Two of the photos seem to show 1.85 ratio screens necessitating Scope films to be shown letterboxed with no masking. This sadly seems to be standard practice nowadays with Cineworld’s new build cinemas.
Seeing films like this, one could argue makes the experience nothing more than watching a large TV set. In fact it is slightly worse as, assuming the projector is set ‘Flat’, just 1998 of the 2048 horizontal pixels are being projected, reducing the Scope ratio from 2.39 to 2.32.
CF100, you mention the lack of masking. So, is the new screen just 1.85 rather than Scope.
The two photos of the screen in the ‘Photos’ section both show a Scope screen. Were these then taken before its 4DX conversion ?
If indeed Cineworld have taken out the Scope screen and replaced it by a 1.85 Flat screen, this does seem rather strange as nearly all films nowadays are filmed for Scope.
I went into Screen 1. It’s fairly small, just 7 rows of seats.
I sat in Row 4, just halfway. For its size the screen is quite impressive when out in Scope. It is full wall-to-wall with movable side masking. If you choose a seat well, it is a good place to see a film in.
All 6 screens are Scope with movable side masking.
Screen 3 (the largest) is particularly impressive and is a great place to see movies in. Screen 2 (second largest) is also very good.
Some of the other screens (4, 5 and 6) don’t seem quite as full Scope as they should be. I have no way of measuring but I would estimate they are more 2.25 to 2.30 shaped than the proper 2.39. They always have been like this even in 35mm days.
Since the cinema went digital Screens 4 and 5 show the Scope image very slightly letterboxed top and bottom, presumably in an attempt to make the image closer to 2.39. As it is I find the slight letterboxing rather irritating.
Speaking to the management they say that there is nothing they can do locally, all such technical decisions are controlled from Head Office. The solution would require altering the fixed part of the masking and the projection lens to give correct shaped Flat and Scope images. Despite being informed, Odeon Head Office have shown little interest in fixing the problem, perhaps because it would involve spending some money.
One can only hope that Odeon’s new owners will sort this out whenever they come to upgrading the cinema. At the moment the logo ‘Fanatical About Film’ rings slightly hollow.
CF100, Thank you for the information; it is appreciated.
My understanding is that “classic IMAX” is indeed 1.43 ratio on film. Digital IMAX is always 1.90 as that is the size of the Digital Container.
— 2048 by 1080 pixels for 2K presentations.
-— 4096 by 2160 pixels for 4K presentations.
Thus for DUNKIRK, which Christopher Nolan did film in part with classic IMAX film cameras, the presentation at BFI IMAX on IMAX film was at 1.43 whilst any IMAX presentation at Cineworld LSQ Square must have been at 1.90 as it was digital. Over the road at Odeon LSQ, the presentation would have been at 2.20 as it was showing standard 70mm. Confusing indeed.
I must confess that I know nothing about Laser IMAX yet and therefore don’t know about its ratios. If Laser is about how the pixels are projected rather than how they are created, then I would have thought that the there would be no change to the ratios.
One of the pleasures of cinema going to me is seeing a perfectly picture perfectly projected and perfectly framed and masked. This is often the case but not always. With the rush to ‘Large Screen Format’ screens, as cinemas like to call them, some peculiar decisions seem to be taken; installing a 1.70 screen screen when nothing is ever shown in that ratio being one.
I have just uploaded a photo taken from Cineworld publicity showing one of the auditoria with just a 1.85 screen.
Despite most films nowadays being made in Scope, Cineworld sadly continues to build new cinemas with these 1.85 screens necessitating that Scope movies have to be letterboxed.
This is never what Scope was designed for. To me, this dilutes the whole cinema experience. It ceases to be a cinema and becomes just a large TV set.
Photo uploaded from the Cineworld Facebook page showing on e of the screens. I presume it is that in the main auditorium but don’t know.
An excellent Scope screen. I hope that all the other screens are also full Scope but I have my doubts. For reasons best known to Cineworld many of their screens in recently built cinemas are only 1.85 despite the majority of films being made in Scope.
It opened in 1989 with INDIANA JONES AND THE LAST CRUSADE as the main draw in Screen 1. Then it was Southampton’s premier cinema. Since than it has faced competition from first Harbour Lights, literally yards away, then the Odeon multiplex in Leisure World to finally, last year, the new Showcase Cinema de Lux in the city centre. Now I think it is struggling and is probably the one most likely to close if times get rough.
At opening, all 5 screens were 1.85 with top down masking for Scope films. With digital presentations, I presume the masking has gone but don’t know for sure. At one point, in Virgin’s time, there was talk of redesigning the auditoria and giving them full Scope screens but I don’t think it came to much.
