Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Need help with questions about the silent movie era

This is topic Need help with questions about the silent movie era in forum Film Handlers' Forum at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=005233

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 08-19-2003, 06:48 PM:

A visitor to our theatre website sent me these questions about the silent movie era. I have a couple of "guesses" on some of them, but mostly I'm clueless about that time. Any help would be appreciated. Here are the questions.

1. When did nitrate prints stop being used? How long after did they circulate? Any still around?

2. Can an old projector (with soundhead) play a silent print? Where they standard 35mm? Are new prints being made today of old silent films?

3. Do you know what the reel sizes/lengths were for silent films? The same as sound films?

4. Were there any trailers made of silent features?

5. Do you know, perchance, who distributes silent films today?

[ 08-20-2003, 12:26 PM: Message edited by: Mike Blakesley ]

Posted by Brad Allen (Member # 470) on 08-19-2003, 06:53 PM:

Mike, don't know the answers. But a quick search on google finds this and many more.

Silent movie info

Posted by Robert E. Allen (Member # 1351) on 08-19-2003, 07:13 PM:

The one question I can answer is that silent films were photographed at 16 FPS (frames per second) rather than the 24 used for sound today. So while they can be run on today's projectors (Aspect ratio 1.33) unless they are re-processed with some frames duplicated the action is speeded up considerably.

If our Kodak rep John is looking on he can answer the nitrate thing for you.

Posted by Paul Mayer (Member # 355) on 08-19-2003, 07:27 PM:

As to your Q#2, I got to see a brand new print of the Lon Chaney Phantom of the Opera in 2001 at the Orpheum Theater in Los Angeles. It was made up on a platter and played on the existing booth equipment (at that time the Orpheum was running as a Spanish-language grind house). I assume some of the changes they had to make would be things like crank speed, screen masking, aperture plate, lens, plus a possible reduction in lamp current due to B&W print heat related issues.

Posted by Gordon Bachlund (Member # 124) on 08-19-2003, 07:40 PM:

Answers to some of your questions may be found at www.film-center.com. On home page click on "Historical Perspective" under COLLECTING BASICS.

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 08-19-2003, 07:47 PM:

Sorry Bob...I've got to jump on you for that one...where did you get your "information" that silent films ran at 16fps?

The truth is that silent film speeds were all over the place...the SLOWEST I've personally seen was 16fps the fastest was 22 fps. Some have cue sheets when to over-crank and when to under-crank. Believe it or not sometimes the speed of the camera/projector were used to add effect.

Silent films seem to be on the climb in terms of places to show them. There number of rooms we are setting up to be silent capable is much higher than ever.

Silent films are on standard 35mm stock with 4-perfs per frame. The frame sizes vary though...I believe 1916 was the cut-off point where the frame tended to be standard (for projection that is)...around 1916 the projection frame standardized at about .680" x .910" give or take a couple thousandths. I've measured several period projectors to verify this (across a few brands... like Powers and Simplex...etc)...note, there were not aperture plates, just apertures!

The most popular way I set up rooms for silent film capability is with Kinoton's "E" projectors (FP-30/38ES). They give a digital readout and continiously variable speed control from 12fps to 30fps.

However, I have also done Simplex and Century. Using a 3-phase motor and a frequency converter (there are several good companies like TB Woods, Lenze, Reliance...etc) where you can program in various speeds and variable speed so you can have your standard 24 fps for most shows but can go to whatever you want for silent. Note, this technology would also allow a completely automated switch between faster and slower frame rates. The cost is on the order of a red-reader conversion. [Wink]

Many will claim that if you do slower speeds with conventional projectors like Simplex and Century you should invest in a 3-wing shutter so the projector doesn't flicker so badly...others find the increased flicker "charming" and adds to the moode of the olde time "flicks." The above mentioned Kinoton "E" projectors don't increase the flicker when they slow down the film...the shutter is maintained at the faster speed however they program it to simulate a 3-wing shutter below 20fps.

Steve

Posted by Will Kutler (Member # 770) on 08-19-2003, 07:58 PM:

Mike,

please e-mail me at Wkutler1506@yahoo. I have some extensive info for you.

There is also a lot of info under Simplex in the manuals section of FT.

Before electric motors were introduced, both the camera and projector were hand cranked, and speed could be varied to compensate for action. Furthermore, the projectionist and musical conductor would have to work as a coordinated team.

With the advent of Sound on Disc (WE) and Sound On Film, and the addition of electric motors, machines such as the WE U-Base had a variable speed clutch for both sound and silent.

