Film-Tech Cinema Systems
Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE


  
my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » The Language of Film (Page 2)

 
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3 
 
Author Topic: The Language of Film
John Walsh
Film God

Posts: 2490
From: Connecticut, USA, Earth, Milky Way
Registered: Oct 1999


 - posted 05-27-2001 10:48 AM      Profile for John Walsh   Email John Walsh   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Translating the Cinemeccanica manual to English came up with some interesting terms. In English, we would say, "Bushing Screw" but in the Cinemeccanica manual it says, "Screw for Bush" which has an unintended meaning.

The German Ernemann 15 manual had this sentence:

"The disk type shutter with its advantageous light efficiency cares for optimum exploitation of the Xenon light."

Antonio; What is a "Mascarini" switch? It's in the Cinemeccanica manual.

 |  IP: Logged

Antonio Marcheselli
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1260
From: Florence, Italy
Registered: Mar 2000


 - posted 05-27-2001 02:21 PM      Profile for Antonio Marcheselli   Author's Homepage   Email Antonio Marcheselli   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
John,

ROTFL!

When I read "Mascarini" on my Italian manual of V5, I thought that was a bad translation of an english manual.
In Italian "mascherini" are "aperture plates". Mascarini is meanless.

Antonio

 |  IP: Logged

William Hooper
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1879
From: Mobile, AL USA
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 05-29-2001 02:31 AM      Profile for William Hooper   Author's Homepage   Email William Hooper   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
I have taken the convention of referring to a cinema as "theatre" and live-stage venues as "theater." I have noted that others and some dictionaries follow this as well.

I promise you, the live-stage people insist that their stuff is "theatre" & a movie house is a "theater".

"The media" is not making this call. They are just following the dictionary, & what English usage profs & stylebook writers in the US call "standard English". Look in your US dictionary; most likely "theatre" will be listed as a "variant" after "theater".

Spell it "theatre" in a US English class, it'll be marked as incorrect, & may include a little note about pretentiousness.

It goes back to Webster's first US dictionary, when he was trying to differentiate the US language from the language of those people in England. He in many ways "improved" spellings: dropped the "u" in colour, favor, etc. And he phoneticized things like "theater".

However, all the people who work in theatres want something exotic & uptown (that's what they're selling, anyway), & also do ingroup/outgroup creation by saying "We are 'theatre', the *others* are 'theater'."

Generally, you can tell by the spelling in the US whether their profession is words or one or another segments of "the biz".

My view is: "Who gives a rip?" "And why?"


Spell it "theatere", & move on.


 |  IP: Logged

Manny Knowles
"What are these things and WHY are they BLUE???"

Posts: 4247
From: Bloomington, IN, USA
Registered: Feb 2002


 - posted 04-08-2002 11:30 AM      Profile for Manny Knowles   Email Manny Knowles   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
This is a neat thread I stumbled onto.

For training purposes, I have found it convenient to teach "lacing" as an activity involving the platters. "Threading" involves the projector and sound-head. "Threading" of projectors is taught after the candidates have mastered "lacing" the platters.

Booth Operator = Basic booth employee. Shows movies. Nothing else. Not permitted to possess or use so much as a screwdriver or other tool.

Projectionist = A booth operator who can build-up, tear-down and handle trailer placement. The term "supervisor" is sometimes used, but this connotes a wage increase, which isn't always the case. A projectionist can be trusted with making certain small repairs/adjustments.

Projector as "the whole thing" vs. Projector as "picture head"

Douser vs. Dowser
Cue detector (general) vs. Proximity detector (specific)
Platter (entire system) vs. Platter Deck (individual disc or "plate")

Armature plate = Aperture plate (misprounounced)
Island screw = Allen screw (mispronounced)

Movies = Motion Pictures from Hollywood
Film = Motion Pictures from New York
Cinema = Motion Pictures from Europe

Exception: Australian product is variable.

For clarification, we have taken to using the term "theatre" (only one accepted spelling here in The Bahamas) as a referrent to the building. It is usual to hear the term "theatre building."

"Auditorium" refers to the rooms where the movies/plays are presented. "House" has the same meaning, but this word is not used when communicating with the general public.

In The Bahamas, we do not use the word "cinema" too much to differentiate a film theatre from a "legit" theatre. British expatriates are an obvious exception; they still say "cinema." Older people have been known to use the phrase "cinema theatre" but I haven't heard that one in ages. "Movie theatre" used to be more common, but even *that* has fallen out of use.

------------------
And, hey! Let's be careful out there.

~Manny.


 |  IP: Logged

Steve Kraus
Film God

Posts: 4094
From: Chicago, IL, USA
Registered: May 2000


 - posted 04-08-2002 01:38 PM      Profile for Steve Kraus     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Manny mentioned:
>Movies = Motion Pictures from Hollywood
>Film = Motion Pictures from New York
>Cinema = Motion Pictures from Europe

What term do you use for Canadian motion pictures that purport to depict the USA?

 |  IP: Logged

Dave Williams
Wet nipple scene

Posts: 1836
From: Salt Lake City, UT, USA
Registered: Jan 2000


 - posted 04-08-2002 04:57 PM      Profile for Dave Williams   Author's Homepage   Email Dave Williams   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
We had the Theater vs. Theatre discussion some time ago at the live stage venue where I work part time.

Although the board of directors made thier decision on how to spell, the arguments were heard as such....

Point 1: THEATRE is the appropriate old english spelling, only when referred to in its whole noun form, as in "Jonestown National Theatre"

Point 2: THEATER is only appropriate when referring to a building in general as in "lets go to a theater"

Thats where we stood on it, however ownership apparently wants us to spell it THEATRE all the time no matter what. They like the way it looks.

