Aesthetic and technical details of the silent film era

[loccdor]

I have a lot of questions and thoughts about pre-1930s cinema aesthetics and I'm trying to weave a thread to how they could be practically actualized in photography done today. It's a pretty broad topic, so these points may seem disorganized, but I'd love your ideas and thoughts on one or all of them. It was a toss-up on which sub-forum to submit this to.

* Which films or film processes give a "look" closest to the black and white negative they were shooting at the time? What sort of spectral sensitivity, characteristic curve, and film speed would have been typical? What amount of exposure latitude and graininess? What size negatives? What type of lenses were common in cinema? Which companies were making the film?

* What effect does going from the negative to positive in a copying machine of their day have on the images? Any details of the process they used and is it different from black and white reversal done today?

* It's my understanding that the artificial lighting situation was very different. How was this handled?

* How have the ideals of attractive men and women's faces and clothing and makeup changed from then versus now?

* It seems like many of the compositional ideas came from the paintings of the old masters. Does anyone have more information on this connection?

* Any other information of interest pertaining to the cinema and photography of this time period, including book recommendations that explore the topic in detail.

 

[grain elevator]

Maybe you'll find something of interest especially regarding the first point in this thread: https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/closest-filter-to-create-ortho-response-with-pan-film.156112/

 

[Kino]

It would take an Encyclopedia and several years to respond to your questions.

I spend 25 years timing/grading over 600 films, the vast majority of them Silent Era features, to make new photochemical exhibition prints for the Library of Congress.

There is no one "Silent Era"; there are many and there are many ways to categorize the "look" of films within the period from the late 1890's to about 1935.

There is a vast scope of literature out there covering the questions you ask, but it tends to be associated along lines tangential to your questions.

The vast majority of my suggestions (due to personal experience) will be US-Centric, but there is a huge rich history in Europe, Asia and the rest of the World.

Despite this I suggest you start with:

"The Parade's Gone By" Kevin Brownlow (film making, history of US Silent film production)
"Images and Enterprise: Technology and the American Photographic Industry 1839 to 1925 by Reese V. Jenkins
"This Film is Dangerous: A Celebration of Nitrate Film" Roger Smither and Catherine A Surowiec, FIAF press
"The Red Rooster Scare: Making Cinema American, 1900-1910" by Richard Abel
"Restoration of Motion Picture Film (Butterworth-Heinemann Series in Conservation and Museology)" by Paul Read and Mark-Paul Meyer

This is hardly scratching the surface, but will give a broad introduction to the subject via film restoration techniques and history.

Good luck.

 

[Paul Howell]

As noted by Kino it is a very diverse topic. In terms of film stock, you can try Kodak Double X developed in a monobath, and Foma Ortho 400.

 

[ic-racer]

One difficulty in answering some of the questions is due to in copyright law and poor reproduction. That is to say, one's perception of a 1930's film can be highly altered by observing a poor, multi-generation, lossy compression, bootleg of a film.

Kino, thank you for those references!

 

[JPD]

Into the 1920s actors often had to use heavy makeup to compensate for the poor spectral sensitivity of the film. https://www.cosmeticsandskin.com/cdc/early-movie.php

 

[Alex Benjamin]

It's my understanding that the artificial lighting situation was very different. How was this handled?

Don't know about pre-1930, but the ultimate reference for cinematographic lighting in the 30s and 40s is John Alton's Painting With Light, written in 1949 but still available today (I have the 1995 University of California Press edition).

It seems like many of the compositional ideas came from the paintings of the old masters.

Well, depends on which "old master". There's no single "old master" style — there's a world of difference between Botticelli, Vermeer, Poussin, Caravaggio, Goya, Bruegel, Turner, Manet, Van Gogh, etc., and none of them "composed" in the same way. So maybe one cinematographer might have been influenced by one painter he particularly liked or admired — and, regarding film noir, I'd say Caravaggio is your best bet —, but there certainly wasn't a trend or general school of thought regarding this.

