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.
Twelve AMERICAN CINEMATOGRAPHER March, 1924
£M1I1I1I1PII1MII!I1IIIIIIIB
I
Of Interest To Theatre Managers \
Herewith is reprinted a letter which, written by an A. 8. C. member to the managing director of one of the nation's foremost theatres, deals with a matter which is of great concern to those who are interested in the art of ein ematograph y.
This matter — cutting cinematographers credit titles — is one which lias claimed the attention of the American Cinematographer previously from time to time. Happily, as Mr. Tan Buren points oat. the majority of the important theatres in New York do not eliminate the cinematographer' s credit titles from
Hie prints they exhibit.
H
Hut because these theatres are progressive enough not to arbitrarily ignore the importance of the calling of the cinematographer does not lessen the injustice worked against the camera artists whose names are cut from Hie film on the occasion of vital New York runs in another theatre. To a great degree, theatres such as Hie outstanding houses in "New York set the pace for exhibitors throughout the country. Of these theatres — whose directing heads are naturally supposed to know more than other exhibitors concerning the factors which go to make up film production — if these theatres still hare among their number some which persist in not recognizing the cinematographer. then what can lie expected front those exhibitors who are fur remorcd from production in other cities?
The progressive producer has long since indicated his appreciation of the master camera artist by including his name among those which are given screen credit. It is to lie hoped that the absence of cinematographer* names fromthe Strand screen, in pictures wherein such camera <irtists are credited is not the result of arbitrary and retrogressire action, hut has been caused bu some unusual situation of some sort that may at on<-e lie corrected ' .
No doubt the managing director of the Strand, although he did not hare the opportunity of answering Mr. Van Buren's letter at the time the A. S. C. member forwarded the copy which is herein reprinted from New York, has' had some good reason for withholding screen credit for the cinematographer. but it is to be hoped that this reason has been a transitory one and since' passed.
In his letter. Mr. Tan Buren speaks with the sincerity ejf a man who can not but feel disappointment in seeing fellow cinematographers deprived of that which means so much to them. The letter follows:
Mr. -Toseph R. Plunkett,
Strand Theatre.
New York City. Dear Sir:
Having been a patron of the Strand since the first week of its opening several years ago when it opened with Selig's "The Spoilers" I am writing yon a little letter in the form of a complaint, and which I think is a just one.
I have noticed for quite some time that you have been cutting THE CAMERAMAN'S NAME FROM ALL OF YOUR PRODUCTfOXS. Do yen really think you are treating us fair in this matter? Being a cameraman myself prompted this letter, and I trust you will take same in the spirit in
»"'" ■■■llil illlilllllllllUHIIIIlll ISIIIIIII II Il!!lllllllllillllll!!l!l'l!!llll!llll!llll|||l|!ll!!ll||li!||||||||||!l||||||| Il!!lllll!|||||l!l!|||||!||||||||||!|||||||||| l||IU!ll|||||!lJ||!||||||||||||||