Real D Vs. IMAX 3D.

[superpidrooo]

REAL 3D it rocks, is cool and I can see all the details , but the one problem is that you see it all dark

[Txen]

There are really two kinds of IMAX, digital and film. I have only seen the digital IMAX and Real D. I thought both were good. The IMAX had the edge in sound for sure. I think both are really good.

One thing I wonder about. The IMAX uses linear polarization with one eye vertical and the other horizontal. If you tilt your head the images blur. I didn't notice that at all on the Real D. How does Real D separate the images? Is it a clockwise vs counterclockwise polarization instead of linear?

EDIT->Update: A quick look at wikipedia shows that it is circularly polarized and that is why you can tilt your head.

RealD 3D cinema technology uses circularly polarized light to produce stereoscopic image projection. Circular polarization technology has the advantage over linear polarization methods in that viewers are able to tilt their head and look about the theater naturally without a disturbing loss of 3D perception, whereas linear polarization projection requires viewers to keep their head orientation aligned within a narrow range of tilt for effective 3D perception; otherwise they may see double or darkened images.[6]

The projector alternately projects right-eye frames and left-eye frames 144 times per second.[6] It circularly polarizes these frames, clockwise for the right eye and counterclockwise for the left eye. A push-pull electro-optical liquid crystal modulator called a ZScreen is placed immediately in front of the projector lens to switch polarization. The audience wears spectacles with oppositely circularly polarized lenses to ensure each eye sees only its designated frame, even if the head is tilted. In RealD Cinema, each frame is projected three times to reduce flicker, a system called triple flash. The source video is usually produced at 24 frames per second per eye (total 48 frames/s), which may result in subtle ghosting and stuttering on horizontal camera movements. A silver screen is used to maintain the light polarization upon reflection and to reduce reflection loss to counter the inherent losses by the polarization filters. The result is a 3D picture that seems to extend behind and in front of the screen itself.

[Avatar'd]

I went to the "new" IMAX in Camarillo, CA to see avatar and I was not impressed. It looked like a giant square old tv. Its like they cut the sides off the screen and added them to the top. The sound was great though! But I agree with TC, IMAX was kinda lame.

[Jafloogan]

IMAX was louder. I still stand by what I said about picture quality though.

[Turuk Maktu]

I went to the "new" IMAX in Camarillo, CA to see avatar and I was not impressed. It looked like a giant square old tv. Its like they cut the sides off the screen and added them to the top. The sound was great though! But I agree with TC, IMAX was kinda lame.

It's the other way: The square old tv look on IMAX is 16:9 and real 3D is ultra wide screen. It means they didn't cut anything on the side and added it to the top at IMAX but they cutted lots of content for the real 3D versions on top and bottom:

Take a look at these postings for visual explanations:

Explanation 1
Explanation 2
Explanation 3

[neytirixjake]

*sighs* I've seen it both in Real3D and in IMAX, but for the IMAX viewing i arrived late and ended up squished 2 rows from the front, at the far right of the cinema with my neck cranked back at an unbelievable angle. It was TERRIBLE and i was so upset because i didn't have another chance to see it in IMAX before it left cinemas D: I'd planned to arrive at least 40 minutes early as well, but things got in the way. If it comes out in IMAX in the Autumn i'm booking a ticket as early as possible and arriving AT LEAST an hour and a half early (it's in a complex so i'll just sit in a cafe until the showing) to get the best seats. I hate to think my disasterous first and only experience of IMAX will be the only one, because i was stupid enough not to plan ahead.

[Be_Creative]

I liked Real D better, too!
IMAX was kind of blurry and not what I expected...
The sound was awesome though, but for the rest I prefer Real D

[Jafloogan]

I liked Real D better, too!
IMAX was kind of blurry and not what I expected...
The sound was awesome though, but for the rest I prefer Real D

I agree, the sound was better.

[Miami Surfer]

I have seen the IMAX 3D twice, and RealD once. The IMAX version was very sharp, I sat in the front/center (The only remaining seats for both viewings) and the screen filled my peripheral vision. I was viewing the film as I was almost going to fall with Jake down the waterfall. The sound of 70mm seven-track magnetic was amazing!

I liked both versions, only the IMAX was presented in the 1.78:1 ratio while the Real D was 2.35:1. It was cropped slightly on top and bottom.