Movie Makers (Jan-Dec 1953)

CloseupS— What filmers are doing And now, for those who are interested, we present the facts and figures of the Ten Best competition of 1952. The League's board of judges examined in that contest a total of 51,750 feet of film. In bulk footage, this figure shows an increase of 1,398 feet over 1951's total. In projection terms, 1952's operation represents 34^/2 hours of unbroken screen time — with no time out for threading and rewinding films, setting up, rehearsing and synchronizing musical scores. Our rough recollection is that these latter tasks often took longer than running the film itself. Something, obviously, needs to be done toward standardizing cue and sync marks in amateur-film audio arrangements. As to number of entries, last year (1951) had seen an increase of 6l/2 percent over the 1950 competition. In 1952 the increase over 1951's total was 1.2 percent, or exactly one more entry. In terms of 8mm. vs. 16mm., color vs. black and white, the 1952 entries (in comparison to those of '51) break down as shown herewith. ALL FILMS SUBMITTED 1951 1952 dmm. 25.9 29.2 16mm. 74.1 70.8 Color 90.1 87.9 B & W 9.9 12.1 ALL FILMS HONORED 8mm. 23.0 31.8 16mm. 77.0 68.1 Color 96.1 91.0 B & W 3.9 9.0 THE TEN BEST 8mm. 10.0 20.0 16mm. 90.0 80.0 Color 100.0 80.0 B & W .0 20.0 HONORABLE MENTION 8mm. 31.2 41.6 16mm. 68.8 58.3 Color 93.7 100.0 B & W 6.3 .0 Clearly, the outstanding fact which should be noted in these 1952 figures is the continuing ascendency of the 8mm. competitor. In 1950, 35.5 percent of the total number of entries in the contest were on 8mm. film; but only 11.6 percent of them won through to honors. In 1951, this ratio stood at 25.9 percent 8mm. films entered, with 23 percent of them honored. And now, in 1952, we find that 29.2 percent of all films entered were on 8mm. stock, but that they copped 31.8 percent of the Ten Best and Honorable Mention awards. Not shown in the figures above are the following facts . . . Among the total of 22 producers honored (10 Ten Best, 12 Honorable Mentions), 14 of them had never placed before in any ACL competition. The newcomers won 6 of the Ten Best, 8 of 12 Honorable Mentions. Among the total of 22 films honored. 16 (or 72.7%) were accompanied with sound of some kind, to be reproduced in some manner. Six winners, therefore, won through without sound in any form. Of the 16 films (in 1952) which did use sound, 11 (or 68.7%) of them presented it on magnetic tape; 3 (or 18.7%) of them on magnetic stripe, and 2 (or 12.5%) of them on an optical sound track. Presented in the same order, directly comparative figures for sound usage in 1951 show: total use — 69.2% ; tape — 22 percent ; optical sound track — 22.2 percent. Two omissions from our previous reports on the Ten Best sound components should be noted at once. Gone completely from the 1952 winner's circle is the amateur's original audio system — direct disc playing via the double turntable. Also gone is the use of magnetic wire — a lack which we are sure no audiophile will long lament. At the risk of seeming to rationalize these omissions too readily, we nevertheless do feel that they are easily explained. The satisfactory playing of a direst sound on disc accompaniment was an exacting and arduous task — and one which had to be repeated in all its complexity at each successive screening. Thus, with the advent of the first of the magnetic recording methods (the wire), it was natural that amateurs should turn to it as a solution of their disc-system difficulties. There then followed magnetic tape which, by its superior audio qualities, began almost immediately to replace wire. Thus, although turntables (single or double) are still in the background of any amateur sound scoring, the end-product presented for playback is now predominantly a magnetic tape. What, then, of amateur movies' newest audio method — magnetic sound on film? Well less than a year from its first birthday as the 1952 contest passed its deadline, magnetic on film (it seems to us) was surprisingly prevalent. For roughly 10 percent of all the films entered in the contest carried a magnetic sound stripe — that is, 8 films out of 83 entries. Three of these 8 were to comprise 18.7 percent of the winning films with sound — thus immediately outstripping optical sound for the amateur (12.5%), to the surprise (surely) of no one. . . . However, every amateur should note carefully that the mere presentation of magnetic sound on one's picture has proved no guarantee of a winning production. Only 3 (or 37.5%) of this, the first year's crop of 8, came through with honors. Fundamental good filming still is — and always will be — of paramount importance. JANUARY 1953 And now, as is our January custom, we present for your delectation such personal data as we have been able to elicit from (and about) the year's Maxim Award winner — in this case, winners. Tim and Delores Lawler (and they really are a filming team) have been making amateur movies since November. 1943. Their camera was then, and still is, a Bolex H-16; and, as Tim tells you in his current article, they squeeze the most out of its considerable capabilities by adapting their battery of Contax lenses to its turret. Our Timmy, concerning our review of which in 1945 Mr. L. is so shatteringly mnemonic, seems to have been their first award winner on any contest level — in this case, the Kenosha (Wise.) Movie and Slide Club. (They are still members of this group.) Other local winners were Trail in Two Cities and Pastorale, both undated on our data sheet. However, in 1949 ACL took a look at Trilogy and promptly tapped it for Honorable Mention — a judgment which was reinforced in 1950 by Isle of the Dead, which reached the Ten Best circle. It was, we gather, in the summer of 1951 that Duck Soup began taking form — as Mr. Lawler so engagingly describes in his story From Review to Reward. And you know what happened in '52. On the more personal side, you should know — both from this story and from our review of Duck Soup — that the Lawlers had five children when the film was made. Well, they now have six, a second daughter, name of Bridget, having been added within the past year. Furthermore, of the five whose names we itemized in December, the thenbaby's name is Barry — not Gary, as we gave it. We took it phonetically off the tape track — and we regret the slight slip. Tim Lawler, when not making movies, rearing children or building a house for them, apparently with his own hands, is a special test engineer in the Aircraft Division of the Nash-Kelvinator Corporation. In reply to our routine query concerning his employment, he has gratuitously added: "Delores is unemployed. I have tried lo instill a little ambition in her to take on some outside job to help fill out her day. But so far I have been unsuccessful." W e leave you, one and all, with that thought for the New Year. But before the old year fades too far into obscurity, all here at ACL send our warmest thanks to all of you everywhere for your myriad Christmas greetings. They were, happily, far, far too plentiful to acknowledge in person. IifiDti!'-|i.L4fe®fr .