 

[loccdor]

Thanks everyone! There's a lot for me to research here.

 

[Kino]

One quick and dirty possibility is to obtain some 35mm Kodak 5366/2366 Fine Grain Duplicating Film and shoot it as a negative. Through testing, you will have to determine the ISO (about 6 to 12) and print it toward the contrasty side.

The same can be said for 5302/3202 Print stock, but it is blue sensitive and can be handled under an OC safelight for easier processing; even processing by inspection. Most silent films WERE processed by inspection, hence the term "Timer"; the person who timed how long the film stayed in the developer for proper density...

There is no direct equivalency between the reflected image of a silver gelatin print and a projected transparency like a motion picture film print, so you'll have to play around a bit to find something you deem suitable.

A nice sepia or iron tone to the print might help heighten the simulation.

https://www.kodak.com/content/products-brochures/motion-picture/EASTMAN-2366-technical-information.pdf

https://www.kodak.com/content/products-brochures/motion-picture/Kodak-black-and-white-print-film-2302-3302-technical-information.pdf

 

[cowanw]

​

This book may be of help, particularly in understanding the evolution and progress of imagery the period you are looking at.

Still​

American Silent Motion Picture Photography​

David S. Shields

Still

The success of movies like The Artist and Hugo recreated the wonder and magic of silent film for modern audiences, many of whom might never have experienced a movie without sound. But while the American silent movie was one of the most significant popular art forms of the modern age, it is also...

press.uchicago.edu

 

[MattKing]

Most silent films WERE processed by inspection, hence the term "Timer"; the person who timed how long the film stayed in the developer for proper density...

Thankyou for this @Kino - you just answered a question that has been niggling at me gently for far too long!

 

[Kino]

Thankyou for this @Kino - you just answered a question that has been niggling at me gently for far too long!

Matt,

You're welcome! If you ever see a still photo of someone with a stop watch standing near a rack and tank motion picture developing system, most likely they are (were) a timer...

 

[Alan Johnson]

Small town and local silent movies were accompanied by a pianist so you will need the music scores as well.

 

[Maris]

Here in Noosa, Australia we still get the full silent movie experience: https://www.themajestictheatre.com.au/

 

[Augustus Caesar]

I have a lot of questions and thoughts about pre-1930s cinema aesthetics and I'm trying to weave a thread to how they could be practically actualized in photography done today. It's a pretty broad topic, so these points may seem disorganized, but I'd love your ideas and thoughts on one or all of them. It was a toss-up on which sub-forum to submit this to.

* Which films or film processes give a "look" closest to the black and white negative they were shooting at the time? What sort of spectral sensitivity, characteristic curve, and film speed would have been typical? What amount of exposure latitude and graininess? What size negatives? What type of lenses were common in cinema? Which companies were making the film?

* What effect does going from the negative to positive in a copying machine of their day have on the images? Any details of the process they used and is it different from black and white reversal done today?

* It's my understanding that the artificial lighting situation was very different. How was this handled?

* How have the ideals of attractive men and women's faces and clothing and makeup changed from then versus now?

* It seems like many of the compositional ideas came from the paintings of the old masters. Does anyone have more information on this connection?

* Any other information of interest pertaining to the cinema and photography of this time period, including book recommendations that explore the topic in detail.

Most film stock used in the silent era was orthochromatic. Lenses were uncoated. That's about all you need to know.

 

[snusmumriken]

Most film stock used in the silent era was orthochromatic. Lenses were uncoated. That's about all you need to know.

Plus the kind of make-up they used.

 

[Kino]

Plus the kind of make-up they used.

Max Factor supplied 99.9% of the makeup to Hollywood Silent Filmmakers. Old American Cinematographers Manuals have advertisements for the shades they offered...

 

[Augustus Caesar]

Plus the kind of make-up they used.

Oh yeah, but that changed when panchromatic film became standard.