Handbook of projection for theatre managers and motion picture projectionists ([1922])

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.

MANAGERS AND PROJECTIONISTS 299 which have within themselves an extraordinary drawing power, hence we may reduce the loss by at least one-third, making it thirty dollars. But even that is a very serious matter, unless compensated for. And right there, Mr. Exhibitor, we ask you to think very carefully. You will, we believe, agree that a clear cut, undistorted picture will be more pleasing to your audiences than will the heavily distorted picture which is not in the sharpest possible focus (two faults which are the invariable accompaniment of the long projection distance and the top of the balcony projection room location) and that the more pleasing picture, or more pleasing general screen result must and will operate to the benefit of the box office. Is it not therefore reasonable to suppose that by the sacrifice of some of your high-priced orchestra seats (which will only be really sacrificed when you have a capacity house) you will sell a greater number of seats at times when your theatre is not normally full. In other words, while the perfect screen result cannot increase the business of your capacity shows, it can and will increase the business at the shows which do not do a capacity business. The fact is that the perfect screen result upon a main floor location will sell more than enough additional seats to make up for those lost, while the front-of-balcony location will sell the additional seats without entailing any sacrifice in seating capacity. One objection advanced as against the main floor location is that it necessarily restricts the size of the projection room. True, but immediately below usually is plenty of available room in the basement, in which re-winding can be done, repairs made and where motor generators, etc., can be located, the room below being connected with the projection room by an incline or a stair. The main floor location is of course usually only available in theatres planned to accommodate it, because the methods for disposing of smoke and gas must be taken care of in the structure of the house. Otherwise it would be difficult, if not impossible, to install the necessary ducts without sadly marring the beauty of the theatre. Summed up, the rear of the auditorium at the top of the balcony is usually a miserable projection room location, from the viewpoint of excellence in screen results. It generally gives projection pitch far in excess of that permissible in good practice. It usually gives a too-long projection distance, which operates to produce heavy waste of