I used to go to there regularly in the 90s but stopped going as the cinema went into a gentle decline and there were better presentations on offer elsewhere. I gather Cineworld are not investing in keeping it up to date, though that comment is heresay.
The cinema is on a stand-alone site so could be redeveloped for other uses when the lease is up. However, a lot of apartment blocks have been built very nearby in recent years so it may remain a popular venue for those within walking distance and confound everyone and survive. I don’t think it is a cinema anymore that people would want to drive to for the experience.
I presume that the main difference between the IMAX and Superscreen is the equipment in the projection both rather than the screen itself.
I presume that the IMAX screen is 1.90 ratio, perfect for a digital IMAX presentation. For a non IMAX presentation, a 1.85 film would appear very slightly pillarboxed and a Scope film would appear letterboxed.
If the Superscreen is 1.90, the same would be true.
However if it was 1.85, as it may well be, a Flat film would fit perfectly while a Scope film would not just be letterboxed but also slightly trimmed at the sides, down from 2048 to 1998 pixels giving an aspect ratio of around 2.32, not be ideal for a premier cinema.
I visited Screen 4, one of the medium size auditoria.
It had an impressively sized wall-to-wall Scope screen and together with the black matte walls making the auditorium very dark during the film, I found it an excellent place to see a movie in; I was impressed.
Speaking to the duty house manager afterwards, he told me that all the auditoria had Scope screens. Looking into some of the screens near Screen 4, that was generally true but Screen 5 (a smaller one) was showing a Scope film letterboxed onto a 1.85 screen.
Sadly this is not the first time that a cinema manager has told me incorrect information about his own cinema. Whether he knew or was just fobbing me off, I can only surmise.
I visited Screen 2, the largest auditorium. It has an impressive large Scope screen with no movable side masking. The auditorium was impressively very dark during the film itself.
Cineworld often gets criticism (on this site and other forums) about its modern multiplexes, typically comments about the auditoria being too light and some screens being ‘Flat’ necessitating Scope films to be letterboxed.
Back in the early 2000s, Cineworlds were designing their cinemas correctly, Yeovil being a good example. I could not fault Screen 2, it was excellent. I am told that all the other screens are Scope as well.
I never went into the old Odeon but may be tempted now it has been refurbished.
Can anyone tell me about the screens?
I guess they must be relatively small given the size of the cinema, but are they a good size relative to the auditorium sizes?
Have they changed with the refurbishment? Are they Scope?
Could someone kindly give all the new Screen numbers, new versus old. I am confused. I presume the IMAX and Impact (if it is still called that) screens are unnumbered, albeit perhaps with implied numbers, as before.
I have just added a photo (from the cinema website) of the main auditorium showing a very impressive screen for the size of the auditorium (130 seats).
I wish all cinemas near me were as good as this.
I sincerely hope it is a proper Scope screen.
However I suspect that it is PR jargon for a 1.90 screen which will mean that all Scope films, the majority of films nowadays, will be letterboxed with no top/bottom masking. Hardly a step forward.
Four of the five screens (Nos 2 to 5) have been refurbished and rebranded as ‘Odeon Luxe’.
The IMAX Screen 1 remains the same with 307 seats. The new (and reduced) capacities in the other screens are: Screen 2 (71), Screen 3 (50), Screen 4 (53) and Screen 5 (49) which gives a total capacity of 530. The figures have been taken from the Odeon web-site.
The seating capacities of screens 4 and 5 are only slightly reduced because they were already fitted with luxury seats.
Mention is made in a comment below to a photo in a ‘Time Out’ article. I rather think that Odeon are using generic photos in their publicity for Luxe cinemas, so that photo is probably not of one of the Swiss Cottage auditoria. I think I have seen it used before.
Scope screens with side masking in all 5 auditoria. As can be seen in own of the photos the screens rather strangely have lights all around them. They do go out during the film so not a problem.
As also shown there is a rather inconspicuous entrance at ground level leading to the stairs which take you the main foyer on the first floor.
Just announced that it is to close on 9 August 2018. I’m not surprised, it was not up to modern standards.
Two of the photos seem to show 1.85 ratio screens necessitating Scope films to be shown letterboxed with no masking. This sadly seems to be standard practice nowadays with Cineworld’s new build cinemas.
Seeing films like this, one could argue makes the experience nothing more than watching a large TV set. In fact it is slightly worse as, assuming the projector is set ‘Flat’, just 1998 of the 2048 horizontal pixels are being projected, reducing the Scope ratio from 2.39 to 2.32.
