International projectionist (Jan-Dec 1951)

JBN22I35I B 2826«6 ^ INTERNATIONAL ":"TOECTI0NIS1 With Which Is Combined Projection Engineering HENRY B. SELLWOOD, Editor Volume 26 y JANUARY, 1951 Number 1 Index and Monthly Chat 3 Maintenance and Servicing of Motors, HI 5 Robert A. Mitchell Lacquer Coating for Cine Film 6 Old, New Equipment Display a G'-od Exploitation Stunt ... 9 Theater Television via the RCA PT-100 Equipment, II 10 RCA Service Company Standard 16-m Travel-Ghost Test Film 12 American Standards Assoc. Carbon Arcs vs. Inkies for NonTheatrical Projection 13 Harry H. Strong This 'Mysterious' Aerial Image 15 Robert A. Mitchell In the Spotlight 16 Harry Sherman Brush-Up on Fundamentals, II: Capacitance 18 The Ashcraft Hydro-Arc Lamp 19 New Technicolor Lighting System Tested by Top Photographers 20 Leigh Allen Projectionist Examination Questions 20 National Carbon Reduces Copper Coating; Amperage Cut 21 Telecasts 22 IA Elections .... 23 News Projections ... .25 Technical Hints Miscellaneous Items Published Monthly by INTERNATIONAL PROJECTIONIST PUBLISHING CO., INC. 19 West 44 Street, New York 18, N. Y. Telephone: MUrray Hill 2-2948 R. A. ENTRACHT, Publisher SUBSCRIPTION REPRESENTATIVES AUSTRALIA: McGills, 183 Elizabeth St., Melbourne NEW ZEALAND: Te Aro Book Depot, Ltd, 64 Courtenay Place, Wellington ENGLAND and DOMINIONS: Wm. Dawson & Sons, Ltd, Macklin St, London, W. C. 2 Yearly Subscription: United States and possessions, $2.50 (tw<y years, $4) ; Canada and foreign countries, $3; single copies, 30 cents. Changes of address should be submitted two weeks in advance of publication date to insure receipXof current issue. Entered as second class matter February 8, 1932, at the Post OfhW'at New York, N. Y, under the act of March 3, 1879. Entire contents copyrighted v!95l by International Projectionist Publishing Co, Inc. International Projectionist is not responsible for personal opinions appearing in signed articles in its columns. 420 MONTHLY CHAT IT'S ironic that when film exhibitors finally got around to effecting some degree of cohesion and displaying a bit of spunk with respect to a go-ahead on theater Tv, the defense needs of the country became so acute as to render their efforts futile. The same degree of courage and savvy, if evidenced two or more years ago, might have created a situation wherein the exhibition field today would be in a strong spot to battle the inroads of network Tv upon the boxoffice take. It is all very well to announce that theater Tv will be installed in 71 houses of a given circuit — as both RCA and Fox West Coast Theaters did in recent weeks — but it is quite something else to gain this goal when one stops to ponder the amount of critical defense items that necessarily would be included in this number of units. It is not our intent to disparage the forward-looking stand of both RCA and the exhibition group, but it seems a pity that such aggressive action could not have been taken many months ago at a time when the FCC was disposed to look with favor on the expansion of a theater Tv chain. The present time, which sees even run-of-the-mill items severely restricted in favor of defense needs, seems hardly the time to announce the creation of a theater Tv setup involving upwards of a hundred units — just as a start. It is barely possible that the international situation will suddenly take a turn for the better; but even if this nearmiracle should eventuate, it is sheer nonsense to suppose that Uncle Sam would cut drastically his rearmament program. It seems certain that we face at least three years of equipment scarcities, with the motion picture theater slated to enjoy no particular favors from Uncle Sam. The situation is rather a tough one for projectionists to accept with equanimity, because the craft has gone along month after weary month in the hope that exhibitors would bestir themselves and really take positive action anent theater Tv. Alas, it was not to be. For the present, therefore, projectionists must mark time and nourish the hope that somehow the theater field will be permitted enough leeway to erect a bulwark against those forces now threatening the box-office. That the craft will do more than its full share in the materials conservation program goes without saying. For the rest, it can only grimly get on with its work and hope for the best. And we hope that this time the contributions of the organized crafts will not be overlooked when the kudos are handed out to the industry. iHi INTERNATIONAL PROJECTIONIST • January 1951