JimmyG

My first true "cinema experience" happened as a pre-teen when my mother took me and some of my siblings to the Ziegfeld Theater in Manhattan to experience the widescreen release of "2001: A Space Odyssey" (well, technically it was "Mary Poppins" several years earlier! Ha!), a film that I have viewed more times than any other over the course of my lifetime. Having seen this film in its many format incarnations over the decades, be it in theaters both large and small, on broadcast television and then cable, in its various incarnations of home video release and, now, most recently in its 4K HDR BluRay release on an LG G2 OLED TV, none of these viewing experiences have ever equaled or surpassed that original experience. A majestic screen presentation with then state-of-the-art sound surrounded by fellow viewers to share in a common experience. Film as spectacle.

And this "film as spectacle" experience has repeated itself countless times throughout the intervening years with other personally favorite (or not) movie-viewing theater showings. From "Ben-Hur" to "Bridges Of Madison County" to the numerous "Star Wars" releases and "Jaws" or "Close Encounters Of the Third Kind" or "The Shining" the entirety of Peter Jackson's Tolkien films, my list goes on and on...my point and commentary to countless friends, family and folks having been the same over these many years..."You've gotta go see this on the big screen!" And this has been true for Comedies and Rom-Coms and Thrillers and Period Pieces and Horror and Art-House films, etc. all always better on the big screen!

Anyone thinking or suggesting that home viewing of any of these films on their devices or TVs is the better experience are either being disingenuous or perhaps are simply oblivious to what they are truly experiencing while at a theater. What being siloed in my home during the pandemic has reinforced for me is the understanding that hermited media consumption is a poor substitute for getting out in the world and being with my fellow humans while we all take in a shared experience...be it a sporting event, concert, parade, play and, yes, motion picture film.

Bravo on the Academy, if it was not made for theatrical release, no Oscar. Simple. Otherwise there's the Emmy Awards for streamers.

Well, IMHO.

Hi Folks,

First-time poster here, I joined just to post some my own personal experience with telephoto lunar photography. FWIW, my experience in observing and recording the night sky spans a lifetime of amateur astronomy since before I got my first telescope in 1967.

A few quick items that folks should be educated on and familiar with before casting one's public opinion on this thread's topic...

1. The, er, "evidentiary" image of the moon purportedly shot with a Sony a7R III/200-600mm lens here...

...speaks to either A. the photographer's inability to know how to use that camera/lens combo for excellent results, and/or B. an attempt to use fake or misleading evidence for their argument. A simple search of the Sony 200-600mm moon images will reveal such...

...clearly, that lens and pretty much any Sony body can provide a much more detailed lunar image than the one posted as evidence.

2. The use of combining numerous images and using deconvolution methods in post processing has been a, um, "thing" in the world of astrophotography since the dawn of digital imaging...

My take on Samsung's "100x Space Zoom" feature is that it's nothing more than an automated stacking and deconvolution software routine labeled/marketed as "AI".

I hope that helps clear the air of any further misconceptions on this subject and, hopefully, any erroneous conclusions and/or opinions based on that unfamiliarity.

Best,

Jimmy G