Motion Picture Herald (Apr-Jun 1931)

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.

66 Better Theatres Section May 9, 1931 of course the same results on their equipment as on mine, thus proving to the exchange that there was nothing wrong with our equipment. To my surprise there was absolutely no in-and-out of focus efifect at the Florida. "The Florida is equipped with Simplex projectors and Hall & Connolly high intensity lamps. Not satisfied with the experiment, I took the same print to another house, using the same equipment as at the Capitol. At this house I got the same results as at the Capitol, a very pronounced in-and-out effect. Can you explain to me why the same print will project O.K. on the Florida equipment and give a very pronounced in-and-out effect on the other two equipments? I have checked our equipment and find the gate tension, aperture plate tracks, sprockets all O.K. In fact, I don't see any difference between the condition of the Florida's equipment and my own, except the type of lamps used. I would appreciate your explanation of the problem." I would like to receive comment on this from other projectionists, who may have encountered and discovered the cause for such a condition. First of all, I would suggest to Brother McFarlin that he secure a steel straight-edge and make sure that his aperture plate track surfaces are perfectly straight and level. It is not impossible that in putting on an aperture plate a bit of dirt may have got behind it and buckled these parts slightly, though it does not seem possible that that would be the case in all of the projectors used. It should • • TESTED . • APPROVED . • SPECIFIED . • BY ALL DEPARTMENTS OF THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT SAMUELS bTABILARC MOTOR-GENERATOR SAMUELS ILENT SAMUELS aulodrape CURTAIN MACHINE ASK UNCLE SAM— HE KNOW! AUTOMATIC DEVICES COMPANY 739 HAMILTON STREET, ALLENTOWN, PA. nevertheless be checked up on. I am assuming, of course, that the projector aperture plate tracks and tension shoes are not worn, and that the tension springs apply the right amount of pressure. (See general instruction No. 9, Page 636, Volume 2, of the Bluebook. ) If all these things are found to be in good order, then the only thing I can think of which might set up such a condition would be that the spot at the aperture is very much hotter than the one at the Florida. This may be caused by the fact that he is using a front shutter, whereas the Florida equipment employs rear shutter. If any of our readers can suggest any , other reason for this, I will be glad to hear from them. RIGHT AND WRONG A FEW days ago I overheard an argument between a projectionist, and a theatre manager. The manager was the projectionist's boss. The argument i was a hot one, and in my opinion the projectionist was right, as I later told the manager. However, the manager had discharged the projectionist and would not recede from his position. I was reminded of some lines in my scrapbook, which read as follows: Here lies the body of old Sam Grey, IV ho died disputing the right of way; He was right, dead right as he sped along. But he^s just as dead as though he'd been wrong. The argument arose because the manager had peremptorally ordered the projectionist to come early enough to look over and make all necessary repairs to films received from the exchange. The ^ projectionist very naturally and very rightly refused to do this unless he received extra pay for it, advising the manager it was the duty of the exchange inspectors to inspect and repair film, sending them to the theatre in condition for immediate use. It seems that film in very poor state of repair had been received from the exchange upon several occasions. The manager, instead of refusing to accept the films, or else withholding a portion of the rental :; price as pay for attending to what most emphatically was the exchange inspector's work, tried to force his projectionist to do it gratis. This the projectionist very rightly declined to do. He was right, but just the same he was without a job, and in this instance there was no union to protect him. I have told managers before, and again tell them, that they pay for film in mechanical condition to project. That is to say, there should be no ripped sprocket holes, no loose splices or other fault which will operate to prevent the films being projected with safety without repairs. That is a condition the theatre pays for. It is, in the very nature of things, a part of the service presumed to be rendered by the exchange. 1!