Business screen magazine (1946)

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.

p (II '(1(1 ().\ STANFORD SOBEL Slide films are >er\ good business and a very effecli>e medium, hut n(ili<>d> is especially proud ol' (loin}; them. Tilt riKsi SCRIPT 1 ever wrote was a slide-film. Since that time, not a single year has passed during which I did ni)t write slide-film scripts. Last year. I wrote them for Xerox, Volkswagen, and Sunoco — admittedly not small outfits. None of those particular slide-films, however, cost the client nunc tiian a modest four figures, as the bankers say. On the other hand, I did a slidefilm of sorts — a sales meeting opening module — which used .^.000 slides, a special recorded track, eight screens, twenty-four Carousels, eight dissolve units, and a programmer. Although it lasted less than ten minutes, it cost more to produce, than 90 percent of the movies I've written. It's not all lowbudget work when dealing with slidefilms. Recently. I received a puzzling letter from an old friend, a film producer who has given me assignments for more than twenty years. The puzzle was in his question — "Do I write only movie scripts now. or do I still write slide films too? If I do. wouki I work on some for him? I highl\ lespecl slide-lilms, and have written dozens of them, but iii\ Iriend's lellei letlects a \eiN widespread viewpoint. Most people in our business generally regard slide-films with loathing and distaste. I've heard producers — who were literally kept in business by slide-film revenue — say. "I haw slide-films!" I've also heard clients say, "I detest the damn things, but they're all we can afford at this cheap chintzy t)utfit; I guess 111 have to go along until the budget improves." The negative feeling about slidefilms is reflected in an experience 1 had years ago. when I was first hired by Wilding. I was introduced to a lot of different people at the time — writers, salesmen, directors, cameramen, cutters executives. One man, however, was always introduced to nie just as "Charlie Smith" (I'll call him) with no explanation of his job or function. He skulked at the edges of different groups without seeming to he part of the cadres or cliques. Finally, one day I caught him alone in the parking lot, and I asked, "What's your job. anyway, Charlie. What do you do around here?" He looked around, as if making sure no one was within earshot. Acting as if arrested for indecent exposure on a public conveyance, he muttered under his breath. "I'm the slide-film director, but listen, don't say nuthin', willya? My wife and kids think I'm a reijiilar movie director." Much of that feeling seems to have carried over to modern slidefilms from the hackneyed old "gong operas" of yesterday. I've done a lot of thinking about this situation, and have some theories about why this attitude has occurred. Hasically, two maior problem areas exist in slide-films^hardware and software. If we could separate the two problems in our thinking, we coukl jiroiluce some great slidefilms. Unforlunalely. the defects of each area keep slopping over to spoil (he other. I suppose that if we could ever slaiul.irili/e sljtie-tilm projectors the \s.iy Id mm |irojeclors lia\e hecon widely accepted, we might have multi-million dollar industry on o hands. However, the hardware is ; diverse, constantly in flux and oft< shabbily engineered and manufa tured. that the most avid afficionat becomes discouraged. As soon as client invests a sizable amount capital in hardware, another systcj comes along, and he has to eit convert or abandon his units, great expense and non-producti effort. Let's assume we could solve hardware problem. Suppose overnight — magically — all sou slide-filmstrips were interchangeab! just as all 16 mm movies can 1 shown on all 16 mm projectoi Nevertheless, the software probl would still exist. How do people think of sli( films' The trouble is they alm^ never think of them at all. If they d it is usually in terms of some othi medium. Slide-films are not "poor man's movie" any more th; magazines are the "ptior m book." Slide-films and motion pi tures arc distinct audio-visual m just as books and magazines different printed media. Each has own conception, methods, cconoi ics. writing problems, editing, pi duction and marketing techniques. Furthermore, use of their uniq qualities can result in s''^al slidi] films. The visuals can be as uniqi; as any combination of creati artists, still photographers, and an mation cameramen can conceive-] and that's pretty unique. The sound can be as original that of any i>ther audio mediu Petiple like Dick Bruner are doii remarkable things with totally innt: vative conceptions of slidc-fili sound tracks. The real key to good slide-filn' is the way we conceive them the way sve think i>f them. We mu: begin by treating them as separal iilenlifiable imilies. with their ow specific ad\.inlages. disadvantage ' l'iiiiiili>\" is u iiinnlhly ciiliiiiin hiiiUh fiffliimf Mriplwrilrr. hy Siiintinil Sohel, <i Sew Yi'rk hiisril 46 BUSINESS SCREEN