Loud sound of IMAX 15/70 film cameras rolling

Various clips showing the loud noise produced by IMAX 15/70 film cameras when rolling; sourced from "No Time to Die" and "The Hunger Games: Catching Fire". I believe the IMAX MSM 9802 model camera was used in all these clips - a detailed video of the loading and running of a similar camera (MSM 9801) can be found here: • MSM 9801 RUNNING
Video sources:
- • Video (NO TIME TO DIE (2021) - Behind-the-Scenes B-Roll Footage (4K UHD))
- • Catching Fire DVD/Blur... (Catching Fire DVD/Bluray Outtakes with Jennifer & Josh from Entertainment Tonight)
Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act in 1976; Allowance is made for "Fair Use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research.
Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use.
All rights and credit go directly to its rightful owners. No copyright infringement intended.

[@algosun6978]

I've published a second video with more IMAX film camera noise from Nope (2022)! kzbin.info/www/bejne/i4aWiICchrSdm9U

[@illygah]

why are you surprised at this? would a professional be surprised at the imax camera noise? Did you ever screw with 8mm in filmschool? I'm probably older than you; my expectation was that it would have made more noise. The IMAX projector is loud. The IMAX camera makes noise. Do you think that noise is 'loud'? Read the dictionary if you're not sure. That's what it's there for.

[@kishascape]

Modern movies are all commercial garbage with over done grading but nice to see they still use real cameras.

[@johndough007]

@@illygahwhy are you mad? People are enjoying this format and they are not loud but compared to modern digital cameras it is certainly different. No need to get upset

[@malypavel25]

The pain I feel hearing all the frames before “action” being wasted knowing the price of film 😢

[@Shrek_Has_Covid19]

thats why the budgets are always $100M+

[@malypavel25]

@@Shrek_Has_Covid19 yes, they can afford it, but it’s still painful 😭

[@malypavel25]

Still, I am glad they shoot on film, because thanks to them, that particular film stock is still cheaper than others and I can use it for photos.

[@shakensparco]

@@malypavel25 you shoot on imax film stock?

[@vasiovasio]

My Friend from My Zero Waste Community!

[@pauljakeman]

“Is it rolling?” “WHAT?!?” “I SAID IS IT ROLLING!?!” “YES!!!”

[@johndo9648]

😅 But is makes no sense 🤣

[@vasileiospgr]

are you sure? 😂

[@rangershark10]

@@johndo9648 it's a joke bud

[@David..]

The complexity of making a film is just mind boggling to me. There are so many codified and subjective things that go into making a film it’s just insane to think brilliant directors, producers, and actors like Neil Breen can put such works of art together.

[@piersonmcwayne1136]

I cant believe he committed suicide, I can’t believe he committed suicide

[@cbennoes]

It's nice that movies make so much money

[@JacobJake7]

@@piersonmcwayne1136 Who?

[@SimioFAT32]

@@cbennoes not all movies makes a bunch of money.

[@sixstanger00]

@@JacobJake7 It's a reference to one of Neil Breen's films.

[@leokimvideo]

each rattle is akin to $100

[@SafetyLucas]

It costs $400,000 to fire this weapon. For 12 seconds.

[@fiskfisk33]

nah, a frame is closer to $0.5 ish If the frames were $100 a pop, one minute of film would be a cool $144000...

[@justinv.535]

@@fiskfisk33 it could be $100 because then the film would be around $25m+ in imax film alone which isn't crazy considering blockbusters have 200m+ budgets

[@RealLagu]

@@SafetyLucas Welcome to Team Fortress 2. After 9 years in development, hopefully it will have been worth the wait.

[@Chrisallengallery]

@@justinv.535 The majority of the budget goes on cast salaries.

[@LilShepherdBoy]

1:15 this shot was actually insane!

[@wisef00l76]

a lens cap or something from the camera flys off too around 1:28

[@LilShepherdBoy]

@@wisef00l76 DAMN, I didn't even catch that.

[@180_S]

​@@wisef00l76 also at 1:48

[@manojreddy9872]

​@@180_S those are tire blowers

[@theblah12]

@@wisef00l76 Gotta give something for the VFX team to fix.

[@julespeyronnet1765]

R.I.P. The sound crew

[@austinbartnicki1385]

I know this is a 10mo old comment, but Nolan has said that with Oppenheimer, they did a sound take immediately after they were done capturing the video, allowing them to get the emotions of the moment without having to deal with the loud noise from the IMAX camera. I can imagine this is the case with a majority of IMAX films that employ the camera in dialogue scenes.

