International projectionist (Jan-Dec 1939)

Television and the Motion Picture Theatre (Continued from page 19) portion of the latter's income as against a minimum flat guarantee? But do the distributors offer to make up the deficits of the innumerable "ham" pictures of B, C, D, E and F grades? The exhibitor just must be given a chance to make some money so that he can refurbish his house, employ the best mechanical facilities, better sell his film program and do in ever so much better fashion the many other things essential to the successful conduct of a theatre. More money must be alloted to the industry's technical forces so that pictures can be improved. Strenuous efforts should be made to improve color films and to bring out of the laboratories new developments — such as stereoscopic motion pictures — to the end that the industry may be better armed to fight for its share of the entertainment dollar. Someone well versed in both the motion picture and electronic arts (the writer can think of no better nominee than Dr. A. N. Goldsmith) should be appointed to look into the technical, economic and legal aspects of the relationship of motion pictures to television. This is a "must" procedure. The exhibition field must be accorded every aid in what will develop into a battle for its life. If the aforementioned steps are not taken, and shortly, the film theatre field is doomed. The opinion has been advanced that man being a gregarious animal is an important factor in the theatre's favor in its battle for patronage against visualsound broadcasting. Certain it is that people will not be expected to huddle around a television receiver in a semidarkened room and give fixed attention to a comparatively small moving image hour after hour, night after night; but it cannot be denied that anything that tends to keep people in the home is bad medicine for film theatres. Watch a few box-offices these Sunday and Thursday evenings. • Opportunity for Labor The greatest enemy of the film theatre today, apart from the policies pursued by the industry itself, the writer holds, is bridge. Before you laugh just stop and consider what a hold this strictly home game has on millions of people in this country. Next in order as boxoffice poison are the innumerable chance games flourishing in many cities, in the very forefront of which are the churches which resound to pious platitudes Sunday morning anent the evils of the flesh and gambling, while in the evening the walls echo and re-echo to the lingo of Bingo and Bango. Just as an example, in the city of Cleveland the nightly Bingo games are estimated to draw an attendance of about 70,000 nightly, with games running rampant in every block. Such things as this are the concern of everybody in the industry, and a conference of producers, distributors, ex hibitors and Labor to consider how best to attack the problems posed by all forms of box-office poison would be not at all amiss. Projectionists and stagehands should do all right in the television field itself. Television, if handled properly, is just a wooly lamb ambling down the street and just waiting to be shorn. In Radio City, New York, there are today six motion picture projectionists employed. Since motion picture film will be extensively used in television broadcasting, it seems safe to say that there will be about 3000 projection jobs in television stations: and on a three-shift basis this number may run as high as 5000. This is plenty of jobs in any language. How this angle develops will depend in large measure upon how swiftly and efficiently Labor moves in upon the television field, a topic which is not for discussion herein. Nobody in the television field will say "No" to Labor, because the stakes are too big. To repeat: What will be the effect of television upon the motion picture theatre? The writer's opinion is that, after two years or so, it assuredly will do the theatre field no good, but the extent of the damage can be held to a very small total if only the picture industry will bestir itself promptly to save its own life. In short, the answer to the foregoing question is in the lap of the picture industry itself, from the most noted producer in Hollywood right down to the doorman of a small-town theatre. Wall St. Estimate of 1939 Film Business Prospects The Wall Street Journal in its yearly forecast edition dealt extensively with the film business. Key sentences from the leading article : "The movies probably will have a much more profitable year in 1939 than in 1938, which might be called a year of expiation." "... the combination of lower expenditures and higher income probably will result in first half profits nicely ahead of a year ago." "It begins to look as though a lengthy process of revamping and readjustment of policies and methods of doing business is just beginning to get under way." "Hollywood has made the error of believing that money can be used as a substitute for brains, talent and hard work." "The industry is also probably carrying the load of too many pictures." "Another trend that may have important influence on the industry is the growing movement toward producing good Class B films." Favor Theatre Divorcement "... it is interesting to note that last year the only producing companies that made substantial profits from the film division of their business were those that had the fewest theatres." "It may be assumed from this that theatre chains are not essential to the effective operation of a film producing company and that the industry might be benefited in the long run by the divorce of the production and exhibition divisions." "At least one management is understood to be perfectly willing to separate these two divisions, and eventually may take action along this line, even if not compelled to by the courts." Erpi Foreign Department Deal on all Room Equipment Negotiations are in progress between erpi and leading American manufacturers for the distribution, by erpi's foreign distributing companies, of complete projection room equipment in approximately fifty foreign territories. "Because of a pronounced tendency on the part of exhibitors in foreign countries to prefer transacting business with some one establishment when purchasing such equipment," the announcement states, "Erpi will begin distributing a complete line of projectors, lamps, screens, converters, etc., American manufacture. In the past our foreign organizations have handled only W. E. sound equipment, but expediency has caused us not infrequently to handle other kinds of projection equipment." G. E. Process Removes Glare, Reduces Light Loss Glare from reflected light, which has made it difficult to see pictures framed under glass at certain angles, has been removed by a new process developed by General Electric. Similar results are obtained any place where glare is caused by light reflections on glass. The process still is in a laboratory, stage. The refractive index of any type glass is easily determined. This known, the process consists of building or attaching to the glass a very thin transparent film of about four millionths of an inch, or exactly one quarter wave-length of light, in thickness. As light falls upon the film, rays are reflected from both the upper and lower surfaces. With the film exactly one quarter wave-length in thickness, those rays coming from the outer or upper surface are equal in intensity and opposite in phase to those rays reflected from the lower surface, thus counteract one another and no light is reflected. We can measure or determine the exact thickness of the film at any time, although it may be thinner than any substance we know of today, by an optical process. See Widespread Application The non-glare treatment of glass also promises to have a wide spread application with all other type lenses. It is commonly known that reflection from the surface of any lens causes from 4 to 5 per cent loss in the light transmitted. Since this is true of both front and back surfaces, there is a light loss of at least 8% in each lens. With some of the better type cameras, using three or four lenses, the loss of light reaching the plate or negative is 25 to 35%. With telescopes and submarine periscopes, where a larger number of lenses and prisms are used, the light loss is still greater. In some periscopes it is as much as 75%. With the exception of the slight loss by absorption in the glass itself, the film-treated lenses would transmit 100 per cent of the light. In an actual laboratory test, a piece 22 INTERNATIONAL PROJECTIONIST