Return to Kinemacolor Project Page
Re-creating Kinemacolor on the
screen
by
David Cleveland and Brian
Pritchard
The idea
The idea
of re-creating Kinemacolor came out of some experiments attempting to colour a
new black and white print section of Claude Friese-Greene’s New Natural Colour
Process of the mid 1920s. For this experiment, to try and find out how
it was achieved, an original alternate frame staining machine made by W.
Vinten of London was put back into use to colour alternate frames of print
film red and green, followed by the projection of this print at 32 frames per
second to attempt to see what the picture on the screen actually looked like.
This was only partially successful, mainly because it
proved difficult to get an even colouring across the whole frame. So how
it was actually done so well (we looked carefully at the only surviving
original stained nitrate print) still remains a bit of a mystery. But at
least it showed us how the projected film, with the colours, looked on the
screen. From this came the ambition to re-create a successful, though
short-lived colour system, known as Kinemacolor.
One of the things that worry us is the lack of
understanding and knowledge of colour systems of the past. The fashion
today is to copy these so they resemble images we see on the cinema screen and
television today. This is fine for new audiences who want to see these
films for the first time. These restorations are however, new films and
should be acknowledged and catalogued as such.
For technical archivists doing this work, there are only
modern ways of dealing with colour. We only have colour inter-negs and
colour positive stocks, which have been refined over the years for present day
use, so when copying from one system to another, the new version will
naturally take on some of the characteristics of Eastman colour or whatever
colour stock is being used.
Likewise, mixing computer technology (scanning, digital
restoring, recording out onto film) all add different yet subtle differences
to the screened image compared with how the film was originally seen.
The next generation of restoration, when film is not the end product, but
files - along with digital presentation – will take us just that bit further
away from what audiences once saw.
This is inevitable, and we are not saying there is anything
wrong with this, as this is how things will be.
However, during restoration (and conservation, and
preservation) the technical archivist needs to know how the original colour
system was made to work, how it was duplicated, how it was shown on the screen
and what the audiences actually saw.
This can be achieved by a good library in an archive,
original equipment on display (not necessarily in working order), occasional
talks and lectures on particular colour systems, emulsions, speed of
projection etc, and where they fit into motion picture history, and, if
possible, reconstructions of film making, editing sound and picture,
laboratory procedures, and presentation.
Recreating a showing as near as possible to how films were
presented is fraught with problems, and of course some parts cannot be
replicated (such as a nitrate print). However, we think it is always worth
trying, as it makes one realise the difficulties engineers, cameramen,
laboratory staff, and projectionists had getting the film before the audience,
in fact making the system work at all.
Here we are only dealing with one particular colour system
used in the cinema. There is so much more – such as sound, widescreen
systems, home cinema and home moviemaking, non theatric presentations,
television in 405 days etc etc – that need to be looked at before viewers in
the future (100 years and more) have no idea where moving images came from,
how and why they were made, that they have become processed, homogenised,
synthesised, purified. We probably cannot help this happening, but having the
knowledge, understanding, feeling, and technical ability, technical archivists
can help steer the processes of conservation, preservation, and restoration.
Taking just one example of a colour system from the early
part of the twentieth century, Kinemacolor, we thought to demonstrate as near
as possible how this worked and roughly what the images looked like on the
screen.
Finding a projector
To re-create Kinemacolor, we considered the best way to do
this was to present a modern print (we cannot show an original nitrate print
for safety reasons) on an original Kinemacolor projector.
Because Kinemacolor was a
system of photographing on black and white film alternate frames through red
and green filters at high speed - 32 frames per second – and showing at
the same high frame rate on a projector with similar revolving red and green
filters, special heavy duty projectors had to be manufactured. We located one
of these original machines, and sought permission to use it from the
custodian. The Principal Museums Officer of the Williamson Art Gallery and
Museum, Colin Simpson, was sympathetic to our plan and helped us by loaning
this 1910 projector in the possession of the museum in Birkenhead.
The Kinemacolor projector was in pieces, seized up, and
generally in need of attention. We managed to get it to Brian’s workshop,
where much work was needed to get it into running order.
The projector had originally been installed in the Argyll
Theatre at Birkenhead, but when Kinemacolor as a colour system faded away
around 1916, it seems the projector was converted for running ordinary 35mm
films at around 16 frames per second.