[@AlucardaPapere]

​@@austinbartnicki1385That's a pretty common thing, it's called a wild track. It's also used for shots that are quite wide and without close ups for the dialogue, or in case that something went wrong during the take if you are shooting on film

[@pedroesteves3018]

i understand now why dialogue isnt shot with imax cameras ahahha

[@smartduck904]

ADR works but it can become very expensive

[@pedroesteves3018]

@@smartduck904 what is ADR ?

[@jordanh5834]

@@pedroesteves3018 Audio Dialogue Replacement.

[@ansermusic]

Automated Dialogue Replacement

[@TheGreatDearLeaderJimPickens]

@@pedroesteves3018 Essentially, you bring the actors into a sound studio and lip sync their lines

[@lowkeyislowkey]

Christopher Nolan definitely uses this video to fall asleep at night. On loop.

[@Hritik9000]

Lmaao

[@mixdown78]

absolutly love IMAX and the people who 're making the extra effort

[@privacyrules]

Consume movies and get excited for next movies?

[@vb8428]

Such a shame they didn't retain this aspect ratio for home viewing of the IMAX scenes

[@bagnome]

Yeah, I'd pay for an "IMAX Special Addition" Blu-ray where they give you that option.

[@MrViper7121]

Some of Christopher Nolan's films has IMAX scenes

[@asatuduatiga]

@@MrViper7121 which one

[@MrViper7121]

@@asatuduatiga Dunkirk, tenet, the dark knight trilogy, interstellar, etc

[@asatuduatiga]

@@MrViper7121 thanks

[@jorisbonson386]

1:26 incredible timing

[@okitasan]

This video was a reminder to me of how important lighting, art and production design is to making a movie look cinematic. Like, we're seeing BTS footage that could've been shot with what I assume is probably around the level of a RED or a Black Magic, and you could put these up on a screen and they would look fantastic, and probably would still look incredible shot through the lens of a DSLR or mirrorless.

[@DAETRICH]

that as well as the fact that these BTS clips were likely color graded by an expert

[@pirii88]

​@dehydrated plant Since around the last five years, there's a misconception about cinematic. Just shots on a gimbal, with a lut and black widescreen borders added aren't cinematic and on top it's all the same boring content without an actual story. Also the reason why i don't watch a video with the word "cinematic" in the title.

[@bensblues]

@dehydrated plant hahaha of course those directors are seen most frequently... you would hope that actual aspiring filmmakers would have taken interest is directors a little more niche than nolan and fincher...

[@samgriffiths9868]

70mm IMAX film is about 2 or 3 times the image quality, best way to see it is a diagram showing the resolution of the RED cameras etc compared the the IMAX, the amount of extra detail you get is huge

[@shaun1040]

Ain’t no way you’re comparing professional cinematic grade video cameras to your standard mirror less or dslr camera 😂 I shoot with the canon r3. A professional well I guess now mirrorless camera. The video would be absolutely trash when blown up and used in a movie theatre

[@Rezzanine]

Always wondered what Imax cameras sounded like.

[@AudioJellyfish]

Why?

[@ElNietoPR]

Same!

[@abowden5079]

Ive always wondered what Imax cameras smell like... maybe we can get a video on that next

[@sixstanger00]

And the answer is, "like any other camera that uses film stock"

[@Rezzanine]

​@@AudioJellyfish Because Christopher Nolan said Imax cameras are impractical for shooting dialogue scenes as they are too noisy. Having never heard a film camera in operation, Imax or otherwise, I was intrigued and this video answered the question 🙂

[@tsegulin]

I did the IMAX camera course for 3 days in 1986 at their Oakville facility. At the time they were changing over to the new Wilkinson IW5 cameras. That might be one in the video, I'm not sure. To understand why an un-blimped IMAX camera sounds like a lawn mower you just have to squirt a few feet of film through the gate with the door open. The IMAX camera was horizontal traveling (like a 35 still or VistaVision camera) and shot on 65mm negative with a 15 perforation pull-across. Each frame had to be pulled several inches over and locked on the pilot pins 24 times a second. This took a beautifully engineered movement that was forced to make quite the 24 Hz racket. The footage these things shot on these massive negatives was utterly superb - the very best Eastmancolor has ever looked AFAIK. Anyway, thanks for the video - I quite enjoyed it!

[@RemyCT63]

I was just going to post the question as to why is this particular film camera generating so much noise. You explained it. Thanks!

