Author
|
Topic: Standard 8 projection speed
|
|
|
|
Rob Koeling
Master Film Handler
Posts: 399
From: Brighton, UK
Registered: Jun 2003
|
posted March 23, 2006 08:01 AM
Craig,
Silent films and projection speed is an incredible can of worms. People disagree on this a lot, but seem to agree on one thing and that is the fact that there isn't a single answer to that question. The topic is raised every year or so on the silent film usenet group alt.movies.silent. See this thread that summarises the points that are mostly made: [url= http://groups.google.co.uk/group/alt.movies.silent/browse_frm/thread/869acef17a5a1804/3f2eaa33d16f34b1?q=%22projection+speed%22&rnum=1#3f2eaa33d16f34b1]a.m.s.[/url]
As a general rule of thumb:
For early silents use 18fps, for late silents use 24fps. If you have a Eumig to run your R8 on, adjust the speed until you're happy with what you see.
If you watch late silents like Buster Keaton's 'The General' or Murnau's 'Sunrise' (both 1927), there is absolutely no doubt about that they should be run at 24fps. I would run 'The Gold Rush' at 24fps (it is also a late silent (1925).
Chaplin's 'Shanghaied' is quite a bit earlier (1917), but still I would run it slightly faster than 18fps. I'm sure 24fps would not look natural. It was probably shot at 18fps, but also (probably) intended to be projected slightly faster.
One last thing: don't trust the running times in the IMDB. These are often given by people who look it up on the back of their video copy. That is not particularly accurate. If you look at the technical specs in the IMDB, you see the length listed in meters. That is mostly more accurate. The running time than just depends on how fast you run it.
At the film society I used to run, we once showed a Russian silent sci-fi film: 'Aelita' (1924). The pianist refused to play for it at 18fps, he was afraid that the film would drag. He was absolutely right. It was slightly too fast at 24fps, but people would have fallen asleep at 18fps.
- Rob
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|