PIC 1
The Kinemacolor projector at Birkenhead Museum
When we collected the projector it had a shutter on the
front, which had been damaged. The mechanism would not turn over because
the shaft that the shutter was fixed upon was bent. The first job to be
done was to remove this shaft and straighten it. It was then found that
the shaft had been extended so that the shutter could be attached. Once
the shaft had been straightened the projector was run using a handle that was
made to fit the hand crank gear. At this point we discovered that the
shutter was revolving once for each frame pull down; fine for black and white
but no use for Kinemacolor where alternate frames had to be projected through
the red and green filters on the shutter wheel. After much investigation,
including two visits to the Media Museum at Bradford where, with some great
help from Michael Harvey, we discovered that the gear chain from the vertical
drive shaft to the shutter shaft had a gear ratio of 2 to1 instead of 1 to1 as
on the Bradford projector.
One of the conditions under which we were able to borrow
the projector was that we could not make any permanent alterations to it.
This meant that a new shutter shaft and a new vertical shaft had to be made
and new gears purchased to change the ratio. The job was made more difficult
as the governor for the dowser was fixed to the vertical shaft and had to be
moved to the new shaft.
The visits to Bradford also showed that the shutter between
the lens and film was missing as was the dowser, the filter wheel and the
shield for the filter wheel. Eventually when we had made these parts we
were able to test run the machine and, probably for the first time for many
years, see Kinemacolor projected on a Kinemacolor projector, a very exciting
moment after a year’s work.
The projector was fitted with a carbon arc in the lamp
house. This meant that we had to make a new lamp holder as we were unable to
use an arc in the locations where we were aiming to use the projector.
We started with a 250 Watt tungsten halogen reflector lamp, which did not need
a fan for the short periods we were using the projector. After our first
show at the University of East Anglia MA course in Film and Television
Archiving we decided that we would use a 750 watt tungsten reflector bulb and
had to modify the lamp holder to incorporate a fan.
According to Henry Joy’s “Book of Instruction for Operators
of Kinemacolor Apparatus” published in 1910, the operator should adjust the
size of the double green filter so that the colour of the light on the screen
was a pale yellow; if the light was green then the segment should be reduced,
if it was orange the segment should be increased. Using our tungsten
lamp we found it was necessary to use two thicknesses of the green filter
across the full width of the green segment to achieve the required colour on
the screen with no film in the gate.
PIC 2
A close up
of the heavy duty gears required for the machine to run at 32 frames per
second
Development of Kinemacolor
George Albert Smith, a film maker living and working in
Brighton, had worked out how to produce a colour system whereby the camera
film actually recorded the colours in a scene on black and white film. He
mentioned this to Charles Urban, film producer and motion picture businessman,
and on March 21st 1904 wrote “Referring to our recent conversation
about photography in colours, I am quite assured of the results, the only
thing to do is to produce them on a commercial basis. The apparatus requires
to be so simple that any good showman or Bioscope exhibitor can exploit it.”
“My object is to market the colour pictures without any
dislocation of existing plant, i.e., exhibitors in possession of the best
projectors (your new ones for instance) will be able to show the natural
colour films. As the new projection outfit which you have in preparation
promises to become the standard, it seems desirable to carry out my methods in
conjunction with yours, and therefore I should like to arrange a co-operative
scheme – you to keep me posted and supply your new perfected machinery and I
adapt my colour methods to it. Under this suggested arrangement your company
would handle the results of my method, and the advantage would be mutual.”
Charles Urban, of the Charles Urban Trading Company,
replied in a letter dated March 24th 1904, saying “I will
thoroughly consider the matter and shall be prepared within a few days to
outline the basis of co-operation, and the extent to which we will assist you
with the mechanical part of the business.”
So the partnership was set up, and Smith continued his
colour experiments. One of the problems Smith had been faced with was how to
get the orthochromatic type of film stock used at the time (not sensitive to
red, only a limited range of colours from blue to green) to record all the
colours in a scene in black and white tones. This necessitated “sensitising”
the emulsion – making it panchromatic in fact.
A record of how Smith achieved this is described at a later
date in a letter of September 12th 1912, to Mr J Birch of the
Kinemacolor Company of America. He used a solution of Pinachrome in
water and alcohol which was further diluted in filtered water. He treated six
200ft rolls at a time. The first film was bathed for eleven minutes, in
absolute darkness, in the solution; it was then washed for 10 minutes before
drying in warm air. Subsequent films had longer bathing times to
compensate for the dye being used up; the final film had 14 minutes in the
solution.
Smith also says that different batches of Eastman film
varied in their capacity for becoming colour sensitive. He added a
little Pinacyanol Iodide to the bathing solution if the red sensitivity was
considered insufficient.