CF100, you mention the lack of masking. So, is the new screen just 1.85 rather than Scope. The two photos of the screen in the ‘Photos’ section both show a Scope screen. Were these then taken before its 4DX conversion ?
If indeed Cineworld have taken out the Scope screen and replaced it by a 1.85 Flat screen, this does seem rather strange as nearly all films nowadays are filmed for Scope.
Not an improvement in my opinion at all.
I went into Screen 1. It’s fairly small, just 7 rows of seats.
I sat in Row 4, just halfway. For its size the screen is quite impressive when out in Scope. It is full wall-to-wall with movable side masking. If you choose a seat well, it is a good place to see a film in.
Looks 1.90 meaning Scope films have to be letterboxed. So it’s really just a big TV screen.
All 6 screens are Scope with movable side masking.
Screen 3 (the largest) is particularly impressive and is a great place to see movies in. Screen 2 (second largest) is also very good.
Some of the other screens (4, 5 and 6) don’t seem quite as full Scope as they should be. I have no way of measuring but I would estimate they are more 2.25 to 2.30 shaped than the proper 2.39. They always have been like this even in 35mm days.
Since the cinema went digital Screens 4 and 5 show the Scope image very slightly letterboxed top and bottom, presumably in an attempt to make the image closer to 2.39. As it is I find the slight letterboxing rather irritating.
Speaking to the management they say that there is nothing they can do locally, all such technical decisions are controlled from Head Office. The solution would require altering the fixed part of the masking and the projection lens to give correct shaped Flat and Scope images. Despite being informed, Odeon Head Office have shown little interest in fixing the problem, perhaps because it would involve spending some money.
One can only hope that Odeon’s new owners will sort this out whenever they come to upgrading the cinema. At the moment the logo ‘Fanatical About Film’ rings slightly hollow.
Zappomatic, Yes that sounds as if the Superscreen is 1.90.
The Digital Container has 2048 by 1080 pixels (1.90).
Flat films are shown using 1998 by 1080 pixels (1.85).
Scope films are shown using 2048 by 858 pixels (2.39).
The control of the projector is always set to ‘Flat’ with the Scope zoom lens never activated.
CF100, Thank you for the information; it is appreciated.
My understanding is that “classic IMAX” is indeed 1.43 ratio on film. Digital IMAX is always 1.90 as that is the size of the Digital Container. — 2048 by 1080 pixels for 2K presentations. -— 4096 by 2160 pixels for 4K presentations.
Thus for DUNKIRK, which Christopher Nolan did film in part with classic IMAX film cameras, the presentation at BFI IMAX on IMAX film was at 1.43 whilst any IMAX presentation at Cineworld LSQ Square must have been at 1.90 as it was digital. Over the road at Odeon LSQ, the presentation would have been at 2.20 as it was showing standard 70mm. Confusing indeed.
I must confess that I know nothing about Laser IMAX yet and therefore don’t know about its ratios. If Laser is about how the pixels are projected rather than how they are created, then I would have thought that the there would be no change to the ratios.
One of the pleasures of cinema going to me is seeing a perfectly picture perfectly projected and perfectly framed and masked. This is often the case but not always. With the rush to ‘Large Screen Format’ screens, as cinemas like to call them, some peculiar decisions seem to be taken; installing a 1.70 screen screen when nothing is ever shown in that ratio being one.
I have just uploaded a photo taken from Cineworld publicity showing one of the auditoria with just a 1.85 screen.
Despite most films nowadays being made in Scope, Cineworld sadly continues to build new cinemas with these 1.85 screens necessitating that Scope movies have to be letterboxed. This is never what Scope was designed for. To me, this dilutes the whole cinema experience. It ceases to be a cinema and becomes just a large TV set.
Photo uploaded from the Cineworld Facebook page showing on e of the screens. I presume it is that in the main auditorium but don’t know.
An excellent Scope screen. I hope that all the other screens are also full Scope but I have my doubts. For reasons best known to Cineworld many of their screens in recently built cinemas are only 1.85 despite the majority of films being made in Scope.
It opened in 1989 with INDIANA JONES AND THE LAST CRUSADE as the main draw in Screen 1. Then it was Southampton’s premier cinema. Since than it has faced competition from first Harbour Lights, literally yards away, then the Odeon multiplex in Leisure World to finally, last year, the new Showcase Cinema de Lux in the city centre. Now I think it is struggling and is probably the one most likely to close if times get rough.
At opening, all 5 screens were 1.85 with top down masking for Scope films. With digital presentations, I presume the masking has gone but don’t know for sure. At one point, in Virgin’s time, there was talk of redesigning the auditoria and giving them full Scope screens but I don’t think it came to much.