Yes, 35mm silent film can be used on modern machines. In fact the Simplex Front Shutter Standards and Regulars were first hand cranked, then motors were introduced, then these projectors were converted to rear shutter. Then they were replaced by Supers.

Posted by Martin Brooks (Member # 1269) on 08-19-2003, 10:01 PM:

There were a number of apertures used during the silent era, but it's unlikely that you'd be using any prints from that era. When most were reprinted, they used relatively modern standards.

From 1917 to 1927, many silent films used an aperture of .906 x .675 (1.342:1).
Edison used a format of .906 x .6795 = 1.33.
As indicated in another posting, .910 x .680 (1.33) was also used.
And sometimes a full negative image of .980 x .735 (1.33) was used.

FYI, the original sound 1927 aperture was .825 x .680 with the centerline shifted to the right. I've also seen documentation claiming .800 x .6795 (1.78:1) and .8 x .607 (1.318:1), but 1932 saw the adoption of the "Academy" aperture of .825 x .600 (1.37:1).

It is illegal to show nitrate prints in most places without having special facilities that are approved by the fire marshalls. I think UCLA has such a facility and perhaps the Museum of Modern Art at the main NYC location (which is temporarily closed for construction).

Posted by William Hooper (Member # 71) on 08-20-2003, 01:51 AM:

quote:
2. Can an old projector (with soundhead) play a silent print? Where they standard 35mm?

Yes. But a big problem if the print is one that was actually made during the silent era will be of course shrinkage of the base.

quote:
Are new prints being made today of old silent films?

Yes. Kino films has a theatrical division which has 35mm prints of silent titles, also archives do restorations & strike new prints. Many famous, late 20s silents are still under copyright to the studios which made them. Metropolis is such an example, which coincidentally is distributed in the US by Kino
http://www.kino.com/theatrical/index.html
Turner used to have some of the silent DeMille's, like the silent Ten Commandments.

quote:
3. Do you know what the reel sizes/lengths were for silent films? The same as sound films?

Originally, the standard reel size was 1,000 feet. That's why there's that splice in the middle of your 2,000 foot reels! Of course, if you get a new print of a silent, it will come on 2,000 foot reels.

quote:
4. Were there any trailers made of silent features?

Yes, & often the only thing that remains of some "lost" silents is what's on the trailers. If he's thinking of running silents theatrically, the distributor may have new trailers for the movie.

quote:
The one question I can answer is that silent films were photographed at 16 FPS (frames per second) rather than the 24 used for sound today.

This is a modern misunderstanding which deveoped from the silent/sound switch on 16mm projectors. 16mm home movie cameras ran at 16 fps (& were silent, of course). But when theatrical sound titles got printed down to 16mm, they needed to run at 24fps of course. Short label on the switch was silent/sound.

Silent films were shot & run at speeds which could vary even within the movie! As a rule of thumb, earliest silents like from the 'teens ran slowest (around 16 fps) late silents ran faster: 24-26 fps!

A great page about silent film taking & projection speeds is at
http://www.cinemaweb.com/silentfilm/bookshelf/#March1998

quote:
unless they are re-processed with some frames duplicated the action is speeded up considerably.

That is called "stretch printing" & has distracting visual artifacts. The best way is to just project it at the correct speed. "Stretch printing" has been done for different applications - Chaplin stretch printed on of his features so it could be re-released in the sound era, but didn't like the results & preferred it to just run fast. Some silent titles with slower taking speeds were stretch printed to run on video transfer chains.

quote:
As to your Q#2, I got to see a brand new print of the Lon Chaney Phantom of the Opera in 2001 at the Orpheum Theater in Los Angeles. It was made up on a platter and played on the existing booth equipment

Was that the Kevin Brownlow restoration that was done around that time? Brownlow requires that the projector be fitted with equipment to vary the speed in accordance to notes for projection that came with the film originally (or were reconstructed by Brownlow). Kino & some other companies have 35mm prints of Phantom too (it's PD), but it's a late silent, & was taken very near & runs very well at 24fps. Phantom of the Opera is an easy silent show because you just plop it out bloop at 24fps on whatever you got.

Posted by Mitchell Dvoskin (Member # 751) on 08-20-2003, 08:00 AM:

1. When did nitrate prints stop being used? How long after did they circulate? Any still around?

Kodak discontinued nitrate 1950 (John, correct me if I am wrong), and by 1952 it was not longer being used in the USA. Nitrate film was manufactured in eastern europe up though the 1960's.

