You mentioned "Pandora's Box" which coincidentally I saw last night. I didn't notice any special motors on the RCA soundheads so I presume it was 24 fps but then again I didn't really give it any thought and forgot to ask. Didn't seem excessively speeded up so perhaps there are converted prints? Strange film with a very meandering plot. Cool to see via carbon arc projection. (Gateway Theater, Chicago)

 |  IP: Logged

I recall reading somewhere that toward the end of the silent era, films were made with increasingly faster frame rates. The problem was that theatres, in order to squeeze in more performances, would instruct the projectionists to run the films faster. The filmmakers would, in turn, increase the frame rates to compensate.

Since this was a late silent (1928), perhaps it was filmed at somewhere around 20-22 fps, which would account for it looking almost right, but just a little bit too fast, at 24fps.

 |  IP: Logged

 |  IP: Logged

 |  IP: Logged

quote:

---

16fps with a two blade shutter is "silent movie headache"

---

There's some information about the variance of silent movie projection speeds at http://www.cinemaweb.com/silentfilm/bookshelf/#March1998

Most features after the early Griffiths were much faster than 16fps. The 16fps "reference" is the (very early! they beat Edison to projection!) Lumieres' recommended speed for their projecting Cinematographe, which was slower than the Edison peep-show machines' 48 fps. The Lumiere camera & speed were very influential, but that speed is only appropriate for a sort of average for the "short-subjects" shot with the Lumiere camera & things like the early, post-Biograph Griffiths.

24fps is generally not far off & OK for most late silents.
It's certainly OK for action & comedy subjects, unless they were filmed at more than 24 fps.

There are knock-down, drag-out fights over silent film projection speeds now. But here's the fact, jack: Silent-era projection was hand-cranked or had a rheostat for speed control. In the absence of notes with the film, there would have been standard, "good" practice, as described by F. H. Richardson in 1910 & which stood until locked down at 24 fps for sound:

"The matter of speed is of much importance, but no rule can be laid
down governing it. Speed must be left entirely to the discretion of
the operator, except that with inflammable film forty feet per minute
is as slow as is safe, with ordinary light. Theoretically, the
machine speed should be the same as that of the camera which took the
picture being projected, but in practice this is often far from true.
The camera man grinds out a set speed, supposed to be sixty feet per
minute, though often he varies widely from the mark. The actors act
the scene as seems best to them, but ofttimes when the scene is
projected it is discovered they have misjudged the speed of action
necessary for best effect. Right here is where a really good operator
who closely watches such details becomes of great value, helping out
the scenes amazingly merely by changing speed on different scenes.
Take, as an example, Pathe's "Faker's Dream." If run straight through
at camera speed the film is dull and of comparatively little effect.
Where the actors are moving about their speed is too great and while
on the various amusement devices of the park the speed is altogether
too slow. But by running about a fifty foot speed in the first
instance and close to seventy-five in the other, the film creates much
laughter, but it is necessary to change speed radically many times on
this film. Another example is "A Ride for a Life," by Edison, I
believe. If run at normal speed while the auto ride is on, the "Ride
for a Life" develops into a howling farce, but if speeded up just as
fast as you can run, it is excellent, but as the ride is cut three or
four times in its length by other scenes, you have to slow down for
each of them or the farce would be reversed. As an example the other
way, we all know that the slower the Passion Play is run the more
impressive it is. Forty feet per minute is best for it. The only
rule for speed, except in starting the machine, which should always be
done slowly, is, "Watch your subject and be governed entirely by its
action." Twenty-five minutes is the extreme limit of time for 1,000
feet of film. Fifteen to twenty minutes is ordinary time for most
subjects."

--_Motion Picture Handbook for Managers and Operators", F. H.
Richardson, 1910

quote:

---

Ah, but were silent-era machines typically equipped with 2 or 3 blade shutters? (2 or 3 blade presuming 1X rotational speed)

---

Well, typically 2-bladed, but I think I remember reading in "A Million & One Nights" that in the teens the 3 bladed shutter to reduce flicker had been patented & was in use in nicer machines. So if your silent movie ambience was of a show with the best equipment, it would have 3 blades. Of course, for a typical period silent show you'd also need to cut the screen size & illumination down a little from what you've probably got now!

 |  IP: Logged

I've run quite a number of silents with accompaniment by Alloy and BQE Orchestras as well as pianists and organists. Early on I was all concerned about speed and whether the print had been corrected or not and how would they be able to play if they had rehearsed to some video that wasn't the same speed as the print. All of these artists were always so nonchalant about it that I soon learned that they were as flexible as the silents were free of speed standards. "If it goes a bit fast, we'll deal with it," Tom Nazziola, conductor and composer for The BQE Project: said. He added, "Heck, we get prints that have scenes missing or out of sequence -- we just adjust; that's what we do; we are accompaniests."

One of the pianists for an evening of silents walked into the theatre, wanted to look at the stage setup, tried out the piano and said that was fine. I asked if he wanted to see any of the films. No. Seems there wasn't a silent film that he hadn't seen or played for -- he was no spring chicken; he was Mary Pickford's personal pianist. I asked if the light on the piano was OK...he said, "Yes, thanks, but I play in the dark." No rehearsal at all, and the guy hit every beat, changed tempo and mood so seamlessly that it sounded like you were listening to the soundtrack, it was so perfect. Had I asked him if playing these prints at 24fps rather than 16 or 20fps would be a problem for him, most likely he would have probably just smiled.