Motography (Apr-Dec 1911)

MOTOGRAPHY Vol. V, No. 4. as a matter of course; but not the gossip and rumors. Nor will the politics of the industry be touched upon in any way, except as it may affect the technical relations through patents or licenses. _ . Certain motion picture films, either educational or entertainment, which are described in Motography are selected by the editors as meriting such description. No synopses of current films will be printed. Those interested can procure these direct from the manufacturers, who will be glad to furnish them free, and a reprinting of them is mere duplication and wasted effort. We launch this initial number of _ Motography with the assurance that good as it is, it is the poorest we will ever print. Each succeeding issue will be an improvement on its predecessor, and, we trust, a credit to the most fascinating industry in the world. REGULATIVE PROJECTS IN NEW YORK. NEW YORK seems in a fair way to profit by the bright light of publicity which has lately been turned upon her picture shows. At the request of Mayor Gaynor, Commissioner of Accounts Raymond B. Fosdic'k has made an exhaustive investigation of conditions among the low-priced entertainments of New York, and his report is printed on another page. Immediately following its publication the Conference on Motion Pictures adopted the following resolution unanimously : Resolved, That the Conference heartily approves the recommendations of Commissioner Fosdick, and urges them upon the attention of the Mayor, the Board of Aldermen, Commissioners of City Departments and the public, as follows: (1) That much of the abuse connected with motion picture shows in this city is due to the lack of centralized authority and responsibility and to the confusion of jurisdiction between the various administrative departments of the city government. The Conference realizes the urgency of concentration of power and responsibility and, if necessary, recommends charter revision looking to this end. (2) The Conference agrees with the Commissioner of Accounts that a complete ordinance or set of regulations should be drawn up, governing the structure, ventilation, lighting, and similar conditions in the motion picture shows, and that these laws or regulations should be codified and published. (3) The Conference agrees that serious evil has resulted from the limitation of the seating capacity of motion picture shows to 299, and urges that steps be taken to allow a larger seating capacity, with careful regulations to safeguard such enlarged premises. (4) The Conference urges the appointment by the Mayor of such a committee as the Commissioner of Accounts recommends, and urges upon the Board of Aldermen the importance of prompt co-operation with such a committee in carrying out the above substantial recommendations. It is not at all difficult for even the youngest men in the business to remember the time when the serious proposal to establish a permanent committee of city officers to supervise the improvement of picture theaters would have been laughed out of countenance. Yet it is now proposed not only to make it possible for New Yorkers to have better shows, but actually to remove the present size limit so that exhibitors may build as large and as sumptuous houses as their optimism and their bank accounts permit. New York at present has not one really first-class straight picture theater; and the reason lies in the restriction to a seating capacity of less than 300. If Commissioner Fosdick's analysis accomplishes nothing else than the removal of this restriction he will be regarded as a benefactor to both the exhibitors and the public. The Conference on Motion Pictures, which is urging municipal action on Mr. Fosdick's recommendations, is composed of Matthew P. Adams of the Children's Aid Society, Mrs. L. Betts of the Brooklyn Recreation Committee, John Collier of the National Board of Censorship, J. P. Dresser of the West Side Association, Robert E. Ely of the League for Political Education, Burt H. Farnsworth of the 23d Street Y. M. C. A., Ralph Folks and V. F. Hanmar of the Russell Sage Foundation, Mrs. Barclay Hazard of the Woman's Municipal League, Albert W. Hind of the Federation of Men's Clubs, Thomas L. McClintock of the Society for the Prevention of Crime, Miss E. J. Moss of the Woman's Society for the Prevention of Crime, Mrs. A. A. C. .Montague, Henry Moskovitz of the Downtown Ethical Society, Mrs. Joseph M. Price of the Public Education Association, Mrs. P. Sexton, Lester F. Scott of the People's Institute. Mr. Hind is chairman and Mr. Collier secretary. EFFECT OF THE ART ON ADVERTISING. MOTOGRAPHIC advertising is expensive. That is one of its advantages, for it will always remain more or less exclusive. There is little chance that publicity films will ever become so prominent that the public will tire of them or ignore them. Speaking in round numbers, a single 1,000-foot reel of films made to order for advertising purposes will cost the advertiser $1,000 before it is ever projected on a screen. Of course, as an advertising medium that reel may be and generally is worth many times a thousand dollars. For the advertiser who cares to spend that much in one place, that is undoubtedly the place to spend it. In no other way can he possibly get his proposition before so many people and really interest so very large a proportion of them. But motographic advertising is new, and those advertisers who are not accustomed to spending such a sum at one throw, and even some of those who would not hesitate to spend it if they were convinced of its value, have nevertheless made a confession and paid a tribute to motography in the style of advertising they are using in the current magazines, newspapers and signboards. The method referred to is described in a recent number of Advertising and Selling by A. Rowden King, under the title "The Cinematograph Style of Advertising." Mr. King even goes so far as to say that the same illustrations used in advertisements appearing in popular magazines during the last season or two, changed into film form and run through a projecting machine, would produce an actual motion picture on the screen. This, of course, is hyperbole. But we have all become familiar with the kind of advertising illustrations he refers to. The cinematograph advertisement, he says, is increasing in popularity. One advertiser after another is taking up with it, and if their stick-to-itiveness is any criterion, results must be eminently satisfactory. About the first crude effort in this line was the familiar series of three heads, the first having six or seven hairs upon it, the escond having one and the third innocent of all hirsute adornment. This may be styled a compromise between the "before-and-after" type and the cinematograph type of advertisement. A company manufacturing food supplies has used as many as twenty-five consecutive pictures in its adver