Editing IMAX (section)

=== Digital ===
{{See also|#Digital projection}}
Because 70&nbsp;mm film and projectors are costly, difficult to produce en masse, and the size of auditoriums that house full-size IMAX screens make them expensive to construct, IMAX debuted a digital projection system in 2008 to use with shorter 1.89:1 aspect ratio screens. It uses two 2K-resolution projectors that can present either 2D or 3D content in [[Digital Cinema Initiatives|DCI]] or IMAX Digital Format (IDF; which in itself is a superset of DCI). The digital installations have caused some controversy, as many theaters have branded their screens as IMAX after merely retrofitting standard auditoriums with IMAX digital projectors. The screen sizes in these auditoriums are much smaller than those in the purpose-built auditoriums of the original 15/70 IMAX format, and are limited to the 1.89:1 aspect ratio. Another disadvantage is the much lower resolution of digital IMAX. The technology has a maximum perceived resolution of 2.9K, compared to traditional IMAX 70&nbsp;mm projection, which has an estimated resolution of 12K.<ref name="imaxresolution" /><ref name="IMAX Digital - Slater" /><ref name=atlasomega>{{cite web|url=http://www.atlasomega.com/2010/08/howard-hall-interview/|title=Interview with Underwater Filmmaker Howard Hall|first=Calvin|last=Tang|work=AtlasOmega|publisher=AtlasOmega Media, LLC|date=15 August 2010|access-date=29 March 2016}}</ref> Some reviewers have also noted that many non-IMAX theaters are projecting films at [[4K resolution]] through competing brands such as [[Dolby Cinema]] and [[Cineplex Entertainment#Premium formats|UltraAVX]].

IMAX has held to a uniform branding of "The IMAX Experience" across various underlying technologies and screen sizes.<ref name="lfexaminer.com">Hyder, James (October 16, 2008). ''Is IMAX the next "New Coke"?'' LF Examiner, October 16, 2008. Retrieved from [http://www.lfexaminer.com/20081016.htm LFexaminer.com.] {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161030135930/http://www.lfexaminer.com/20081016.htm |date=October 30, 2016 }}</ref> Some have criticized the company's marketing approach,<ref>{{cite news |url=http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090308/LETTERS/903089997 |title=But...but...IT's NOT IMAX! |publisher=Rogerebert.suntimes.com |access-date=May 23, 2012 |archive-date=July 22, 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120722220148/http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=%2F20090308%2FLETTERS%2F903089997 |url-status=dead }}</ref> with the format being dubbed "Lie-MAX".<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.bostonglobe.com/arts/movies/2017/07/21/what-best-format-for-viewing-dunkirk/tOCBPfQ86vFsrwSYFMfyaO/story.html |title=What's the best format for viewing 'Dunkirk'? |last=Burr |first=Ty |work=[[The Boston Globe]] |date=July 17, 2017 |access-date=May 5, 2018}}</ref> The company has defended the format by saying it has a bigger screen, brighter picture and better sound than standard theatres.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatoon/imax-responds-saskatoon-liemax-1.4645381 |title=Imax responds to Saskatoon 'Liemax' claim, says there's more to it than screen size |last=Quenneville |first=Guy |publisher=[[CBC News]] |date=May 3, 2018 |access-date=May 5, 2018}}</ref> Despite the differences with digital IMAX, the cost-effective format has aided in the company's worldwide growth, especially in Russia and China.