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.

July, 1939] MOTION PICTURE FILM AND TELEVISION 17 If this "whole-number submultiple" relationship does not obtain, then patterns of light and shade will travel up or down the image at a rate corresponding with the difference rate between the frame frequency and the nearest submultiple of the power supply. These moving patterns are as objectionable as true flicker. If we did not use 30-frame television, for 60-cycle power, the designer would be confronted with very severe handicaps. For receivers, in particular, it would be difficult to find operative apparatus layouts, and certainly the cost would be increased to provide tolerable freedom from the effects just outlined. MR. CRABTREE: At the New York meeting you demonstrated a method of projecting on a fairly large screen an image of high brightness contrast. Would it not be better to photograph the televised image onto motion picture film, process that rapidly, and then project it? What are the relative merits of the two procedures? MR. ENGSTROM : I believe the method you suggest has been experimented with in Germany and to the best of my knowledge has not been adopted. One of the advantages that television has is the timeliness of the reproduction and it appears to those who have thought about the subject that even a matter of twenty, thirty, or forty seconds would take much interest from the program. On the other hand, to photograph the image on motion picture film and then project it involves a great deal of apparatus. We hope to find a more direct and simpler answer which will make it more generally applicable. MR. CRABTREE: I do not think that a time lag detracts seriously in all cases from the showmanship. We in the East are quite entertained in spite of an apparent three-hour delay in the transmission of the football game from California on New Year's Day. MR. GOLDEN: Is there any difference in definition between receiving film images and images of living actors? MR. ENGSTROM : If as good a job is done in the television studio as one would do in producing motion picture film, then the resulting performance should be identical. There is no reason why one system should permit better contrast or better resolution than the other. MR. LUBCKE: Our results concerning the qualifications for good film for television support those that Mr. Engstrom has outlined. In addition, we have felt that a slightly accentuated contrast between the various parts of the scene, but not too great an overall contrast range, is also desirable.