I used to go to there regularly in the 90s but stopped going as the cinema went into a gentle decline and there were better presentations on offer elsewhere. I gather Cineworld are not investing in keeping it up to date, though that comment is heresay.
The cinema is on a stand-alone site so could be redeveloped for other uses when the lease is up. However, a lot of apartment blocks have been built very nearby in recent years so it may remain a popular venue for those within walking distance and confound everyone and survive. I don’t think it is a cinema anymore that people would want to drive to for the experience.
I presume that the main difference between the IMAX and Superscreen is the equipment in the projection both rather than the screen itself.
I presume that the IMAX screen is 1.90 ratio, perfect for a digital IMAX presentation. For a non IMAX presentation, a 1.85 film would appear very slightly pillarboxed and a Scope film would appear letterboxed.
If the Superscreen is 1.90, the same would be true. However if it was 1.85, as it may well be, a Flat film would fit perfectly while a Scope film would not just be letterboxed but also slightly trimmed at the sides, down from 2048 to 1998 pixels giving an aspect ratio of around 2.32, not be ideal for a premier cinema.
I saw THE GREAT ESCAPE and ALFIE there in the 1960s. I remember that it has a very impressive size Scope screen in its wide proscenium.
This was a better place to see a movie in than the ABC Forum over the road, which had a far smaller proscenium and was not ideal for Scope movies
I have not been but the screen size at 41' sounds very impressive.
Some of these old cinemas with wide prosceniums can have very impressive Scope screens, often larger than that on offer from many modern multiplexes.
I visited Screen 4, one of the medium size auditoria. It had an impressively sized wall-to-wall Scope screen and together with the black matte walls making the auditorium very dark during the film, I found it an excellent place to see a movie in; I was impressed.
Speaking to the duty house manager afterwards, he told me that all the auditoria had Scope screens. Looking into some of the screens near Screen 4, that was generally true but Screen 5 (a smaller one) was showing a Scope film letterboxed onto a 1.85 screen.
Sadly this is not the first time that a cinema manager has told me incorrect information about his own cinema. Whether he knew or was just fobbing me off, I can only surmise.
I visited Screen 2, the largest auditorium. It has an impressive large Scope screen with no movable side masking. The auditorium was impressively very dark during the film itself.
Cineworld often gets criticism (on this site and other forums) about its modern multiplexes, typically comments about the auditoria being too light and some screens being ‘Flat’ necessitating Scope films to be letterboxed.
Back in the early 2000s, Cineworlds were designing their cinemas correctly, Yeovil being a good example. I could not fault Screen 2, it was excellent. I am told that all the other screens are Scope as well.
I see from the photo that Screen 1 has movable side masking.
Are all the screens Scope ?
Impressive Scope screen in the main auditorium
Impressive Scope screen
I never went into the old Odeon but may be tempted now it has been refurbished.
Can anyone tell me about the screens? I guess they must be relatively small given the size of the cinema, but are they a good size relative to the auditorium sizes? Have they changed with the refurbishment? Are they Scope?
Could someone kindly give all the new Screen numbers, new versus old. I am confused. I presume the IMAX and Impact (if it is still called that) screens are unnumbered, albeit perhaps with implied numbers, as before.
I have just added a photo (from the cinema website) of the main auditorium showing a very impressive screen for the size of the auditorium (130 seats). I wish all cinemas near me were as good as this.
What is a “large format” screen ?
I sincerely hope it is a proper Scope screen. However I suspect that it is PR jargon for a 1.90 screen which will mean that all Scope films, the majority of films nowadays, will be letterboxed with no top/bottom masking. Hardly a step forward.
I hope I am wrong.
Four of the five screens (Nos 2 to 5) have been refurbished and rebranded as ‘Odeon Luxe’.
The IMAX Screen 1 remains the same with 307 seats. The new (and reduced) capacities in the other screens are: Screen 2 (71), Screen 3 (50), Screen 4 (53) and Screen 5 (49) which gives a total capacity of 530. The figures have been taken from the Odeon web-site.
The seating capacities of screens 4 and 5 are only slightly reduced because they were already fitted with luxury seats.
Mention is made in a comment below to a photo in a ‘Time Out’ article. I rather think that Odeon are using generic photos in their publicity for Luxe cinemas, so that photo is probably not of one of the Swiss Cottage auditoria. I think I have seen it used before.
Scope screens with side masking in all 5 auditoria. As can be seen in own of the photos the screens rather strangely have lights all around them. They do go out during the film so not a problem.
As also shown there is a rather inconspicuous entrance at ground level leading to the stairs which take you the main foyer on the first floor.