|
|
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
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
|
|
|
|
William Hooper
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1879
From: Mobile, AL USA
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 05-29-2001 02:31 AM
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
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
|
|
|
|
Dave Williams
Wet nipple scene

Posts: 1836
From: Salt Lake City, UT, USA
Registered: Jan 2000
|
posted 04-08-2002 04:57 PM
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
John Pytlak
Film God

Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000
|
posted 04-09-2002 07:25 AM
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3
|
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.
|