Smith evidently had difficulty at first at sensitising the
emulsion, for one of the early existing tests held by the BFI National Archive
is covered in white spots on the print which have come through from the
negative, where of course they would have been black. This is a 1906 test
which is titled “Two Clowns”. Smith wrote a number of letters regarding
sensitising and its problems. A letter dated March 26th 1913
to Mr Hickey, General Manager of the Natural Color Kinematograph Co. Ltd, from
Smith refers to troubles with sensitising in the States. Smith recommended
testing several batches, and as soon as a suitable one was found, suggested
buying up the rest of the batch. He tested the film by taking a yard
(approximately a metre) winding it on a developing frame, immersing it in
plain water for 10 minutes then developing it for 10 minutes and fixing it.
If the film was only slightly veiled it was suitable. He also says it
should be “quite, nearly or very nearly, free from black spots (either pin
point or pin head size).”
Urban signed a contract on the February 5th 1912
with Kodak Ltd “to supply cellulose nitrate “cine” film to the customer for
the purpose aforesaid, of a width approximately thirty-five (35) millimetres,
or one and three-eighths of an inch (1⅜) unperforated f.o.b. London at a price
of one and forty-five one-hundredths (1.45) pence per running foot,
all such film to be in standard “cine” lengths of two hundred (200) feet and
four hundred (400) feet.”
The contract went on to say they could buy short lengths
less than 100ft and more than 15ft at 1.0 pence per running foot
and had various stipulations about not buying other manufacturer’s film stock,
preventing resale, not using the film for duplicating other company’s films,
and offering a 5% rebate if the films bought in the last three calendar months
were paid for within 15 days of the quarter day.
In a letter dated March 5th 1912 Kodak Ltd
referred to the contract and to Mr Eastman’s statement “that provision would
be afforded you for testing, if you so desire, films produced by other
manufacturers in competition with ourselves…..providing your consumption of
Eastman film amounts to not less than 300,000 metres annually….not to exceed
10% of your total requirements from manufacturers other than ourselves.”
The letter continued that the 5% rebate depended on Kodak receiving a
certificate from Price, Waterhouse & Co or other agreed accountants showing
the percentage of other manufacturers stock purchased compared to the total
film purchases. The letter also offered a limited quantity of second
quality film at a 20% discount but stipulating that this film could only be
used for titles, sub-titles, Journal or Topical subjects.
But whatever success Smith had in enabling all colours to
be recorded, the red and green filter basis of Kinemacolor was only capable of
recording so much. In fact this was well known at the time, and later even
publicised. An article in a supplement to the Kinematograph and Lantern
Weekly of October 10th 1912, states: “Where do the brilliant
multi-colours come from, then – the bright yellows, brilliant blues, rich
browns? There are no yellows, no blues, no browns. These only exist in the
brain of the observer. As the old conjurors used to say, “Quickness of the
hand deceives the eye”. If the pictures could be made to fall on the screen
slowly enough the spectator would see one picture all red, and the next one
all green. But they come so fast he has no time to distinguish them
separately. His eye receives a general impression, then his brain proceeds to
sort out the colours for itself”. This was the secret of Kinemacolor, and some
other colour processes around this time - the brain did most of the work.
It seems Smith’s first
experiments involved colouring the film print frames red and green (the letter
of March 21st 1904 alludes to this method so that any projector
could be used without alteration), but he soon abandoned this and settled for
a revolving filter of red and green segments on the projector. The filter
wheel had to be behind the gate, between the light source and the projector,
so that the light was coloured before it went through the film onto the
screen. If the filter had been in front of the lens, sharpness could suffer.
A few of Smith’s original test films survived thanks to a
film collector who lived a road or two away from Smith in Hove, the late
Graham Head. Graham began collecting equipment and films from 1918, and knew
Smith well, as he was a frequent visitor to the Head household. Three of
these negatives were passed to Ronald Grant at the Cinema Museum after Graham
Head died in 1980. Thanks to Andrea Kalas of the BFI National Archive, new
prints have been made by Ben Thompson.
From 1908, we have been able to show “Woman Draped in
Patterned Handkerchiefs” as well as “Cat Studies”. In 1910, a year after
Kinemacolor had been shown to the public, Smith filmed the “New Romney, Hythe
and Sandwich Pageant”, but the BFI has recorded that Smith declared that this
was “a reject taken with excessive contrast”. This does seem so, but one
thing this film does show us today is the problem of parallax error usually
known as fringing. Fringing is when the action is fast, and objects have
moved between the red and green exposures, so that, for example, men walking
quickly have red or green legs!
