Journal of the Society of Motion Picture Engineers (1930-1949)

ing magnetic equipment in the projection rooms. 2. It introduces 1 00% magnetic operation without causing any disturbance in the editorial department. 3. It eliminates photographic rerecording masters and substitutes a magnetic sound track for re-recording purposes. Economic Considerations Experience with this recording method at Columbia Pictures has shown that there is a definite reduction in cost as compared to the normal negative-positive photographic recording method as practiced at the studio. However, due to the downward trend in costs of magnetic striped film and also due to such alternate methods as the use of 17^mm instead of 35mm and the substitution of a lower-cost fine-grain positive for the premium 5372 emulsion, it is difficult to set down in figures what the ultimate savings might be in the method of recording described in this paper. A considerable saving results from the elimination of master photographic rerecording tracks which amounts to an average figure of $500 per picture at Columbia. It is too early yet to thoroughly evaluate completely the full effect and future potentialities of this particular method. This method was originally developed as an interim measure designed to promote the gradual education of the film editors at Columbia Pictures in the handling of magnetic films prior to the introduction of 100% magneticrecording methods. It is quite possible, however, that because of the advantages shown above this method may eventually develop into a strong competitor to the all-magnetic recording method which is the ultimate objective of the motion picture industry. The authors wish to acknowledge the invaluable aid of Lloyd Russell of Columbia Pictures in getting this recording system into practical use in the studio. They also wish to thank Reeves Soundcraft Corp. for their cooperation in making this film available and in endeavoring to meet the particular studio requirements for the successful operation of this photo-magnetic film method. References 1. C. C. Davis, J. G. Frayne and E. W. Templin, "Multichannel magnetic film recording and reproducing unit," Jour. SMPTE, 58: 105-118, Feb. 1952. 2. L. I. Carey and Frank Moran, "Pushpull direct-positive recording," Jour. SMPTE, 58: 67-70, Jan. 1952. 3. G. R. Crane, J. G. Frayne and E. W. Templin, "Supplementary magnetic facilities for photographic sound systems," Jour. SMPTE, 54: 315-327, Mar. 1950. 4. Eastman Kodak Company, Common Cause of Damage to 35mm Release Prints, 1952. Discussion J. E. Aiken (Naval Photographic Center): Many studios prefer the use of variabledensity sound tracks. I would like to ask Dr. Frayne if there is any reason why this method may not be used with variabledensity sound tracks. While I have the floor, I would like to ask a second question. What precautions should be taken in the film laboratory in processing and are any changes in techniques and equipment required in the film processing laboratory? Dr. Frayne: There's no reason whatever why you could not use variabledensity instead of variable-area, provided that you have a variable-density directpositive. There was a paper published in the Journal about a month ago by O. L. Dupy, which I had the privilege of presenting for him at the Chicago Convention, in which is outlined a direct-positive variable-density system which is currently being used on an experimental basis at M-G-M. If that or some similar method works out, there is no reason why it cannot be used. The problems are the same for either method as far as equipment is 396 November 1952 Journal of the SMPTE Vol. 59