3D or 3D? That is the Question.

I'm with you...I've only seen one 3D film and it was Avatar. And I've only seen one IMAX movie "300" But I believe that for IMAX I read that Prometheus has to be remastered, so first I will see it in real3D, then shoot across town to catch it in IMAX3D to see if there's any difference. Avatar wasn't hard on my eyes, although it did take a bit of time for my eyes to adjust. It made some people feel weird I heard.....like to add here that Avatar looked fine for what it was, although I prefer hard sci fi

I LOVE Imax! I am fortunate to live in the city where IMAX has deep roots and origins so we have tons of IMAX theatres. I have been watching movies in IMAX since forever, and I highly recommend it. It is the best way to see/experience a movie, and it takes maybe 5 min for your eyes to adjust then after that it is heaven. For a visual treat like a Ridley Scott movie there is no other option.

I'm in the same boat. I did a bit of research and found out that the reald effect is more of a 'depth' effect and Imax 3d tends to pop out of the screen. I've also read that some folks tend to experience discomfort due to artifact/flickering that seems to crop up based on viewing angle and frame rate and such. A theater near me has a large format screen where IMAX and reald films are shown. Their site says that they installed a new "4k" projector from Sony which eliminates flicker and artifacting since it uses a new image combining process. http://pro.sony.com/bbsc/ssr/mkt-digitalcinema/ After reading interviews with RS about how he composed the shots, it seems that the depth of field approach is the way he's designed the look of the film.