Dave

 |  IP: Logged

Per Hauberg
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 883
From: Malling, Denmark
Registered: Jul 2000


 - posted 04-08-2002 05:25 PM      Profile for Per Hauberg   Author's Homepage   Email Per Hauberg   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
John & Antonio:

Mascarini - I never saw this word in printing, but but the old projectionist, by whom i learned in 1970, used this name for the switch on the Victoria 8's, which had to be turned back into correct position after a stop - any kind - film jam, reel end etc., before the projector could be started again. - A big, yellow plastic thing just next to the motor on/off grip.

Per

 |  IP: Logged

Paul G. Thompson
The Weenie Man

Posts: 4718
From: Mount Vernon WA USA
Registered: Nov 2000


 - posted 04-08-2002 11:45 PM      Profile for Paul G. Thompson   Email Paul G. Thompson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
One of the Xenon lamphouse manuals (I can't remember which one) the reflecter was called the "Discharge Vessel"

 |  IP: Logged

David Favel
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 764
From: Ashburton, New Zealand
Registered: Feb 2002


 - posted 04-09-2002 01:18 AM      Profile for David Favel   Email David Favel   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
In case of a film build up above the gate, the mascarini (basically a fail safe) is tripped, stopping the projector.
Just an ugly curved silver on the most beautiful projectors/cameras in the world

 |  IP: Logged

Leo Enticknap
Film God

Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000


 - posted 04-09-2002 02:28 AM      Profile for Leo Enticknap   Author's Homepage   Email Leo Enticknap   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I guess this is more an issue for archivists than the cinema/theater/theatre industry, but in my world the term 'print' seems to be used pretty indiscriminately. I'm clear what I mean by the term - a viewing copy which can be projected or seen on a Steenbeck without endangering preservation of the material. But I have heard this term used to mean 'any positive element' (e.g. a fine grain preservation master) and even, in some cases, video copies of material originated on film.

BTW, can anyone shed on any light on why the width of film gauges has always been expressed in millimetres? After all, the 35mm standard was laid down by an Englishman (W.K.L. Dickson) working in the US and for an American company (the Edison corporation) - both countries that used imperial measurements at that time. Apart from in continental Europe, film lengths have always been referred to in feet throughout the world, so I'm curious as to why widths have always been metric.


 |  IP: Logged

Steven Privett
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 208
From: Pasadena, TX, USA
Registered: Dec 2000


 - posted 04-09-2002 03:30 AM      Profile for Steven Privett     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
frame = rack
Is that right? Where some say a film is out of frame, others say a film is out of rack.

 |  IP: Logged

Leo Enticknap
Film God

Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000


 - posted 04-09-2002 04:39 AM      Profile for Leo Enticknap   Author's Homepage   Email Leo Enticknap   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Yup, that's right: racking handle = framing knob, and saying that a print 'has a rack in it', or 'contains a rack' means that it contains a join which is not on the frame line at both sides.

 |  IP: Logged

David Favel
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 764
From: Ashburton, New Zealand
Registered: Feb 2002


 - posted 04-09-2002 04:40 AM      Profile for David Favel   Email David Favel   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Sort of.......

Around here, if the movie is out of frame, we place you on the rack.

Which is what the Orcs had Gollum on when he shouted
Shhhhhiiiiiiiirrrrrreeeeeeee
Baaaaaaaagggggggggiiinnnnnnnsssss

 |  IP: Logged

John Pytlak
Film God

Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000


 - posted 04-09-2002 07:25 AM      Profile for John Pytlak   Author's Homepage   Email John Pytlak   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Leo asked: "BTW, can anyone shed on any light on why the width of film gauges has always been expressed in millimetres? After all, the 35mm standard was laid down by an Englishman (W.K.L. Dickson) working in the US and for an American company (the Edison corporation) - both countries that used imperial measurements at that time. Apart from in continental Europe, film lengths have always been referred to in feet throughout the world, so I'm curious as to why widths have always been metric."

The original standard for "Professional Standard Film" published by the Society of Motion Picture Engineers in July 1917 shows the width of the film to be 1.375 inches. As you may know, for Edison's Kinetoscope experiments, Dickson purchased film from Kodak that was 2-3/4 inches wide, and it was slit in half to 1-3/8 inches. In a note to Kodak in September 1889, Dickson wrote:

"Dear Sirs:

Enclosed please find sum of $2.50 P.O.O. due you for one roll of Kodak film for which please accept thanks -- I shall try same to-day & report -- it looks splendid -- I never succeeded in getting this substance in such straight and long pieces --

Sincerely yrs.
W. K. L. Dickson"

The SMPTE standards for 35mm films today are SMPTE 93-1998 (BH perf), SMPTE 102-1997 (CS-1870 perf), SMPTE 237-1998 (DH-1870 perf), and SMPTE 139-1996 (KS perf). They specify the width as 1.377 +/-0.001 inches or 34.975 +/-0.025 mm.

My guess is that when Leica adopted the motion-picture format for still cameras is when the simple "35mm" nomenclature became popular, even though the aim width has always been slightly less than 35mm.


------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7525A
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: +1 585 477 5325 Cell: +1 585 781 4036 Fax: +1 585 722 7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion


 |  IP: Logged

Leo Enticknap
Film God

Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000


 - posted 04-09-2002 08:37 AM      Profile for Leo Enticknap   Author's Homepage   Email Leo Enticknap   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Many thanks for this. It would be interesting to go through the trade press and see if the term '35mm' crops up on any significant scale pre-WWI. Time to book some leave and head off to the BFI library...

 |  IP: Logged



All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3 
 
   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic    next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:



Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.3.1.2

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.

© 1999-2020 Film-Tech Cinema Systems, LLC. All rights reserved.