Journal of the Society of Motion Picture Engineers (1930-1949)

Record Details:

Something wrong or inaccurate about this page? Let us Know!

Thanks for helping us continually improve the quality of the Lantern search engine for all of our users! We have millions of scanned pages, so user reports are incredibly helpful for us to identify places where we can improve and update the metadata.

Please describe the issue below, and click "Submit" to send your comments to our team! If you'd prefer, you can also send us an email to mhdl@commarts.wisc.edu with your comments.




We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.

Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.

Jan., 1930] RECTANGLE PROPORTIONS IN COMPOSITION 43 of the area of acute vision. At an average viewing distance from the screen, it is probable that an area not more than 2 feet in diameter covers the entire f ovea and it is obvious that a picture of that size would not be either of pleasing size or of pleasing shape. There are many other factors to be considered and I am not prepared at this time to make a more complete analysis. I should like to emphasize the fact that the whole discussion presented in this paper relates to the rectangle proportion and not to the most desirable angular size of picture. MR. PALMER: I should like to have Dr. Hickman's suggestion carried out — that we have a vote on which of the four proportions (left column, Fig. 2) we like best. MR. JONES: Before doing that, I should like to point out that I do not consider this is a fair test, because you have a rectangle within a rectangle here. If you want to take any such vote as that, a group of lantern slides should be prepared and shown one at a time with no contributing distracting surroundings. I have no objection to your going ahead, but it will not mean anything because you can't exclude from your judgment the effect of the other things. MR. PALMER: I agree with Mr. Jones that it would be better to do as he suggests. MR. ELMS: I think the projection of motion pictures of different proportions will give you what you want. DR. HICKMAN: I think one cannot judge without information about the dimensions of the theater. MR. JONES: I do not agree entirely with Dr. Hickman. While there are undoubtedly extraneous factors in the theater which influence our perception of the picture, they are in general of a much lower brightness and hence have much less weight in building up the total visual impression than the picture area itself which is illuminated to a relatively high level. For instance, in an average theater we may take it that the screen surface itself has a brightness of approximately 10 apparent foot candles. The illumination on areas outside of the picture is seldom higher than 0.1 apparent foot candles and when it is considered that the screen surface is of high reflecting power and the surrounding objects of relatively low reflecting power, it will be seen that the screen surface itself is probably one thousand times brighter than the surrounding objects. This certainly will serve to suppress the importance of objects outside of the picture area, and I believe that under such conditions it would be possible to make a more reliable judgment as to the most pleasing rectangle proportions. In this room at present we do not have such conditions and I doubt if our estimates would be of much value.