[opendtv] Re: IMAX beyond just mindless hype
- From: "Manfredi, Albert E" <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2017 00:38:09 +0000
Craig Birkmaier wrote:
Once again Bert is struggling with facts.
Once again, I can't fathom what Craig still has to write copious and pointless
prose about? I've explained everything in detail, and provided evidence, and
given him the equations to use, and very specific explanations from the
designer of IMAX, and very relevant and quantified considerations from the game
designers on both the FOV of humans and on motion sickness, and yet he
persists! Even attempting to argue against what he had previously asserted!
Amazing!
As I noted yesterday it is IMPOSSIBLE to build a theater where every
seat provides the same FOV and viewing distance.
This is in response to what, Craig? No one ever made such a claim. This is the
exact information, which I copy here before Craig can pretend to have forgotten
everything again, in his irrepressible urge for specious arguments:
http://lfexaminer.com/20090522a.htm
"The high-resolution picture is used in conjunction with a large screen and
carefully organized audience seating to ensure that minimum and maximum viewing
angles lie between 60° to 120° horizontally and 40° to 80° vertically for the
farthest and nearest spectators respectively."
Remember when I told you that IMAX screens are taller than they need to be?
Yup. These are the actual facts:
Front rows: IMAX fills 67% of your horizontal FOV, and 89% of your vertical
FOV. Back rows: IMAX fills 33% of your horizontal FOV, and 44% of your vertical
FOV. Do you think an IMAX screen might benefit from more width, before adding
more height? Yes, they would.
Bert seems to think there is some benefit to cover an ever increasing
portion of the horizontal field of view since this is the "natural"
way we see.
Unfortunately, this is not reality.
Of course it's reality, but you need numbers to understand. The links I gave
you on games told you what our FOV is, and it is absolutely not circular. We
are land animals, Craig. That should be a hint. Easy for you to verify on
yourself. One wonders how Craig can have been so unobservant for so many years.
we may never know since Bert cannot find a reputable source to
justify this contention.
Craig has been spoonfed the information, with actual numbers, and provided
links to see if he could invest some time educating himself. To no avail? Now,
just to show how Craig's arguments go around in circles, let's see what other
surprising "new" revelations he has unearthed.
The author emphasized the required viewing angles; It is important to
note that these angles do not cover the entire field of view, but that
any uncovered area is dark and there is nothing going on in this area
of peripheral vision.
Pretty hilarious, but so typical. Craig circling around his own arguments. This
was merely one day ago, evidently forgotten already:
https://www.freelists.org/post/opendtv/Practical-realities-on-screen-aspect-ratios,4
Here's what Craig asserted, toward the end of the post: "IMAX covers the entire
human FOV."
Here's my reply: "You must be joking. Or you are wearing blinders. IMAX does
not even come close. In part, since you have not mastered the concepts **at
all**, you are being fooled by the darkened theater."
QED.
END OF THREAD!!
Bert
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
FreeLists.org
- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
unsubscribe in the subject line.
Other related posts:
