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.
CHAPTER 11
SOUND REDUCTION PRINTING
The possibility of adding sound to 16-mm films was considered almost as soon as 35-mm talking pictures became a workable commercial proposition. At that time the problems which still remained unsolved in the professional sound-on-film systems led most investigators to the conclusion that 16-mm sound films would only be possible if some form of disc recording, similar to that used in the earliest studio productions, were adapted for use in conjunction with the normal 16-mm silent films. Two main points which appeared to justify this conclusion were (a) the shorter film length available to accommodate the high frequency recordings and (b) the extra cost to the user of pictures made with the speed of 16-mm film projection (in terms of pictures per second) increased to be equal to that of the 35-mm film.
At that time it was thought that a high frequency response up to 6,000-cycles per second was the maximum obtainable with 35-mm equipment. Since the speed of this film had already been increased from the silent rate of 16-pictures per second up to 24-pictures per second solely to provide a greater distance in which to accommodate these high frequencies, it was argued that, even if the speed of 16-mm films were also increased to 24-pictures per second, the available film length in which to accommodate high frequencies would only be 2/5ths of that provided with 35-mm film. The ratio is, of course governed by the length of film provided to accommodate the respective pictures in each case and causes a 400-ft length of 16-mm film to have a projection time equal to that obtained with a 1,000-ft length of 35-mm film. It will be realised that if, at that time, this argument was true, the highest frequency which could be reproduced from 16-mm film must have been 2/5ths of 6,000cycles the top reproduction with 35-mm equipment that is, a frequency of 2,400 cycles per second and, whilst this would have adequately covered most dialogue recordings, it would have greatly reduced the quality of musical and sound effects. Tt must
311