[@andrewnibbi]

There really is nothing like an IMAX frame. I got the privilege of shooting 65mm 5219 in a Panavision system last year, and that was uniquely spectacular with respect to the image it produced, but I know even that would pale in comparison to full 15-70. Maybe some day 😜

[@LaserLips2]

Thanks for this insight! 👍 Always fascinating to hear the inner workings

[@jackjamieson1120]

Thanks for sharing

[@simonjohansson248]

A moment of silence for the on set sound recordists out there.. they could really use it..

[@andyrudolph7180]

Never mind the recordists! I feel bad for the dialogue editors!

[@camielpovel6290]

Thank you 😂

[@TsReelTalk]

I remember being on set for this production for 6 months. Such a great experience

[@winstonpoplin]

There were several movies in this video what do you mean "this production"?

[@chiknasen4723]

@@winstonpoplin Probably bond, it was a good 90% of the video...

[@TsReelTalk]

@@winstonpoplin Only two films. No time to die and Hunger Games. And Hunger Games was only one shot of this entire video. I worked on No Time to Die

[@janerdmann22]

@@TsReelTalkwhat was your position on set?

[@thematty2303]

​@mischmaschbischbasch he talks like someone in locations so I'd imagine that.

[@Veyron722skyhook]

Had a feeling they'd sound similar to an old movie projector. I'm surprised to find I was actually correct.

[@metronohm808_6]

Class video, great insight into scenes I never knew were shot on IMAX, crazy! Thanks!

[@mkhan8527]

love it, love it, absolutely love it......every "tick, tick, tick, tick" is a reminder to actors how expensive IMAX film is. Better give your very best shot every time in front of the camera.

[@giuliorasi2711]

i remmeber hearing that just the film stock costs around 1500$ for 3 minutes of footage.

[@TheRenaissanceGuys]

More pressure for sure

[@geuros]

​@@giuliorasi2711 my guess would be much more unless they get good deals on film. IMAX is basically a motion picture medium format which from a point of view of an amateur film photographer like me sounds insane. I shoot medium format and with colour film it's about 2$ per frame just the film price, not talking about lab costs. If they shoot 30fps it's 3600$ per minute, 7200$ for 60fps, that's if they paid consumer prices. Can't imagine them paying less than 1/2 of that so... Yeah

[@amirhaveryt]

@@giuliorasi2711 It's anywhere between 700-1500$ per minute

[@counterfit5]

@@geuros $2/frame tells me you're shooting bigger than 6x6, or have more expensive film prices. I just got a box of Velvia 50 for ~$80, so that should be about $1⅓ per shot in 6x6.

[@ToddLamming]

Film making is such a practical process everytime I see the “making of” it feels so uncreative b/c you have to be thinking in such a linear way to be able to get the shots you need for editing process later and then the need of so much human help to be able to achieve such out of this world shots in real life in real spaces with real cars and real people. It’s truly magic

[@raredreamfootage]

Cameraman: Does this scene have dialogue? IMAX Camera: No

[@delg_vi]

Just phenomenal.

[@Neekuyenduku]

Thank you for this amazing footage

[@mebeperson]

its lawn mowing saturday and all the dads are out, sounds like a crate of these things just showed up

[@rosstee]

Cool little sequence from 1:20

[@gregfaris6959]

Many large-format cameras have has this problem - It's hard to silence that much mechanical flapping. Some 65mm cameras had huge "blimps" for filming where sound was required. Usually voices are simply re-recorded in post - some might be surprised to learn how common this practice is. One of the noisiest I've heard was the Vista-Vision camera (8-perf horizontal 35mm).

[@user-hj8ev8dg2j]

So you are saying that Almost every dialogue scenes shooted by imax camera is re-recorded?? Thats so amazing

[@gregfaris6959]

@@user-hj8ev8dg2j Not "almost" - EVERY! But it's not that amazing - this used to be standard practice in all location shooting, and is still very common today for any number of reasons. Look at the credits of any movie you go to today, and when you start to see "ADR" team members that stands for "Automatic Dialog Replacement" and it is a necessary component of every movie, IMAX or not. It's just that with a format like IMAX you know going in that all the dialog will have to be post-recorded.

[@bertomil]

ADR is shit. We are using Panavision cameras on scenes with dialogue.

[@Andrew-vj2ep]

a modified IMAX 3D camera was taken to the ISS to capture the docking of the first two modules Zarya and Unity. two lenses were used with a beam splitter to record the stereo images side-by-side on the 70mm emulsion, to save on film stock (1.5lbs/0.68kg per minute). somewhere in the ballpark of $10000+ per minute of footage.

[@benjaminbjrklund743]

first and third shot is in Nordmarka, Norway. in the woods not far from my childhood home. the whole (small) town had much fun knowing there was a james bond shoot in our little part of the world.

