Cinematographic annual : 1930 (1930)

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.

190 CINEMATOGRAPHIC ANNUAL Photographers who have used Grandeur recommend use of a lens approximately 2/3 longer in Grandeur than in 35 millimeter. Sound men should be interested in Grandeur for it gives them a sound track 7 millimeters wide as against 2 millimeters of the standard. This naturally permits much greater volume-range in recording and gives a better quality. This in either Variable Density or Variable Area processes, but particularly in the latter. The projectionist receives much from Grandeur, also, for the projector for Grandeur use has many features particularly pleasing to the operator. Chief among them is the fact that the film runs cooler than standard, for the shutter is between the light source and the film. The audiences thus far appear to have taken to the wide film, too. They receive many thrills in watching pictures made on this width. Chief among the outstanding audience features is the effect of pseudo-stereoscopic depth that is displayed. It makes for more naturalness in the picture. The wide proportion removes the consciousness of the dead black borderline. Strangely enough, there is an absence of grain unless you get very close to the screen. So much for Grandeur. It is here, and has its advantages. Whether or not it will be accepted as a standard is a question no one at present can answer. Mr. Fear, inventor of the new Fearless 65 millimeter camera, which is being used in actual production by one big company, claims that he has the ideal width. And there are many in the picture industry who agree with him. We will not dispute him; neither will we dispute the Fox organization, nor any of the others who are experimenting in an effort to arrive at a film width that will add to the development of the industry. We are only attempting to set down the facts as we find them. Thus far this writer has not seen any film shot in 65 millimeters, but it seems very probable, in fact it must be so, that the 65 millimeter width has tremendous advantages over the 35 millimeter standard of the present. The fact that one of the largest producing companies in the industry is using this camera at this width indicates that there must be a lot of merit attached. Also the fact that several other large companies while not publicly announcing their plans are known to have decided upon the use of 65 millimeter width film would indicate that the final decision as to a new standard lies practically between the 65 millimeter and the 70 millimeter widths. Mr. Fear declares the 65 millimeter width is "the ideal width for perfect picture reproduction. As in the case of the Grandeur film, the 65 millimeter width gives the great advantage of a wider sound track, which naturally, makes for better tone quality and greater volume-range in recording. Then, too, in the matter of the "frame," the 65 millimeter has advantages over the 35 millimeter standard that has been breaking the hearts of the cameramen for months. The "frame" of the 65 millimeter width is 22 mm. x 45 mm., which is claimed by Fear