMAX 3D is the best-looking presentation.)

I couldn't find that technical site that Friend of Pandora offered because that was apparently the wrong link.

[Friend of Pandora]

I couldn't find that technical site that Friend of Pandora offered because that was apparently the wrong link.

My apologies - I had the right idea, but should not have pluralized the name... :nwink:

Some possible links of use:

AVATAR ? Xpand 3d, Dolby 3d, Reald 3d which one? - AVS Forum (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1207328)

RealD vs Dolby 3D? - AVS Forum (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1085037)

The Official 3D Thread - Page 45 - AVS Forum (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=790210&page=45)

Which 3D Process Did You See Avatar in? - AVS Forum (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1215605)

[JamesCameronBlogspot]

Thanks again, Friend. I'll be going through those links later on. If I have the time and if I can wrap my head around it all, I'll report back here with a quick summation.

[Lilturk]

whats the difference of Real3D and Imax3d? ive only seen Real3D

[Friend of Pandora]

whats the difference of Real3D and Imax3d? ive only seen Real3D

RealD 3D = smaller screen, different aspect ratio, does not project 3D outward - only shows depth into the screen. Glasses allow freedom of movement (looking around) without 3D issues.

IMAX 3D = (assuming you get a traditional theater) - huge screen, much improved audio, "standard" aspect ratio so no cropping of image, 3D projects outward so it appears to be coming "at" you. Glasses do not allow for the same freedom of movement, so looking around can result in a loss of 3D feeling.

[JamesCameronBlogspot]

whats the difference of Real3D and Imax3d? ive only seen Real3D
I disagree with some of Friend of Pandora's description there.

For the record, the "depth" of the 3D illusion - how much something pops out at you or how far back it seems to be 3D - is 0% influenced by the format. That is determined entirely by the filmmakers themselves when they film it. That stuff is determined by the "interocular", which is the distance between the two camera lenses (the further apart they are, the more something seems to pop out to you) and by the "convergence", the point at which the axes of the two cameras converge.

The basic difference between IMAX 3D and, to the best of my knowledge, all the other 3D formats (but RealD for certain), is that IMAX shows both the left and the right eye simultaneously. IMAX also has some proprietary screen reflection material which, supposedly, reflects the projected images back much brighter than the other screens (although the most significant difference could just be in how bright their projectors bulbs are). So IMAX is noticeably brighter than RealD. Lastly, IMAX has different screen dimensions than RealD or other screens. IMAX is 1.76 units horizontally for every 1 unit vertically, whereas RealD is 2.35 units horizontally for every 1 unit vertically.

Because Avatar was natively filmed in the same ratio as IMAX's screen, IMAX, they can present the full image, whereas vertical slices are cropped off for all other formats (other 3D as well as 2D). Here's an example:
http://www.avatar-forums.com/images/imported/2010/01/1209.jpg

However, before a bunch of wannabe-fanboys make you feel guilty for not seeing the "true" Avatar in IMAX, you should note that, to the best of my knowledge, there is absolutely no evidence that people enjoy the movie more in IMAX than in other formats - or in 3D more than 2D, for that matter. Given a blind test, I don't think that people would really care.

Here's what James Cameron said about 3D vs. 2D: "Will the 3-D inform the experience? Yeah absolutely, I think if you see the film in 3-D you’ll be 10 percent more impressed. The film plays as well in 2-D. It’s just, pay a couple of extra bucks and you get a little more sense of being there."

I've seen it in multiple formats. Yes, I like IMAX the best (if only because the sound in the other screens was so freakishly low!), but, push comes to shove, I would be a liar if I claimed that it effected how much I enjoyed the movie.

[OMEGA]

I'm probably going to spend the 3 hour drive to see it in IMAX 3D this weekend I mean RealD was sweet but even more imersion can only make it better not to mention the better sound.

[JamesCameronBlogspot]

I'm probably going to spend the 3 hour drive to see it in IMAX 3D this weekend I mean RealD was sweet but even more imersion can only make it better not to mention the better sound.
Hmmm. I think that I've got to bolster my persuasion skills. (And that's with a quote from James Cameron to bolster my argument!)

[Friend of Pandora]

Hmmm. I think that I've got to bolster my persuasion skills. (And that's with a quote from James Cameron to bolster my argument!)

I completely understand what you're saying, but I would submit that - for me at least - there was a 30-40% improvement in my enjoyment of the film from RealD 3D or MasterImage 3D to IMAX.

The screen size is obviously a big factor. The different 3D technology was a bigger factor. The audio system was a huge factor for me, and easily made it worth it. As I posted elsewhere - perhaps even in this thread, I truly "felt" I was there in the IMAX theater. You feel it in your lungs, your bones, all through your body in certain scenes (like during the destruction of Hometree, for example).

All things considered, I do believe IMAX 3D is the ultimate experience, and I for one am happy to drive the 200+ miles round trip to see it.

[Elyannia]

The Imax is amazing! definitely worth going!

[MaJake]

I have a question about IMAX, is it better to sit in the 2nd or 3rd row if you want to feel immersed in the movie?

[Friend of Pandora]

I have a question about IMAX, is it better to sit in the 2nd or 3rd row if you want to feel immersed in the movie?

Thanks to a friend here, I think sitting towards the top is better - perhaps the third row from the top. Before that I sat in the exact middle. It wasn't as good IMO, but I'd imagine this is a question whose answer varies greatly from person to person.

[Turuk Maktu]

A digital projector can NEVER rightfully be called an IMAX projector unless its resolution is about 10000x8000 pixels, equivalent to IMAX film. Current digital cinema projectors, including IMAX ones, have a resolution no better than 35mm film.
Does anyone know in which original resolution the movie was filmed?

I guess HD only would be too less to catch all the details ...

[Tamas]

Sorry for posting to an old thread, but Avatar has been shot in 2k witch means it's NOT a true IMAX content!

[Be_Creative]

Sorry for posting to an old thread, but Avatar has been shot in 2k witch means it's NOT a true IMAX content!

Yep that's what I read too.

[Tamas]

So here's my experience:

IMAX 3D: lower frame/second (48), 1.78:1 (the real IMAX ratio is 1.44:1), 4k screen resolution (Avatar's original screen resolution is 2k)

Digital 3D: pretty high frame/second (72), 2.35:1, 2k screen resolution

I believe both versions are pretty good, but D3D has amazingly sharp image quality (but smaller screen.) I have enjoyed both versions, and of course Avatar is the best film I have ever seen :)