[@jftvrwk]

gotta love the boom operator

[@Brett101792]

This video really made me appreciate the art of editing

[@matthewwilde5222]

This is something I never knew I needed to see. How incredible

[@nigelbraunig8859]

I had absolutely no idea that film was still used today, that's awesome.

[@FilmryStudios]

Very alive

[@faronomus1589]

Film is very much alive

[@Skrenja]

Imo, film is still better than digital 9 times out of 10.

[@ultraviolet7004]

Film has a great look that’s hard to achieve on digital

[@peanuts2105]

Much better dynamic range, especially high contrast scenes where white could be blown out using digital but film can handle it. Breaking Bad is filmed on film for eg

[@callumoconnor159]

Always wondered how they recorded such brillaint audio 🤷‍♂️

[@jessebeegee]

that’s thanks to sound booths and foley artists

[@bertomil]

The dialogue scenes is always shot on Panavision Super 70, or Arriflex 765.

[@athens6228]

Those Italian streets look so much better without hundreds of layers of unnecessary color grading.

[@byronwylder]

Yeah... right. Makes sense now why you can't do sound with them XD

[@maniacguitar]

I did not know this since I've never been graced with an IMAX production - this sounds as if all production sound would be only for reference !

[@royalbloodedledgend]

Just one question: How much tape on ana de armas’s dress?

[@MovingThePicture]

Never thought about how loud these things are. Now they feel even more ancient.

[@virendhemre5237]

Thanks a ton ❤

[@NatureMystic]

Love the behind the scenes view.

[@NatVoisey]

Woah! It sounds so similar to a film projector.

[@johnpekkala6941]

The shutter and film feed system is working a similar way for both a camera and a projector so thats why they sound similar. This goes for all movie film cameras, not just IMAX ones and this is why these cameras make a projector rattle sound when operating. Its because they use the same mechanics as a projector, just a bit more compact to be able to carry it around. The only difference more or less being that the camera records the film and the projector plays it back. I guess IMAX ones are especually loud however. I know the projectors are quite noisy with that huge rotor/vacuum shutter system and I guess the cameras also have some similar such mechanism inside them yet more compact.

[@alexanderleutloff1719]

Imagine being the producer of the film and literally hearing your money rattle away from you 😄 But also you know it‘s going to be visual perfection on the other end of that beast, real IMAX is always worth it 😀

[@BobbiPhantom]

Away? Towards you, you mean. Box office profitssss

[@Jfxkxdvrvr]

Why would I care about Jewish billionaires wasting money?

[@timmccarthy982]

Probably true producers have come up with some pretty creative ways to save money to say the least. From what I've seen usually about everything goes over budget. There's usually never any way to regain a large amount of money but if you stay on top of everywhere you can save a little here and there in the end it can add up to a lot. I disagree about thinking of film as money and rattling away from you. Film is the magic in movie making it captures life and light in a way video doesn't. If you are going to make a movie it starts with film and that is priceless. Anybody debating or making the choice to shot videos is in a business.

[@tigerchills2079]

1:41 wow, looking at all the skid marks, I guess you were keeping the neighbourhood quite awake for a while with that ear blasting sound of the IMAX!

[@Editor_N_Chief]

I imagine this sound is Christopher Nolan's ringtone and alarm clock

[@icancamera]

wow. The one with the merging car and camera had to be nerve racking.

[@ryans413]

1:20 wow that was like perfectly timed to get that shot. I love it.

[@dreadbubble4681]

they look so beautiful

[@YouCareMoreThanMe]

I love cinema. The making is just as entertaining as the final product

[@privacyrules]

Why do you love it? You have checked out of reality?

[@Jobobaboss]

Wow that sounds heavy! 😯 average joe has no idea how much money, bleeding edge technology, effort and thoughts go into such a simple-seeming couple seconds shot. Huge appreciation for their work.

[@gordon1545]

I'll never fully comprehend how David Breashers took one of these beast and filmed at the summit of Everest.

[@raksoen]

1:41 Sounds so good. Nothing beats the sound of NA Inline 6

[@ronkerjake1]

It sounds like an S54

[@raksoen]

@@ronkerjake1 im pretty sure it’s an Aston Martin shell on top of a E46 chassis so I guess you are right

[@TheSteveKinney]

Ugh. It would be SO much fun to be working on sets like this. I wish I had that opportunity.

[@Jfxkxdvrvr]

Convert ✡️🕎🇮🇱

[@Bejitabro]

@@Jfxkxdvrvr oy vey

[@dermomedia]

This is super cool!

