British Kinematography (1950)

Jan., 1950 STANDARDISATION AND THE KINEMA 23 that we should not introduce as British standard, something that comes from America simply because it is American. Dr. F. S. Hawkins : The standard which the last few speakers have discussed is one of screen brightness, which is rather a different thing from screen illumination. Mr. R. Pulman : Nobody who reads any British standard yet produced on the subject of kinematography doubts that it does most vitally affect the work of the projectionist. It enables him to do his job much more efficiently. Nobody this morning has yet said anything against standardisation. In approaching standardisation one should be very cautious indeed. I remember at a debate of the Illuminating Engineering Society not long ago a standard was defined as " The establishment of the least common denominator." Standardisation can easily defeat its own object. I do feel that everybody who is concerned with these B.S.I, committees should approach the matter with every precaution to ensure that no undue limitations are imposed upon designers. Mr. S. A. Stevens : Two points which Major Bell brought up have not been dealt with. One was the point of the international feature of standardisation. None of us is against that. My experience of the work of the B.S.I, is that it does fit in very well, not only while the committee is drawing up the specification, but for years afterwards. They have a system whereby they receive copies of overseas specifications, they put them before the committees, and long after they keep sending them to us. That gives an opportunity sometimes for re-opening the procedure, and possibly considering a bright idea from some foreign country. Another point raised by Major Bell was that of the user asking for something not standard, and the manufacturer supplying it. I am of the opinion that this problem will solve itself, because if equipment is standardised, the manufacturer is in a much better position to produce a steady run of that equipment and therefore costs will be lessened. A non-standard version of it will therefore inevitably cost more, and the user will soon appreciate that it does not pay him to continue asking for non-standard items. Mr. R. H. Cricks : We on the B.S.I. committees do a large amount of work in preparing specifications, and the B.S.I, do an excellent job in issuing them. But there is insufficient publicity given to them ; users have no knowledge of standards. What is the B.S.I, doing to bring specifications to the notice not only of technicians, but of the buyers ? Mr. M. J. Parker : When Mr. Cricks mentions the user I presume he means the user in the kinematograph industry. It should, however, be appreciated that with some British Standards the user is the man in the street and in those cases effective publicity would be expensive. The B.S.I, has no advertising grant and does not advertise in that way. The function of the B.S.I, is to produce a standard and this is issued only when there is general agreement that it fulfils a generally recognised need, and has been approved by both the producers and users. As far as general technical publicity is concerned the Institution has a most comprehensive press list which includes all the technical journals in Great Britain and also House magazines and Associations' bulletins. The appropriate press are circulated with a notice of every new and revised British Standard issued and are offered a free copy of the standard. The Institution also has a number of overseas journals on its list, including some in the British Commonwealth. In regard to publicity in the kinematograph industry in particular, to which I presume Mr. Cricks refers, there has recently been established a Press Relations Sub-Committee which, although it has not yet met, will be doing so shortly. The committee is composed of editors of the technical journals concerned with kinematography, under the chairmanship of Mr. E. Oram, who represents the Cinematograph Industry Standards Committee. The purpose of the committee will be to supply the technical press with all the information they might require on new British standards, including the reasons for requirements which might otherwise be questioned. It might also be possible to arrange, with the help of the committee, to secure the expression of public opinion in places where such an expression of views might help the committee to make a decision in regard to certain matters upon which it might be in doubt. One advantage of standards is that their use enables the designer and engineer to treat as routine all matters which have already been studied, leaving them free to concentrate on really creative work. Again the preparation of a British standard frequently focuses attention on a particular problem and thereby stimulates fresh research. One vital factor bearing upon this question of progress is the matter of the revision of a standard. These standards are reviewed whenever necessary to keep abreast of scientific and technical developments and if there is frequent revision there is little, if any, opportunity for standardisation to hinder progress. The question was raised of the representation of small companies on B.S.I, committees. Where a small firm is not represented it should transmit its opinions through the appropriate trade organisation. The international aspect of standardisation has been discussed with particular reference to American standards. We do not want simply to follow the Americans, but, on the other hand, we must remember that the advantages in having a common standard often justify the adoption of a British standard which might be a little different from that which we might establish ourselves.