2. Can an old projector (with soundhead) play a silent print? Where they standard 35mm? Are new prints being made today of old silent films?

Yes. It will just run at the wrong speed unless you have a variable speed motor, or the print was modified to run at sound speed. Yes, new prints are being struck of the major silent films.

3. Do you know what the reel sizes/lengths were for silent films? The same as sound films?

Originally 1000' reels, but by the early 1920's 2000' reels.

4. Were there any trailers made of silent features?

YES. And some great art deco daters.

5. Do you know, perchance, who distributes silent films today?

In addition to Kino, which really does not have very much, Their is our Library Of Congress (requires reel to reel projection). There are a lot of small distributors. I would click Brad Allen's link, check out the "screenings" section, and call some of those venues and find out where they got their prints. You also may want to try contacting the American Theatre Organ Society ATOS for information.

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 08-20-2003, 08:01 AM:

My findings have been that most "Silent" switches and home movies actually where at 18fps, not 16fps.

Steve

Posted by Stephen Furley (Member # 1277) on 08-20-2003, 09:50 AM:

Steve wrote:

quote:

My findings have been that most "Silent" switches and home movies actually where at 18fps, not 16fps.

Are you talking about 8mm?

18 fps is a standard speed for Super8 film, many of the single system magnetic sound on film cameras of that format run at 18fps, to reduce running costs for home use. Some of the cheaper ones only run at that speed. Super8 reduction prints of 35mm or 16mm sound films are, of course, at 24 fps., therefore Super8 sound projectors have to be able to run at both of these fixed speeds.

As for the 'silent' speeds on other guages, it's anybody's guess what they are on most machines. On some, such as the older type Bell & Howell 16mm machines, with commutator motors and governors, they are adjustable.

Posted by Tao Yue (Member # 836) on 08-20-2003, 10:37 AM:

William Hooper wrote:

quote:

Turner used to have some of the silent DeMille's, like the silent Ten Commandments.

Wouldn't Paramount still hold the copyright? I'm not aware of any large-scale sale of libraries in the case of Paramount, unlike with Warners and MGM.

As far as Biblical epics at Turner, there are prints of Ben-Hur (1926) available from Warner Brothers. According to alt.movies.silents (a great resource for print info on specific titles), the prints have the 1931 syn-chro-nized soundtrack, not the Carl Davis score that was on the video version of the Brownlow restoration.

If you don't have the proper equipment to show a silent and/or don't have a pianist/organist/100-piece orchestra, your best bet is to stick with new sound-aperture prints from the late silent era. Metropolis, City Lights, Steamboat Bill, Jr., etc. All of these have soundtracks and prints that can be run at 24.

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 08-20-2003, 11:08 AM:

For anyone interested in nitrate I'd strongly recommend the book This Film is Dangerous, published by the International Federation of Film Archives. Info here.

Posted by Bill Gabel (Member # 1105) on 08-20-2003, 11:51 AM:

quote:
Wouldn't Paramount still hold copyright? I'm not aware of any large-scale sale of libraries in the case of Paramount, unlike Warner & MGM.

During the early 60's, Paramount sold it's pre-49 era films to MCA/Universal Pictures. Currently MCA/Universal have released films from the 30's-49 on video. But Paramount did have a few titles from the silent era on VHS. MCA/Universal handles the early Marx Bros. titles from Paramount and the Preston Sturges and Ernst Lubitsch titles among many other classic Paramount titles. I not know what the earliest date that was from that sale of that library.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 08-20-2003, 12:22 PM:

Thank you everyone for all the info. I knew I could count on you guys. (This is an interesting topic too...I've always wanted to know more about the silent era myself.)

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 08-20-2003, 12:44 PM:

Most of the silent machines such as motiograph and powers had 3 blade shutters on them
I usually use programable motor controllers (inverters) to program different speeds to the smae standard projector

Posted by Robert E. Allen (Member # 1351) on 08-20-2003, 03:18 PM:

"Sorry Bob...I've got to jump on you for that one...where did you get your "information" that silent films ran at 16fps?"

From my dad who began his career in 1916 hand-cranking films in a 6x8 "sweatbox" suspended from the ceiling of an opera house in Michigan and remained a projectionist until just before his death in 1977.
I followed him into the business starting in 1945.