[@lowellabraham6966]

Love the shots from 007-Matera!

[@VariTimo]

It’s a 15/65 camera. 15/70 is a projection format.

[@SchardtCinematic]

That has to be a monster of a motor running that film stock through it. Plus I don't think each spool holds that many minutes of footage.

[@itsyaboi5861]

Around 3 mins per spool if I remember correctly

[@counterfit5]

@@itsyaboi5861 and that's what, 100ft?

[@brreeaad]

@@counterfit5 180 seconds times 24 frames per second times 70 mm is 300m, or just under 1000feet? I think at least

[@snjert8406]

@@brreeaad yep

[@mysticalabysss]

Must be so cool to do stuff like that and just be staff checking equipment and stuff

[@-1-26-]

am i the only one thinking that in 20 years from now, actors are going to say, “i remember when the cameras used to be so loud. actors nowadays have it so easy.”

[@bagnome]

I'd like to see this compared to the new cameras IMAX is building. With how they're suppose to be quieter and lighter, that ought to make they easier to use. I think their current cameras were never built with the intention of movie production which is why they're so clunky and loud.

[@curtisbme]

The Arri 65 IMAX digital cameras that have been in use for a while are effectively silent and much smaller.

[@andrewnibbi]

@@curtisbme the Alexa 65 isn’t an IMAX frame. Setting aside all the conversations about film vs digital, IMAX 1570 has almost three times the area of the Alexa 65 in open gate, not to mention a completely different aspect ratio. They’re both wonderful cameras, no doubt, but the 65 was never meant to compete with IMAX. A great alternative to a Panavision 65 system, perhaps, but there’s a huge difference between a 5-perf 65 image and a 15-perf 65 image.

[@curtisbme]

​@@andrewnibbi Alexa 65 doesn't "compete" with IMAX because it IS IMAX. It is, with some unspecified tweaks, the IMAX digital camera. May not be the same native frame as the film but they can of course frame it however they want.

[@andrewnibbi]

@@curtisbme Are you referring to the “IMAX Certified” badge? The “Filmed FOR IMAX” thing is a marketing ploy, and indeed an effective one, but the only thing that defines a true IMAX camera is the size of the gate - 70mm film, pulled horizontally, 15 perforations at a time. There is no digital IMAX camera because no one has deployed a sensor of that size in a motion picture camera. Again, I love the 65, and it does play on IMAX screens more than true IMAX cameras do these days, but that doesn’t make it a true IMAX camera.

[@curtisbme]

@@andrewnibbi No, there are IMAX branded digital cameras that can be rented from them. They aren't the "true" 15/70 film cameras but they are not 'imax certified' ones.

[@NatVoisey]

Without the music and sound, those Bond seems look much scarier and dangerous!

[@shahn78]

That’s a very good observation. I’m not an action flick fan bc of how they butcher *real* action w/ over the top editing, including sound. I feel it’s counterintuitive in making the movie more engaging.

[@JooshYT]

absolutely insane

[@shinichi9do]

the cameras were purring, so cute

[@12234d]

I like how they don't even clap with the slate, because the editor def isn't gonna hear that.

[@studiokillers4476]

He doesn't need to because they're not recording audio anyway

[@evanmatthiesen7478]

rolling MOS- "mit out sound"

[@dilanrajapaksha]

I’ve been a film buff for years now and its so frustrating to live in Australia since the entire country only has a single working imax screen over in Melbourne. There was one in Sydney (where I live) but it’s been closed for renovations for a decade now with no hope of opening soon. I literally can’t watch a film in IMAX unless I take a plane to Melbourne

[@benhumphreys1871]

On the plus side, the Melbourne one is the world's largest isn't it?

[@martyowens1430]

I remember the one we used to have here in Perth at the City West building. That's been gone a LONG time now, but it was cool.

[@dilanrajapaksha]

@@martyowens1430 yeah i remember hearing about that one as well. Seriously what has Australia got against IMAX cinemas

[@tickledonions9483]

Just drive there lol

[@jacksonbarry5407]

@@dilanrajapaksha Australia doesn't have anything against IMAX, it's just extremely costly and hard to profit from because of the running requirements for the IMAX-Specific AV. The only reason the IMAX is still here in Melbourne is because its adjunct to the Museum, which show a lot of scientific films, especially for school programs, i remember going there 3 times just because of school (multiply 3 or 4 by the current number of students in Melbourne and that's the amount of tickets sold to schools over a 12-year span), plus the state government invests heavily in the arts and education so it's likely subsidized by them too.

[@Michael-it6gb]

wow, the sunny conditions must have been perfect that day. I don't watch movies these days, but dang that looks good.

