Projected film's dark side

[chauncey alan]

Does anyone know of any research of how projected film and its inherent dark "frames" affect our perception of the story? I heard murch talking a bit about it but havent been able to find anything... 

 

(If clarification is necessary : Double shutter required to project 24 fps film thus our brains through persistence of vision do not include, but are subjected to moments of darkness) 

 

 

[Bruce Greene]

I suspect that there is no effect in the perception of the story.  And I also suspect that there will be no research into this "effect" unless you do it yourself ?

It seems like asking if listening to music on a vinyl record effects one's perception of harmony vs a digital reproduction... And more in the realm of youtube bloggers than active filmmakers or recording artists.

[chauncey alan]

Very insightful Bruce 

[Simon Wyss]

There clearly is a sensible relation between frame rate and number of repetitions of the single frames. Silent cinema ran at 16 fps with three “presentations” of each photogram which, as has been pointed out many years ago, sinks a film deeper into the spectator than 24 fps shown with two-blade shutters. Showscan has 60 frames per second and no doubling of frames, but it is an optical knockdown.

An entirely different approach comes with duplex projection. The Skladanowsky were the first to make use of it, Prestwich and Green employed a duplex technique, too. The screen is uninterruptedly lit, you have no dark pauses. Very smooth cinema, deserves actually to be rediscovered.

 

[Satsuki Murashige]

It’s an interesting topic from a film theory point of view. I recall reading essays about this, but no hard research as far as I remember. I’ll see what I can find. 

I do feel there is a visual perceptual difference, but whether it has biological or psychological implications I couldn’t say. My Panasonic plasma tv has an option to run in 48Hz or 60Hz when fed progressive frame content from a Blu-Ray player - the 48Hz version is darker and has flicker that seems like it is meant to simulate film projection.

Flipping back and forth, 60Hz has a more familiar modern ‘video look’ which I actually prefer. The 48Hz flicker doesn’t quite work as the black frames remain perceptible even after watching for an hour. Maybe if they added an extra black frame at even shorter intervals like a three bladed film projector shutter, it would have worked better. 

It is a different experience when I pull out my 16mm Kodak Pageant projector and run some old work prints or reversal rolls - the image is brighter, the flicker is barely perceived, and the colors and contrast pop more. There is a sensation of watching a real image produced with a high intensity light with rich pure color, you can feel the heat coming from the projector lens when you wave your hand in front of it, see the dust floating in the air. There’s something about the experience that feels alive, even though it’s just a machine. Not sure how else to describe it.

[Tyler Purcell]

There is a pretty substantial difference between digital and film projection. The main thing is that with digital, each frame stays on the screen longer than with film. Thus you actually see a SMOOTHER image and it can look very digital and non-filmic if there are any other "video" like tendencies with the production like slower shutter motion blur and highlight clipping.

It's great to see a modern film shot digitally and projected on film. I've actually taken material edited and colored off my computer and projected it. I'm shocked how much depth there is to the image that doesn't exist on the digital projected version. It's like the film print makes it pop. Where it's true that good projection is hard to find, when you can find it, good film prints are amazing to see. They're a whole other planet and I personally feel it's not just the flicker, but also the way film deals with color. 

[Frank Wylie]

On 10/10/2019 at 4:47 PM, Tyler Purcell said:

 Where it's true that good projection is hard to find, when you can find it, good film prints are amazing to see. They're a whole other planet and I personally feel it's not just the flicker, but also the way film deals with color. 

There is a lot to be said for reciprocity characteristics in gradients of exposure that yet can't quite be matched by digital.   The logarithmic fall-off of densities (local contrast) is automatic in film but must be artificially created in digital.