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.

74 A. S. HOWELL AND J. A. DUBRAY [j. s. M. P. E. missible limits which can be attained without undue loss in image quality, and we shall rapidly survey the factors involved. It is our first thought that a screen greater in width than 37 feet would be quite distracting to the intimate character of most of the scenes which form the average story telling photoplay. There is no question in our minds, however, but that some pictures of an exceptionally spectacular nature would be shown to better advantage on the 45 foot screen corresponding to the "Spectacular" dimension. This film width, however, involves a picture height of 27.5 feet, which may be found to be excessive because of the great effort imposed upon the eye by its eagerness to cover rapidly such a large span in a direction opposite to its normal sweep. A reduction in this height of the image would defeat the 3 to 5 ratio between the image sides and would give rise to a hybrid shape, in most cases unpleasant to the eye and difficult to manage artistically, as well as mechanically. We find ourselves also facing other problems of a more technical nature, which we shall rapidly survey. Although a greater screen image, as well as the diffusing surfaces of the screens used in the projection of talking motion pictures, broaden the viewing angle in regard to correct distribution of illumination, they also increase the distance of the optimum viewpoint from the screen. Without entering into a long discussion of this phase of our survey, we shall mention that these factors considerably reduce the number of seats in the front part of the auditorium from which the screen can be viewed under acceptable conditions of good visibility in regard to light distribution of the screen surface and picture perspective. These factors assume serious proportions, especially if we take into consideration the great number of small auditoriums disseminated throughout the country. Furthermore, the greater the increase in size of the film image, the more complex are the problems involved in the design of the appropriate optical system for the projection apparatus. It is quite obvious that a greater film image area demands a greater condenser magnification. Although we believe that the "Economic" dimension would permit the use of existing condensers, we want to suggest that image sizes greater than this, and especially those as great or greater than the "Extreme" dimension, would demand not only a complete redesigning of the condenser system,