[@themtgdude486]

Wow. Never heard of anyone who didn’t watch movies.

[@Michael-it6gb]

@@themtgdude486 Well now you have. There's too much propaganda and brainwashing in these Hollywood films for the masses.

[@g_eazy9153]

Amazing!

[@galacticboy2009]

Beautiful. Some of the best behind the scenes footage I've seen of anything, in a while.

[@GuineaPigEveryday]

No Time To Die has some brilliant cinematography and direction. Shame its let down by the really inconsistent screenplay, and also they had so many phenomenal stunts they edit into a few seconds making it pretty much unrecognisable. Nice thing about the British workmanship-like direction of a lot of Bond films is that they really just hold on the fantastic stunt-work they’ve been doing. Like the Roger Moore flicks just let you sit in awe of the stunts, e.g. Octopussy Train or Plane sequence, it doesn’t matter when effects don’t hold up because we can see that it was done for real.

[@DmitriyDarkJoney]

No time to die was not even bad due to this - it's bad due to the abolsute nonsense ending.

[@Nonamam]

​@@DmitriyDarkJoneywhat inconsistent screenplay? I didn't like the ending but it seemed touching i guess .

[@Big_Chungus935]

Making of these scenes are more fascinating to me. All the calculations and variables they have to consider

[@granada3170]

did anybody else notice that little bird running for his life at 1:29

[@niter43]

not a bird, something fell of front car second before and started rolling.

[@surningom948]

With that sound it would be distracting for the actors

[@illygah]

the camera is big, but the pictures! It's the pictures that got small!

[@norman5329]

damn... thats what i call behind the scenes ...thats why good acting is rare to imagine and ignore all the things "we" dont see and hear while watching is insane

[@Peizxcv]

Expensive, heave, and oversized camera for pretty average movie. Proves plot and cinematography are always more important than fancy equipment

[@shahn78]

💯 A film shot on a Samsung phone can be equally or more engaging by its story & dialogue than big budget ones. I literally fall asleep trying to watch 007, transformers, etc

[@tinkerersagar]

If there's huge noise then how do they do audio recording?

[@jackmeoff7686]

This is from a commenter above who worked on the james bond film "no time to die" he said: A LOT of ADR. So they record the dialogue in post and recreate all the sounds you would hear on the screen

[@user-yi2uv2rb7o]

Real people real skill reel film 🎥 digital just can’t touch what a breath of fresh air

[@leksasdf]

Lovely sound of cinematic 24 fps.

[@alohaarianna]

I never knew they were that loud

[@MichaelSchagen]

Based on the tracks on the ground at 1:40, this wasn't their first take. Did they digitally remove them afterwards or would the camera angle prevent us from seeing them in the final footage?

[@tko03]

digitally removed. always.

[@shaunaksoni7595]

Yes it’s actually insane how much they can fix in post

[@EthanfromEngland-]

they likely have clean plates so this wouldn't be difficult to remove

[@rowengb]

@@EthanfromEngland- Exactly.

[@tko03]

@@EthanfromEngland- Unless the jib arm is motion controlled, which by the way the guys catching it isn't, you're not going to be able to get a clean plate from a moving camera. They're going to have to take sections and recreate it. Not easy.

[@dollayx8]

the fact all actors did not get distracted by the loud camera sound is the damn truly professionalism

[@privacyrules]

Calm down, dude. There's nothing 'professionalism' about not getting distracted by a sound you hear frequently.

[@dollayx8]

@@privacyrules clearly u r not working in movie industries

[@privacyrules]

​@@dollayx8 stop putting actors and actresses on a pedastal. Nobody gets distracted by noises they hear frequently.

[@dollayx8]

@@privacyrules go try it by urself

[@privacyrules]

@@dollayx8 I've worked plenty of jobs with loud noises present. It doesn't interrupt my work because I heard them frequently. Stop the shilling.

[@AdamBorseti]

I can't wait to catch Oppenheimer on the IMAX screen this Friday.

[@Absurdi5t]

Make sure it is not imax digital

[@bluerainbug]

Man, that must've been a nightmare for the sound crew.

[@movitz1579]

The clip at 0:20 is like a little helicopter taking off.

[@MisterMotel]

how do the soundguys handle this loud sound? especially in scenes where everything is quite except the actor?

[@tenettttt]

I guess since the pattern is so predictable/in an even frequence that you can remove it in post. Especially nowadays using software.

[@pulsar9354]

Audio is recorded in the studio.

[@karlatteln9255]

@@tenettttt No, you can't. You have to dub these scenes, if dialogue is in. But there are blimped cameras who are much quieter.

