Could 4K cinematography be good for IMAX?
 

I gotta say, I haven't been to an IMAX theater before but I know that getting your film onto a screen that big has to be a big deal to any filmmaker. But often their shot on 35mm, and using the super35 methoid. Others shot on HD tape. 2K is whats being used for digital distribution in theaters, and they are just only about to begin to release camera that shoot 2K. When we finally have camera's that shoot 4K, what could it mean for IMAX and would it be the digital format of choice for IMAX film makers?

IMAX is 70mm 15 perf, so that would equate to 8K.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I was taught that Imax films are shot on special 70mm film run sideways through the camera?

(edit: Sorry, didn't see second post before posting this)

Someone should call NHK for support.

I'm saying this because their is a problem with most IMAX cameras, their heavy as hell. They use 70mm going sideways at 15perfs, and you only have up to 90 seconds to 2 minutes worth of film. 35mm film is already expensive enough under 4perf or 3perf going top to bottom, but 70mm at 15perfs going sideways, only the IMAX corperation could be willing to unload that much out of their pockets. What hollywood filmmaker could handle shooting under those conditions?

I guess Im missing your point... Are you a Hollywood film maker who lacks the financing to make an IMAX film, or????

You're going to need more than a 4k camera to match IMAX. The 4k camera approximates 35mm - although you could debate that with a Bayer sensor, which has a resolution closer to 3k.

As has been stated you'll need at least 8K. The downside would be that IMAX is a specialist format, so the costs of the digital cameras will be high due to the small market, never mind the cost of handling the data in post.

Hollywood could afford to shoot a film on IMAX if it wanted to, just they wouldn't get a return due to the extremely limited number of screens available. Most of the production costs would going on the cast, not the cameras and filmstock. They've also used heavier cameras than IMAX cameras in the past.

Just because 35mm film is posted at 4k(and most films are only partially or not at all) doesn't mean that is the resolution of 35mm film. That depends upon a lot of factors including optics, how well the film is pin registered, how the film is rated, the actual stock used, etc. HD has been said to produce sharper images than 35mm film (I think this is why hollywood is using morre and more hd video for plate photography). A lot of this is because the resolution of video is more or less absolute compaired with film. Would you need 8k to digitally shoot an IMAX film? I think that depends on what your shooting. I remember reading about a lexas commercial, shot in 35mm, posted in 4k and projected on to an Imax screen. I'm sure it looked great. Also, there have been a few underwater IMAX films shot with a pair of f900s in a custom housing (combined resolution just under 4k).

Well, there's IMAX and then there's Imax.

What I mean is the term can mean several things when it comes to marketing. A film BLOWN up to a 70mm print, and shown on an Imax Screen, will often be called IMAX - just as a film shot on a 70mm will be called IMAX.

Look at all the brands of WIDESCREEN and the different ways they were shot. Cinemescope, Cinerama, Vista-Vision, VistaScope, etc. The public simply percieves them as "WIDE SCREEN" movies.

So sure, you can shoot a 4k digital movie, transfer it to a 70mm print and show it on an IMAX screen.