Is the future digital cinema? A new company called MaxiVision believes that film merely needs a new lease on life. Indeed, the company argues persuasively that, with HDTV in the wings, movie theatres must improve or die.
     The "MaxiVision 48" name is derived from the system's main feature: the use of 48 frames per second instead of the standard 24. This has been done before -- some early Imax films ran at 48 fps -- but doubling frame rate means doubling the cost of films and prints, and also cutting the running time of a reel in two. MaxiVision has a different way of doing things.
     Consider a present-day strip of 35 mm film:

     Two aspects may strike you. First, some of the precious image space is taken up by the optical sound tracks (the bands at the left). Second, there seems to be rather a lot of wasted space between each of the images. Perhaps you know that this waste space didn't use to exist. However films are no longer shot at the old 1.33:1 aspect ratio. The images you see on this film strip have an aspect ratio of 1.85:1 (anamorphic lenses are used on some films to get an even wider film). And so blank bars are left above and below the picture, just as in letterboxed video films.
     The MaxiVision 48 process recycles that waste space. It also gets rid of the optical sound tracks, which are of course not used in high quality cinemas. The result is a film which looks like this:

     The frame now takes up the full width of the film stock, its height occupying three sprocket holes instead of four. This format cuts film use by 25%, and yet yields a picture that is nearly 32% larger. Not only will the larger image be sharper, but it will also be brighter. The film saving makes it possible to run the film at double speed, with much less flicker and with much better representation of motion.
     Note that MaxiVision 48 is not merely a system for making cinema prints, as Digital Cinema is. The actual cameras will shoot in the new format, for a sharper original film, using just 50% more film than conventional 35 mm, much less than Imax, whose double-sized 70 mm image is the size of an index card!
     The company is offering a complete system, not just a camera and format. It will also make a printer, capable of making a MaxiVision print or a conventional 24 fps print with analog sound tracks. It will also offer the "Switchable Format Projector," which (as you've guessed) will be able to show both MaxiVision 48 and conventional films.
     One of MaxiVision's major arguments in favor of its process is that its camera, the Panavision Millennium, is actually practical in production. It can hold almost three minutes of film and run silently. The Imax camera used for the film on Everest, could hold film for only 22 seconds of shooting, and such cameras are nearly impossible to silence on a film set.

     Will MaxiVision 48 catch on?
     What is worrisome is that MaxiVision Cinema Technology is such an unknown company. Founder Dean Goodhill, who has an Oscar for editing on his mantel (for The Fugitive) kept the system underground until he had his patents, and by then Digital Cinema had a commanding lead.
     The question is whether Goodhill has the financing he will need. He plans to produce 10,000 of his US$17,000 projectors. He will actually give away 1000 of them by next Spring, and he will lease rather than sell the rest. That means little cash flow at first, and he will need solid and faithful financing to stay the course. And of course he is up against such companies as Lucasfilm and Texas Instruments, whose pockets are of unplumbed depths.
     Ultimately, the fate of MaxiVision may rest on the shoulders of the film directors with the most clout. If Spielberg were to decide that his next film would be shot in MaxiVision, no one would say no to him. The movie critics are already on side. The next step is to show the sharper, clearer, brighter image to the people who will create those images.