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.

280 CRABTREE, SANDVIK, AND IVES TABLE V Comparative Value of Various Treatments [J. S. M. P. E. Sample Treatment 102 91 111 93 107 92 Cantol buffed-Sol — No after treatment Cantol buffed-Sol — Wiped with plush Special lubricant — Re-treatment* Cantol buffed-Sol— Re-treatment* 2.0% oil buffed— Re-treatment* Cantol buffed-Sol — Clean 95 Plain buffed-Sol — Re-treatment* 101 0.25% cantol — no buff — Re-treatment** 106 2.0% oil buffed — Clean only 96 97 100 Sol— Clean Sol — Clean and Re treatment* 0.25% cantol — no buff— Clean 94 112 Buffed-Sol— Clean only Special lubricant — not buffed — Cleaned every 10 runs 103 Plain film * Re-treatment signifies that the sample was cleaned as described and then given the original treatment after every ten projection runs. ** Re-treatment consisted only of cleaning in a bath having the same formula as the original treating solution. Sol indicates edgewaxing with solution of paraffin wax in carbon tetrachloride. No. 112 after the first ten runs. This is undoubtedly because the oily protective surface was removed in the subsequent cleaning operations. The results shown in the case of sample No. 94 would not favor the use of plain buffing with solution edge-waxing if the film was cleaned with carbon tetrachloride after every ten runs without re-waxing. The ground noise of sample No. 103 which received no treatment increased very rapidly in comparison with that of the tested samples. TABLE VI Treatments Giving Slight Protection Sample Description 96 97 100 106 Solution edge-waxed — Cleaned after every 10 runs Solution edge-waxed — Cleaned and re-treated after every ten runs Bathed in 0.25% solution of cantol wax — Cleaned after every 10 runs Oil buffed — Cleaned after every 10 runs