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 08-20-2003, 04:04 PM:

As to 18fps...I've installed several that had a nominal silent speed of 18fps...home super-8 was certainly 18fps. Again, based on many silent films I've set, I can only think of one that was around 16fps.

I have a friend that has an extensive collection...I'll inquire into this.

Steve

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 08-20-2003, 07:12 PM:

Could this be a case of regional differences? The cameras were probably cranked mostly at 16 fps. Maybe in some places it was common to crank the projector at 16 for fairly realistic speed so that only those shots that were specifically undercranked on photography were speeded up whereas other places perhaps routinely cranked at 18 so that everything was just slightly speeded up.

I'd like to take this opportunity to give a plug for our own excellent Silent Film Society of Chicago which sponsors screenings throughout the year but also each summer has a festival called The Silent Summer with
showings on 6 Fridays in a row in a wonderful old Rapp & Rapp "atmospheric" theatre, the Gateway.

Posted by Martin Brooks (Member # 1269) on 08-20-2003, 08:19 PM:

I'm almost positive that my old Bell & Howell (1940s era) 16mm projector runs on the silent setting at 18fps.

And I'm pretty sure that when I studied film history at NYU in the 1970s, they ran silent 16mm prints at 18fps.

Posted by William Hooper (Member # 71) on 08-21-2003, 02:33 AM:

I'm surprised Leo Entickap isn't in on this!

16-a-second was the early Lumiere speed for cameras, from the 1895 camera into the mid-teens.

http://www.film-tech.com/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=004470;p=1

At that time & later, camera speeds were varying & increasing. As the Kevin Brownlow article on David Pierce's site shows, by 1925 camera speeds were up to 19 fps, that's a visible hop from 16 fps! Projectionists recieved instructions with the films to run them at speeds that were about 4 to 5 fps faster than camera speed.

Brownlow's article really is the one with the answers you want:
http://www.cinemaweb.com/silentfilm/bookshelf/18_kb_2.htm

Clive Tobin has a fast summary of amateur format camera speeds at
http://www.tobincinemasystems.com/page29.html

"16mm was introduced in 1923. The early home movie cameras ran at 15 or 16 FPS. With the advent of sound in the 1930's, commercial 16mm film began to be exposed at 24 FPS which is still the standard for sound or serious film today. In the mid-1950's some camera manufacturers started suggesting that personal films be shot at 18 FPS."

My 1952 Kodak Cine-Photoguide for 8mm & 16mm home movie cameras specifies the speed of the cameras as 16 fps.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 08-21-2003, 10:24 AM:

Kodak has an on-line "Chronology of MP Films":

http://www.kodak.com/country/US/en/motion/about/chrono1.shtml

Kodak introduced cellulose triacetate "safety" base for motion picture films in 1948, but Kodak 35mm nitrate film was still used until about 1952. In 1949, Kodak won an Academy Award for developing safety film. Kodak always used safety film for small gauge motion picture formats like 16mm, that were used at home.

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 08-21-2003, 11:28 AM:

quote:
I'm surprised Leo Entickap isn't in on this!

Steve Guttag said pretty much all there is to say. All I'd add is that the intended projection speed of some late Hollywood silents went up to 24, especially during the crossover period. Yet more suggested reading: Kevin Brownlow, 'Silent Films: What Was the Right Speed?' in Sight and Sound, vol. 49, no. 3 (Summer 1980), pp. 164-7. Projection speeds gradually increased after the end of WWI, because the larger auditoria encouraged a move from three-blade to two blade shutters to maximise light output (hence increased film speed to reduce flicker).

quote:
Kodak introduced cellulose triacetate "safety" base for motion picture films in 1948, but Kodak 35mm nitrate film was still used until about 1952.

According to my sources, Kodak discontinued all nitrate production in February 1950. But presumably it took some time for existing stocks to be exhausted, and of course 'legacy' nitrate prints remained in use for a lot longer. I can't remember where I got this from, but I think it was trade press. [Shameless plug alert] The references are in my article 'The Film Industry's Conversion from Nitrate to Acetate' in the Roger Smither book mentioned in an earlier post in this thread. Please let me know if you'd like a PDF version of the manuscript.

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 08-21-2003, 12:49 PM:

PDFs in the manuals section, Leo! [Cool]

--jhawk

Posted by Gerard S. Cohen (Member # 994) on 08-21-2003, 02:13 PM:

Steve suggested,

"Could this be a case of regional differences?"

An Indian gentleman (now 98 years old) told me that when he was a boy the cameramen cranked while humming "God save our gracious
King (or Queen)" to maintain a steady newsreel speed with 8 to 1 gearing.

