The Nickelodeon (Feb-Sep 1909)

28 THE NICKELODEON. Vol. II, No. 1. Of Interest to the Tracl( By L. F. Cook Power s Dissolving v lew^ AttacLment The Dissolving View Stereopticon Attachment, manufactured by the Nicholas Power Company, New York, N. Y., is meeting with unprecedented popularity. The price of the attachment is so reasonable and it adds so much to the pleasing effect of the stereopticon pictures, that it is rapidly being adopted by the more progressive managers who are striving to take advantage of every refinement in their equipment which will tend to raise the standard of their exhibitions. To fit the dissolving view attachment to the Cameragraph, no change in the moving picture apparatus is necessary, except the substitution of the wide table board for that which comprises a part of the moving picture machine. The moving picture mechanism and magazines must be transferred to the wide table board and the lamphouse detached from its sliding ways and transferred to the special sliding ways provided on the wide base board furnished with the dissolving attachment. The wide table board is provided with leg sockets on its under side adapted to receive the legs of the moving picture machine, and is also provided with the necessary bolts for securing the moving picture mechanism and Power's i^issolving Attachment. magazines in position. The switches to control the current supplying the lamps in both lamphouses may be attached to the under surface of the table board at any convenient point, and the connections of the lamp and rheostat are made in the usual way. The Cameragraph with the dissolving attachment occupies a space 4 feet long, 2J^ feet wide and from 5^ to 6^ feet high, according to the adjustment of the supporting legs of the apparatus. The top of the elevated lamphouse rises only a few inches above the top of the upper film magazine of the moving picture machine, and the total width of the entire combined apparatus is only eight inches greater than that occupied by the Cameragraph without the dissolving view attachment. It will thus be noted that the entire apparatus can be installed in an ordinary operating booth, while a separate dissolving view apparatus would require a specially constructed operating room, and would necessitate the services of two operators to insure good results. "riallberg Incandescent Lamp Economizer A device of much interest to users of incandescent lamps, especially for lobby and sign lighting, where four and eight candlepower lamps are used, is the Hallberg incandescent lamp economizer and new low candlepower lamp. To give an illustration of the great value claimed for this system, the following example may be given : A moving picture or other theater usually has from 25 to 400 four to eight candlepower lamps in the lobby and sign. Assuming that 150 four candlepower lamps are installed, the ct:rrent consumed is 20 watts per lamp, or 3 kilowatts per hour for 150 four candlepower lamps. At the 10-cent rate, 30 cents per hour for three hours per night and 26 days, the cost is about $23.40 per month. With the Hallberg system the lamps are said to require only five watts each per hour, showing a saving of about 75 per cent on the bill. This would reduce the bill of $23.40 per month to $5.85, giving a saving on the current bill of $17.55 per month. Besides this saving, the light is claimed to be white instead of yellow, and consequently more attractive. The new economizer and lamps are ready for immediate delivery, and thousands of lamps are already in service, giving excellent satisfaction. Hallberg Lamp Economizer. Moving Pictures as Proof A curious and deeply interesting point of law has been decided by the appellate division in Brooklyn. Some time ago a boy was injured in a street car accident. On the trial the company produced moving pictures of the boy, with the brace off his leg, running and jumping, the purpose, of course, being to refute the testimony that his injuries had crippled him. Judge Aspinwall told the jury to disregard this evidence, as it might be possible for the operators of the machine by manipulation of the speed gear to show the lad performing impossible stunts. Now the appellate division upholds the ruling of the trial judge. It may well be asked whether similar objections do not apply to any use of photography in evidence. It is known that an expert photographer can produce almost any result he pleases. In a murder trial a few years ago,