PIC 3
1910 Kinemacolor negative and a
print from it made in 2007
Kinemacolor projectors
It was in 1908 that the first examples of Kinemacolor
(though it was not known by that name at this time) were shown to selected
audiences. At first Urban’s own marketed
projector, the Bioscope, was converted and used to show Kinemacolor films.
The name Bioscope was cast into the main upright plate that held the gears,
gate, lens and feed spool. This machine had a beater movement for pull down
(commonly known as a ‘dog’), which produced a reasonably steady picture, and
was capable of being used with a powerful arc light. The subsequent
Kinemacolor projectors had a modified dog; because running at 32 frames a
second caused the dog to put considerable strain on the film. The dog
was modified so that there were two rollers, a small roller and a larger
roller. The smaller roller started the film moving and the larger roller
then pulled the film down quickly. Even with this system the projector was
noisy and hard on the film.
Our prints were polyester and apart from some early tests
where sticky rollers and corroded gate pressure pads caused us to slightly
scratch the film, the projector handled film quite well. We used a second
print for the tests so as not to possibly damage our main show prints. The
small teeth on the feed sprockets and the lack of a normal intermittent meant
the perforations remained undamaged, although our prints had Kodak Standard
positive long pitch perforations whereas the original nitrate prints would
have had Bell and Howell negative type short pitch perforations.
In Smith’s 1906 patent
he states; “If the speed of projection is approximately 30 pictures per
second, the two colour records blend and present to the eye a satisfactory
rendering of the subject in colours which appear to be natural”. In fact
later, at a lecture in December 1908, Smith said 32 frames per second were
necessary. Henry Joy always stated; “run at twice the usual speed”.
The first public show of Kinemacolor took place at the
Palace Theatre of Varieties in London on Friday February 26th 1909.
The Palace is a big theatre with a large proscenium and stage, and plenty of
light would have been needed to project a Kinemacolor picture.
The Bioscope trade journal of March 4th 1909
reports: “At the Palace Theatre, on Friday afternoon last, Mr. G. Albert Smith
and Mr. Charles Urban gave the first of a series of exhibitions of bioscope
pictures in natural colours.”
The programme included a film shot only four days earlier.
This was a clear reference by Urban and Smith to the fact that Kinemacolor,
recording on the film the colours of the scene in black and white tones, could
be printed and reproduced like any ordinary monochrome film – quickly, instead
of the laborious and time consuming business of hand colouring or stencil
colouring that audiences were used to with coloured films.
The article goes on to say: “In the pamphlet distributed to
the audience, Messrs. Smith and Urban claim to present “the veritable hues and
tints of nature.” It was true of many of the scenes, but the least expert in
the audience could tell that a leaden blue was not the veritable hue and tint
of a young lady’s arm, or that a cornfield was all one dull, sandy yellow. It
may seem that these criticisms are captious, seeing that the bulk of the
effects were excellent, but exaggeration at the present stage, which is so an
experimental one, is to be deprecated, and Messrs. Smith and Urban would be
the first to admit that they have still much to perfect in their system. In
the first place the successful manipulation of the panchromatic film which
they use calls for very special knowledge and care, and from the exhibition on
Friday it was clear that both the green and red filters easily get “out of
register,” as the colour-printers call it, with the result that there are
blinding flashes of red or green across the entire picture. Again, one may
object – and we have done so before in these columns – to the very vivid tones
of the greens and reds in these pictures. The green, in particular, is so
aggressive that a single square inch of it in a picture is sufficient to swamp
every other detail on the screen. Finally, there was a very general concensus
of opinion on Friday that these colour-pictures entail a greater strain upon
the eyes than ordinary black and white scenes.”
Because
the film had to run at least at 30 frames per second, or 32 to get the
illusion to work well for the viewer, Charles Urban realised that a more
robust projector had to be made to stand up to repeated showings in a
commercial environment. For these he turned to a young engineer, William
Vinten.