When fitted with normal gearing,(as with my "pancake" Akeley cameras), the Beethoven melody which children satirize as "The worms crawl in, the worms crawl out", a much more arm-exhausting tempo, was needed.

Gerard

Posted by Tao Yue (Member # 836) on 08-21-2003, 02:57 PM:

Thanks, Bill, for the info about the Paramount library. Googling a bit, I found at http://archives.studio.universalstudios.com/timeline1936.html:

quote:
1958. In December, MCA purchases Paramount Studios’ pre-1950 sound film library for $50 million, the richest television syndication deal to date.

So that explains why Paramount still owns their silent films.

Posted by Pete Evans (Member # 1823) on 08-21-2003, 05:40 PM:

When I worked at The National Film Theatre in the '70's they were licenced to run nitrate prints and had a substantial collection in the vaults. The projectors (Vic 8's) had fire extinguishers fitted after a fire distroyed one mech!
Silent prints were run, if I remember rightly we altered the optical centre of the lens to cater for the full frame (no soundtrack). As to speed, prints were run in advance and the machine speed set up by eye, what looked right, prior to screening.....I can't remember what make the speed controllers were.
Whether or not the NFT still runs nitrate I'm not sure, as when funds permitted new safety prints were being made due to the unstable nature of nitrate. I remember seeing at least a couple of features distroyed due to being too unstable for duplication.

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 08-21-2003, 06:45 PM:

If you have film that is shrunken but otherwise ok is it possible to project it using special sprockets and if so who makes them?

Posted by Bill Gabel (Member # 1105) on 08-21-2003, 08:08 PM:

Heres a good site on the web for Silent films info.

http://www.silentera.com/index.html

Posted by William Hooper (Member # 71) on 08-22-2003, 12:38 AM:

quote:
As to speed, prints were run in advance and the machine speed set up by eye, what looked right, prior to screening

That's how it was done originally, when projectors were hand-cranked. Taking & projections peeds varied within the film. The projectionist's part was expected to be a little less a reproducer, & a bit more of a performance. For example, you'll not that projection speeds were specified to the projectionist as being faster that camera speeds. It gave the films a bit of extra crispness (shades of turntable speeds fudged upwards in the ratings wars heydays of Top 40 radio).

Audiences noticed, but didn't have the vocabulary or education to describe exactly what they were seeing. In Brownlow's _The Parade's Gone By_, he referenced interviews with folks who'd watched movies at the end of the silent era into the sound era. They remarked how the movies really slowed down - not just a reference to things getting a little more stodgy due to mic & staging neccessities, but due to the fact that camera & projection were then both locked to 24fps. In the silent era, projection speeds were *expected & spec'd* at a few fps faster than camera speeds.

The trades & technical books for projection of the era have lots of info for the operator in regard to *interpreting* the picture & providing the correct speed for a scene. Here's a copy & paste of a previous post typed from _Motion Picture Handbook for Managers and Operators", 1910, by F. H. Richardson, 1910:

"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 realy 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 you 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."

FYI: to convert feet per minute to frames per second, divide feet per minute by 3.75

(That's 3.75 foot-seconds per frame-minutes.)

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 08-22-2003, 07:18 AM:

quote:
The projectors (Vic 8's) had fire extinguishers fitted after a fire distroyed one mech!

When I was at the NFT in 1990-92 there was an urban legend that the reel which ignited was from The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse: charming if true.

quote:
Silent prints were run, if I remember rightly we altered the optical centre of the lens to cater for the full frame (no soundtrack).

We used (I think it was) 49mm diameter lens mounted in an eccentric 'offset ring' with which it slotted into a 70mm turret or holder: this corrected the angle to make the full-width frame appear centre on the screen without having to physically move the projector. Very easy and straightforward. At the last place I showed full-gate prints this operation was accomplished by inserting a large chisel between projector and floor, and levering accordingly!

quote:
Whether or not the NFT still runs nitrate I'm not sure, as when funds permitted new safety prints were being made due to the unstable nature of nitrate.

NFT2 still did when I was there (although I very rarely worked in 1 or 2, being based mainly in what was then MOMI and what is now NFT3), but 1 no longer did because the spoolboxes had to go when digital sound was installed.

quote:
If you have film that is shrunken but otherwise ok is it possible to project it using special sprockets and if so who makes them?

