Jets games in IMAX 3D?!?!

[USApegger]

ratzy said:

Sorry to burst any bubbles but the cost to produce one game in even a non "3D" Imax mode would be way to high to justify...you'd be looking to sell out the IMAX theatre (just under 300 people) and you would have to charge them likely more than $100/person. IMAX uses 70mm film stock for such a huge screen compared to regular movie theatres that use 35 mm film. So:
a)you'd have to "film" the game and play it back later
b)the cost of producing movies on 35 mm is astronomical...let's not even guess at 70mm costs
c)at under 300 seats, you'd never profit from this adventure
d)if you wanted to just "project" the game onto a massive screen LIVE, that would be cheaper and some cities do play NHL games in their theatres...but in Calgary for example, regular movies are like $13 each anyways...most people would go watch in a bar before paying that kinda money to sit in a crowded theatre with no beer.

Well then not as a revenue source and yes it's cost prohibitive, but I would love to see the NHL produce a movie then that can be seen on IMAX.

I just think that on the huge screen and in 3D, just the thought of seeing it, that would be incredible.

[jason]

Hey I'm sure people laughed and scoffed at the idea of IMAX showing Hollywood movies (and not just documentaries) and WWE pay-per-views Canada-wide and NHL pay-per-view games at SilverCity theatres in Calgary and Vancouver.

[hatrick007]

As for the 70mm film comment... I believe the games are broadcast LIVE to the theatre as they are shown in Silvercities already for other teams, and WWE as well is live I believe. So could you not do this here as well?

3D is just not viable, not in the near future at all anyways. First invent "3DTV" or whatever.

People may have scoffed at the idea of games going in Silvercity... but it is technically possible and fairly easily done. Broadasting something in 3D (Something that does not even exist) is not even possible yet other than the 3D glasses... but those are for prerecorded movies.

[Hardcoresuperstar]

It was a good try Blackthorne, but I think that the production costs will be too high, as many people have stated. Ratzy makes some very good points and he seems to know what he is talking about and is becoming a very respected person on this board.

Please keep the revenue ideas coming though Blackthrone. There is no hurt in trying to brainstorm ideas. I look forward to your next idea.

And for an off note...man...I have never seen the Jesus guy on here before...did I laugh when I saw that his location was in Israel.

[jason]

The "kind criticism" I appreciate... as for the rest of you, I'll take you seriously when you have SERIOUS ideas for a revenue stream.

None of this "bakesale" and "lemonade stand" B.S. I HATE that makes this site look like a friggin' joke.

[yogi]

jason said:

According to you. If it was according to 3+ members of this website, I'd agree.

You don't think hockey (and all of t.v. in general) will go 3-D in the future?

by the time they have the game ready in 3-d and ready to show at the imax the game will be over and nobody at all will want to see it. everybody will already know the outcome of the game. only sweedish tourist who don't speak english would go to it. stupid idea. and btw, i think thats about 3 people who agree with J-zilla.

[ratzy]

Projection on the large screen could be done but the resolution would be worse than in a regular theatre. If you put two home-theatre projectors side by and one screen 10 feet wide, another screen 25 feet wide...when you pump the same video resolution through, the smaller screen will look better. Same would go for IMAX vs a regular theatre...unless you can find a way to get about 10X better resolution to your projector, it ain't gonna look better just a lot bigger. Still cool, but I'd prefer the higher quality to larger size