[@M08J0]

I could have been told they shot this movie on iPhone and I would have believed it.💀

[@megalomaniacal]

This is why podcasts are the future.

[@mcb187]

Every second, 2 feet of film is being shot. And at the current film prices, that’s about $3 of film. Better get those scenes right!

[@randominternet5586]

Yep - 200,000 feet of film rattling away on a movie. Then look at processing cost differences. As digital has gotten up to IMAX quality, the argument for imax is diminishing rapidly. And we have IMAX quality digital cameras now in my view basically. That said, those things generate insane data files if you want the quality cranked up to imax levels, but it can be dealt with.

[@mcb187]

I love IMAX, it is an amazing format. I actually have an IMAX cell from Interstellar, and it’s incredible how much detail you can see in it. But I’ll be honest, I have an ulterior motive to want IMAX to still be shot on film. I am an analog photographer who slits the 65mm stock used in these cameras to make 61.5mm film used in 120/220 still cameras. Keep shooting IMAX, it keeps the film stupidly cheap!

[@unliving_ball_of_gas]

@@mcb187 How does them using film makes film cheaper for you?

[@tweed0929]

@@unliving_ball_of_gas bulk production. Photography needs way less film than movie production does, therefore it can be prohibitively expensive to produce film for photography only. It was Hollywood, who saved film from dying after digital camera becoming so accessible for mass market. Without Hollywood, the film could have died. But it's alive and thriving.

[@jmalmsten]

And this is probably one huge factor in how IMAX looks in theatres. It is almost always post synced. I remain pretty convinced that you can replicate most if not all of the estetics of IMAX film if you treat modern smaller digital formats like it is a huge heavy block of a camera with 1.43:1 crop, favouring wide angles, and post sync the sound. I need to do some testing of my own to test out this hypothetis.

[@MichaelSchagen]

And when you are spending a fortune on film anyway, you are not going to cut costs on any of the other things needed. Imagine shooting a cheaply made set on film with the resolution of IMAX.

[@thatcherfreeman]

There's definitely some truth to what you're saying. The physical properties of some of our cameras and lenses have forced filmmakers to shoot in a certain way that we now associate with "cinematic". That is, relatively slow, physically stabilized camera moves, protected highlights, and a fairly large minimum focus distance typically result in shots that feel professional and high budget. The one main place you might struggle with recreating the IMAX look digitally would be in matching the noise levels and resolution of the footage. Every IMAX shot I've seen has been very clean.

[@AliasA1]

@@thatcherfreeman between modern high res cameras, invisible AI denoising and upscaling, and the ability to accurately match grain and colors to film stock, it seems to me that anyone still using film for their movies are probably mostly doing it for emotional reasons.

[@Skrenja]

​@@AliasA1 ​​​​​​With all do respect, I am going to have to go with a "nah" on that one. Without even mentioning IMAX, I think that even "lowly" 35mm film still looks better than digital 9 times out of 10. The only times I've seen digital footage truly surpass film is stuff shot with the Sony Venice 2. Most other digital cameras are "almost there" when it comes to emulating film -- but fall just short somehow. I can't put my finger exactly on _why_ that is -- but I think it has something to do with dynamic range and color. Also, it seems most filmmakers have no idea on how to emulate the "film look" correctly in post and many modern movies have that tell-tale "digital" look. (Overly sharp, sterile and lifeless.) Can digital footage be tweaked to look very close to film? Yes. Do most filmmakers take the time to painstakingly do that? No. Another thing I've noticed is that most modern movies are lit very "flat" and seem to rely almost entirely color correction to achieve certain looks -- rather than how it was done practically through colored lighting or filters in the past. (Yet another thing that cheapens the look of many modern films.) Everytime I watch a 90's blockbuster that I haven't seen before -- I am often blown away by how much better the cinematography from that era was on average compared to 90% of today's big-budget films.