With shrunk acetate, I found that using Fox Hole sprockets helped a lot to reduce the possibility of perf damage. I've never tried this with nitrate, but I can't see any reason why it wouldn't work, unless the film has got sticky. In that case I for one would not put it anywhere near a projector.

Posted by Robert Harris (Member # 1712) on 08-22-2003, 08:13 PM:

A bit more "illumination" to Steve Guttag's answer (Hi, Steve...)

When were were sceening Napoleon in a number of venues going back to the '20s, I recall a theatre...

I want to say either the Landmark in Syracuse or the Midland in KC, which still had a tachometer system in place which was installed between the booth and the conductor's podium, which gave a readout for fps.

If you review a score from the "silent" period, you'll note that certain scenes are specifically annotated to be run at a specific speed, which would be modified throughout the screening.

RAH

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 08-23-2003, 11:10 AM:

I remember when we did a series of the Kevin Brownlow/Carl Davis 'Thames Silents', the soundtrack was played from VHS hi-fi wild with the projected films. We had two monitors side by side, one showing the VHS, and the other showing a CCTV picture of the cinema screen. Next to them was an inverter control for the projectors, and we constantly adjusted the speed of the film to match that of the video, normally using the moments at which intertitles came and went as a guide. On some of them (The General sticks in my mind) we had to make some quite radical speed changes when you could quite clearly see the two diverging on the screen. It occured to me later that we must have been doing a slightly higher-tech version of what went on in the projection rooms of the 1920s.

Posted by William Hooper (Member # 71) on 08-25-2003, 01:43 AM:

quote:
I want to say either the Landmark in Syracuse or the Midland in KC, which still had a tachometer system in place which was installed between the booth and the conductor's podium, which gave a readout for fps.

There were a number of those installed at various theaters. I was told that at the Stanley in Utica, NY there is a knob on the conductor's stand which is assumed to have controlled projector speed, but I doubt the AFM would have stepped all in the IA like that. I'd guess that it's an annunciator system to 'request' speeds from the operator.

Posted by Dominic Case (Member # 1830) on 08-26-2003, 03:02 AM:

In the mid-20s, the ASC & SMPE were recommending camera speeds of no more than 60feet/min (16fps) while theatres and SMPE recommended projection at no less than 80 feet/min (>21fps). That's right, SMPE recommended different taking and showing speeds. (Though not without some internal argument.)

Production people were concerned with getting enough exposure, and the cost of stock if you ran faster. Theatres argued that flicker was worse at slower speeds, and also they could get one extra house per night if they sped up. Evidently naturalistic representation wasn't as important then as we might expect now, and slightly fast action was expected and considered normal.

It was sound that eventually led to standardisation.

Posted by Jim Spohn (Member # 1547) on 08-27-2003, 10:59 AM:

I had lunch with Hal Roach at Catalina Island during one of our Silent Picture Festivels, he indicated that the cameramen were all over the place between 16 to 22 fps. He said that a good cameraman would give a scene "English" with his cranking. He said that two cameras were standard but on larger scenes they would use three or four and that you would have to watch the dalies like a hawk and advise your cameramen because trying to edit together films from different fps rates was a bitch!!...Jim

Posted by Stephen Furley (Member # 1277) on 08-27-2003, 11:23 AM:

Leo, I saw that print of 'The General' at the NFT; the picture quality was incredible. There was a modern caption on the beginning, stating that it was a print from the camera neg. I don't know if it really was.

Do you know what speed the video transfer was done at?

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 08-27-2003, 12:15 PM:

Dominic: Welcome to Film-Tech! [Smile]

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 08-27-2003, 03:58 PM:

AFAIK the video transfer was done the same way as the film projection, by varying the speed according to the original cue sheets supplied by the studio to cinemas along with the prints. Our instructions were to adjust the speed of the film to match the video, and if memory serves me correctly it went right down to 16 in places and all the way to 27-28 in one or two shots (though very rarely above 24). I do remember that you had to watch those monitors very carefully because the speed changes were sudden and unpredictable.

And AFAIK, Brownlow's print (which was also used as the telecine elements for the Thames/C4 broadcasts) really was struck straight off the camera negative. I presume that the thinking was the same as with the recent rerelease of Mildred Pierce: a float test revealed that sections of the camera neg were likely to start going sticky within the next couple of years, therefore someone thought that there would be nothing to lose by making one or two very nice projection prints from it before it was gone forever.

Edited to remove typo

[ 08-28-2003, 02:13 AM: Message edited by: Leo Enticknap ]