Motion Picture Herald (Mar-Apr 1945)

Why PostWar Reseating Should be Planned for Now 1. TO GET NEW CHAIRS IN GOOD TIME 2. TO PREPARE A BETTER SEATING SCHEMI OF the things that the wartime theatre has needed but hasn't bee: given, auditorium chairs probably top the list in importance. Proje( tion equipment replacement parts and supplies are more critical; the Go ernment has allowed these, to keep theatres running. But pleas for an allc ment of material for the manufacture of a certain amount of new seatir have been consistently denied — theatre and seating industry advisoi boards have been courteously heard, but that has been all. . . . We kno! of no theatre that has had to close because its seating collapsed; indee the chairs of most theatres have been bearing up the weight of more pe sons per day than ever before. The more important significance of tl situation lies in its effect upon the demand for new seating when restri tions are removed. That demand will come all of a sudden, and in tr mendous dimensions. Millions of chairs will be wanted, quickly. . . . 1\ seating industry will need lots of time to turn them out. Fortunatel it will be able to approach a normal rate of production, it is estimate in from 60 to 90 days. That depends, of course, upon the availability materials. But in any case, the size of the demand means a long wait f hundreds of theatres, and longest for those that do not order early. RESEATING on such a scale presents an extraordinary opportunity f the theatre business to extend the better standards of vision, trafl convenience, and comfort. Reseating under these circumstances urg examination of existing seating plans, looking toward practical revisi* of them in the interests of more effective exhibition. This may sugge changes calling for substantial planning that must be completed befo chairs can be intelligently ordered. What to look for in such an exar ination, and how a reseating job may readily include plan and even auditorium floor slope changes are discussed in this article. By BEN SCHLANGfc thousands of existing theatres will be reseated when auditorium chairs again are available. In many instances the installation of new seating will be part of a general modernization project ; in others auditorium conditions may be such as to allow the exhibitor to be content merely to replace the old chairs without giving any thought to factors closely related to effective seating. In either case it would be a mistake to appropriate a large sum of money for the purchase of new chairs without considering another seating plan, to see if a new arrangement, one that is entirely feasible economically and otherwise, would not add to the value of the installation. Actually, auditorium seating is a matter of auditorium design. Reseating can be approached, within limits, from a similar point of view. While we are reseating, it is only practical to take as much advantage as possible of advances in theatre planning realized since the original installation was made. What we are primarily after in restudying an auditorium floor for reseating is better vision and greater comfort and convenience. These improvements, however, affect the chair itself — its life and maintenance. Finish materials, internal supports of upholstery, chair mechanisms are subject to greater strains when the seating plan and the floor pitches are such as to cause constant shifting in a seat to obtain an unobstructed view "of the screen. Besides replacement of worn-out, obsolete or shabby chairs, reseating should accomplish (if these are not attained in the original plan) unobstructed vision of the screen, efficient movement of traffic under both normal circumstances and those of emergency, rapid movement of patrons between rows with minimum disturbance to persons seated. To accomplish these important features it may be necessary to reduce the capacity ; however, it is now highly questionable whether a larger capacity at the expense of good vision and comfort represents sound business principles. PLANNING FOR BETTER VISION How may these conditions be achieved in reseating an auditorium in which the original plan has not provided them? Let us consider first vision of the screen. There are three factors: (1) floor pitches, (2) screen size and position, and (3) the lateral (cross-wise) position of the seats in one row in relation to those of the row immediately ahead. The latter (3) determines whether a patron must look over a head in the row immediately in front, or between two heads in that row and over a head in the following row. By staggering the seating vision between heads in the next row forward can be provided with less incline of the floor than otherwise would be necessary. Indeed, it reduces the floor pitches by about one half, the precise amount varying according to the type of floor slope employed. Most theatres built before 1930, and many built since, provided clearance over the heads of patrons two rows ahead, with the person seated immediately in front creating an obstruction. This condition was once considered quite generally in the business to be "good enough," it being assumed that people did not mind shifting in their seats to obtain an effective view of the screen between heads im mediately in front. This attitude is disa pearing. Quite a few theatres construct! shortly before the war had floor and seatii plans which provided unobstructed vision the screen without recourse to such shiftin They represent an important advance whii must be established as standard practice aft the war. To have to shift around in one seat in order to see the screen properly is u comfortable ; it defeats all the efforts of man facturers and of exhibitors themselves to pr vide chairs of comfortable design. In reseating one of course does not have tl latitude enjoyed in planning a new theati Fortunately, in some existing theatres o structions of vision can be adequately remove by staggering the chairs, perhaps also changir the position of the screen. In others, howeve BETTER THEATRES, APRIL 7, 19