William Vinten was doing a
variety of engineering jobs, when in 1906 he saw an advertisement from Charles
Urban asking for sets of hardened steel dies and punches to be made to precise
specifications for use in making perforations in 35mm wide film. Vinten
was able to supply these, and Urban was very happy with his work. In 1908
Urban offered him a job in charge of the new engineering workshop in Urbanora
House in Wardour Street in London. A year later Urban offered Vinten the
tenancy of the workshops. One of the jobs was developing Kinemacolor
machinery in conjunction with Henry Joy. On January 7th 1910,
Urban gave William Vinten an order for “25 Kinemacolor Machines (heavy type)”
at £25 each. Vinten was now in business (a
company still in existence today) and Urban had his first machines. In fact a
total of 150 Kinemacolor projectors were made. The projector that has
survived in the museum at Birkenhead is No 19, presumably from that first
batch.
Re–fitting the colour filter wheel
The colour filters on Kinemacolor projector No 19 were
missing owing to the machine being used as a conventional projector following
the demise of Kinemacolor. A new colour filter wheel therefore had to be made
with the correct colour segments.
An existing Kinemacolor machine that has the original
filters (or so it seems) were examined thanks to Michael Harvey at the Media
Museum at Bradford. Using a swatch of lighting gels we matched the
colours by eye. Those selected were No 25 Sunset Red, and No 122 Fern
Green. In order to complete our records the filters were measured on a
densitometer using Status M Filters. The results were:
Status M filters |
RED Density |
GREEN density |
BLUE density |
No: 25 Sunset Red |
0.06 |
1.67 |
1.83 |
No 122 Fern Green |
0.81 |
0.10 |
1.22 |
With the information gathered about the filters, David
Cleveland approached a stage lighting company, and procured gelatine filters
both of which appeared to match our specifications. Brian Pritchard then
mounted these in a newly constructed wheel.
The filter wheel on Kinemacolor projectors often appears
slightly different in construction depending on which photograph one looks at,
or which literature is read. Even the two surviving machines in Britain had
different spaces between the red and green filters. This difference does not
alter the way the filters work. As long as there is a red filter in place
during the time the “red” frame is projected onto the screen, and a green one
in place for the “green” frame, everything is OK. Between these two coloured
filters, sometimes the construction shows a black metal area, sometimes a
clear space - to cut down on weight.
It seems that the system was being improved all the time
during Smith’s developments. For instance, to get a bit of blue into the
pictures, a small area of purple filter was tried on the wheel at one time,
but was not incorporated in the final Kinemacolor projectors.
In those days, the light source was an arc lamp, which had
to be properly looked after. The width of the gap between the negative and
positive carbons had to be constantly adjusted as the carbons slowly burned
away, and the arc kept in the middle of the crater. If not adjusted properly,
then the light might go brown or blue, as the carbons became further apart, or
too close.
PIC 4
The red and
green segments of the new colour filter made and fitted by Brian Pritchard
The
prints
The Kinemacolor cameras, specially made wider and heavier
than the normal wooden cameras of the time, had a space inside the gear train
side for an additional filter wheel, so the cameraman could change the filters
to get the best results depending on the light and scene being photographed at
the time.
The “panchromatic” negatives were developed normally, but a
lot must have depended on the grading of the prints. It was necessary to
get a balance between full gradation and keeping the brightness of the picture
as high as possible. If the prints were too light or too high contrast
then there would be loss of detail in the highlights and shadows. We
experienced this with the rejected film of the New Romney, Hythe and Sandwich
Pageant. There was a loss of colour as well as a loss of detail in the
highlights and no good mid tones. In contrast the print of Italian Lakes
had very good mid tones and this gave an excellent range of colours.
In the Kinemacolor days, the prints were made direct from
the cut camera negative (no dupe positives and negatives), so they were second
generation, and were quite good quality.
There have been reports of unsteadiness in Kinemacolor
pictures. In the camera, which moves the film intermittently by claw, the
linear speed of the film is high at 32 frames per second, so maybe a certain
amount of unsteadiness occurred at this stage. However, it is in projection
where possible further unsteadiness took place. The Kinemacolor projectors
used dog movements described above to pull the film down intermittently in the
gate. This was becoming an old fashioned method by 1910, for most good
machines now used the Maltese cross and sprocket system which not only held
the film by the perforations, but stopped it in the right place in the gate,
and held it in position by the locking nature of the Maltese cross gear
assembly.
The dog movement just knocked the film down frame by frame,
with the tension of the gate runners only stopping the film, and holding it in
place. This allowed for a certain amount of movement, especially at 32 frames
per second. This movement on the screen can result in slight flashes of red
or green. Another problem with the Kinemacolor dog is that it is not
“relieved” - that is hollowed out between the perforations - so that the metal
part of the roller is actually also touching the image area of the film. This
can, and does, tend to add scratches to the base side of the film.