[@AliasA1]

​@@Skrenja I don't understand this response. What is with the "nah"? "Can digital footage be tweaked to look very close to film? Yes" This is what I said. If a director wants to make a movie that looks like a 90's blockbuster, they can. It would not just look very "close" to film, it would be more or less fully indistinguishable by scientific equipment. We're able to strip film footage from any of what you'd think made it look like film, turning it into a fully neutral representation of light with no artifacts or grain. We can do the same with digital footage, and CGI already comes out like that by default. We can then reapply all that made the film look like film to anything we want. It would and is not very difficult or painstaking, it's done all the time. This is not a technical issue, it is an emotional one. What you want is not movies shot on film, it's movies that look like they were. That's fair, but it's not something magical about the technology. That all being said, while I can believe you think modern movies look "Overly sharp, sterile and lifeless" and have a "digital" look, I think that's mostly placebo. You sound almost exactly like audiophiles complaining about digital audio sounding sterile and lifeless, when it can easily be proven that it has nothing with the digital part. People fawn over tape hiss, not realizing that the digital version is literally mathmatically identical, and can't be distinguished when doing blind tests where you don't already know which sample of audio you're rooting for. I also have a hard time taking the whole "modern movies are lit flat" thing very seriously, to the point that I wonder if it's an issue with the equipment you're watching it on? Many of the same cinematographers that worked in the 90's are still around and still doing the same work they were back then, working with their own eyes without looking at color grading (Color grading is a post process, the people lighting on set do not see the movie with color grading), and movies have WILDLY varied styles, pushing to extremes in all directions.

[@Blackout00745]

0:50 that MP7 looks like giant assault rifle in her tiny hands xD

[@cacaboss227]

the drifts are crazy

[@rdkevin7729]

How do they over come the sound in a quiet scene?

[@tonybutweird3]

They record sound separately in general for all scenes and sync it up in the edit. Cinema cameras don't record sound along with video So in quiet scenes they just don't record sound.

[@gertwiersema1237]

If the scene contains “narrative sound” (such as dialogue), they will record it as a guide track, helping in post / ADR to get the best timing, intonation, emotion, whatever. It needs to fit the image and having the original audio helps. In fact, animation film starts with recording the dialogue first and then syncing the image to the dialogue.

[@jackeyres5103]

@@tonybutweird3 This is untrue. I work in film sound. We always record sound, making a great effort to try and get usable dialogue with a bunch of noise issues like cameras, lights, wind machines, planes etc. Unfortunately with IMAX cameras they would need to ADR most of the words since the cameras are so noisy, but our recording is stgill a good guide track. The only time we don't record sound is when its without actors. Stuff like establishing shots of buildings are usually MOS *no sound.

[@tonybutweird3]

@@jackeyres5103 yeah for IMAX usually it's ADR. I mean on a separate thing like a boom mic or something. Dw, I'm familiar with sound work. 😅

[@nstarkd9951]

film production is INSANE

[@grantreynolds327]

Crazy i thought they just had somebody with the newest iphone running around getting these shots.

[@LongPeter]

Props to the costumers who managed to keep the actress fully inside that dress, despite the action.

[@tripjet999]

She didn't have that much to "contain," though.

[@theelephantintheroom69]

It's insane how the mics would cut that sound out somehow and we get quiet, near silent scenes

[@Doorito_]

Overdub

[@theelephantintheroom69]

@@Doorito_ that makes sense. Honestly would be a testament to their acting skills that I've never noticed that

[@PunaJussi]

that MP7 looks HUGE with de Armas :D

[@sujitchoudhari4801]

Thank you youtube for this recommendation.

[@user-pc8tb7hg1lHandlesRDumb]

This makes no time to die look not boring.

[@Horrorkidd]

Lol

[@solodagci]

At this point using film can only be explained by being stuck in time, or fetichism, now that we have 8K cinema cameras that record in RAW format with 16 bit color depth and 16+ stops of dynamic range. It's basically indistinguishable from film unless maybe you stop the video and zoom %400 and pixel peep the roof tiles, tree branches and skin pores. Maybe even then they will be indistinguishable.

[@UloPe]

Right? Seems like a huge waste of time and money to continue using film.

[@dr.dylan123]

I'm not saying the digital isn't good, it's great, but it does look different. I'm not saying 1 is better than the other but they do look different

[@emko333]

8k on a 35mm sensors... ? this thing has a massive frame and when projected in a theather it looks way better then 8k , i mean 70mm is like 10x the size of a 35mm digital sensor

[@solodagci]

@@emko333 RED Monstro 8K uses a full frame 35 megapixel sensor not Super35 and boasts 17 stops of dynamic range. The storage is cheaper, editing is easier and cheaper too. There are also 12K caneras already on the market for consumers.

[@adityadas5820]

​@@solodagci Although, film doesn't have a resolution, IMAX film is approximated to have a resolution of around 16K and it is like 4times of 8k. So digital doesn't even come close. And all that detail shows in a 70mm imax theatre.

[@TGGWarehouse]

I have even more respect for actors now who have to stay focused on their scene whilst having CRAM noises in the background all the time ^^

[@joshuahill6153]

My country (NZ) has only one Imax Theatre. They needed to use a helicopter to hoist it into the theatre so cool.