FIG5
The Kinemacolor Dog
Joining Kinemacolor prints must be done so that the
alternate frames are kept that way. We have come across one film which has
obviously been joined wrongly, so that the colours on the screen suddenly
reverse themselves, so we get red trees and green faces. It takes time to get
familiar with the black and white images to determine which is the red frame,
and which the green frame. According to Henry Joy; “In all Kinemacolor films
the green picture is marked on each side with a green ink stroke”. This is
another reason why it is so important to keep original nitrate prints, and to
print through this information when duping. All films should always be copied
with every bit of information that occurs outside the picture area. A contact
step printer capable of including this information should be used.
It has been said that the opening titles were red, but
Henry Joy states; “All titular matter is printed in transparent letters with a
black background upon every alternate picture space, so that, when the film
title is run through the machine, either red or green lettering is seen on the
sheet, according to the relative position of the colour filter to the running
film. When a reel of Kinemacolor subjects is despatched to the Licensee, the
containing box is provided with either a red or a green label,
indicating which color must first appear on the sheet”.
At our demonstrations to the students on the University of
East Anglia’s Film and Television Archiving Course, and to the Technical
Archivists at the John Paul Getty Jnr Conservation Centre at Berkhamsted, we
showed the Smith test films mentioned above, as well as “Entrainement Des Boyz
Scouts” 1912, and “Les Lacs Italiens - Lac
Garde” 1910. These new prints were very kindly
made by the Netherlands Filmmuseum, thanks to the generous help of Ad Polle
and Annike Kross.
Conclusion
We are
pleased we were able to re-create on the screen using original apparatus a
colour system that so excited the motion picture world 100 years ago. Though
short-lived, it was the first successful system of colour cinematography -
even though it had its limitations. We need to know how these things worked,
how the inventors and engineers made them work, and what the audiences saw on
the screen.
It may not
always be possible to use ageing equipment as used a century ago, but there is
no reason why Kinemacolor, or any other early colour or sound system, cannot
be reproduced by either adapting existing equipment or building new. Archives
should consider the origins and presentation of all moving picture systems,
whether it is film or television, not only for the education of their own
staff, but also for the cinema going public, who, when these things are
presented and explained to them, become fascinated in the past - the past
which is in our own archives, and it is up to us to unlock.
In our own presentation, there is a lot more we could have
done, for the room was small, and we did not use an original arc light source.
In Joy’s “Book of Instruction for Operators of Kinemacolor Apparatus” he says
“We strongly recommend Kinemacolor Licensees to show as small a picture –
ranging from 12 to 17 feet across – as the hall or theatre will allow; also
that the sheet be placed as far from the audience, and the projector at as
great a distance from the sheet (but not more than 120 feet), as the
construction of the building will permit. For unduly large pictures,
excessive current is necessary and near objects are magnified out of true
proportion; therefore much of the beauty and charm of Kinemacolor subjects is
lost to the audience”.
“The
success of a show is either made or marred by the operator, who is engaged to
supply the brain power, or thinking part, to the apparatus under his charge”.
Well, we
did our best.
David
Cleveland and Brian Pritchard
2008
References
“The
Bioscope” (trade journal), March 4th 1909, April 15th
1909, July 15th 1909
“Book of
Instruction For Operators of Kinemacolor Apparatus” By H. Joy 1910
“The First
Colour Motion Pictures” D. B. Thomas. Science Museum 1969
“Hopwood’s
Living Pictures” by R. B. Foster 1915
“Images of
Success” Stuart Sansom and Luke Vinten. The Vinten Group 1993
“The
Lumiere Project” Editor Catherine Surowiec 1996
“This Film
is Dangerous” Editor Roger Smither FIAF 2002
Urban Papers in BFI Collections
“A Yank in
Britain” Luke McKernan. The Projection Box 1999
David Cleveland, former Director of
the East Anglian Film Archive, has been a film maker, archivist, and restorer
for over 40 years. He founded, along with colleague Jane Alvey, the MA
in Film and Television Archiving Course at the University of East Anglia in
1990, and has taught on it ever since. In 2001 he was the recipient of the
Silver Light Award from AMIA. David is now an archive consultant, specialises
in searching and identifying early film, and regularly produces and presents
re-creations of what it was like to go to the cinema a century ago.
Kinemacolor in Australia
Michael Rogers kindly sent me this newspaper cutting from
Australia:
Argus (Melbourne, Vic.)
Monday 5 July 1915
Return to Kinemacolor Project Page