Wednesday, October 30, 2019

The Origins of Cinema

Although its basic technical details are clear enough, the origins of cinema are shrouded in doubt, dispute, and even death. As with other media technologies, among the earliest uses of sequential images were in scientific projects, such as those of Marey and Muybridge. The technical problem confronting them both was how to get a series of images in quick, measured sequence. Muybridge used timers and tripwires to obtain sequential images; Marey, more direct, invented a cinematic gun which "fired" a cylinder of small photonegatives; it looked somewhat like a Thompson submachine gun but was limited to 12 exposures. What was really needed was some kind of double movement -- a shutter which would open and close quickly and repeatedly, and a mechanism which would advance the photosensitive material. When the material in question was glass plates, the problem was overwhelming -- but with the invention of celluloid photo "film" by George Eastman, a solution was in sight, and the prize belonged to the inventor who could best employ it.

Louis Augustin Le Prince (above) is my personal favorite among the many candidates for first filmmaker. He had gotten his start working on great-circle panoramas, where his job was projecting glass plate photos onto the canvas for artists to trace. Arriving in Leeds, England, in the late 1880's, he married into a well-off family, and his father-in-law financed further experiments. Le Prince's first design was a 16-lens camera, using a series of "mutilated gears" to fire off 16 frames in short order on two strips of film. He later designed a single-lens camera, with a mechanical movement using smooth rollers (sprockets not yet having been tried) to advance the film. He planned to stage a grand début in New York City, and had rented a private mansion for his demonstration; his equipment was packed into custom-made crates, and his tickets were purchased for crossing on a luxurious Cunard liner. And yet just then, as he was returning from visiting his brother in Dijon, France, he vanished from the Dijon-Paris express and was never seen again, alive or dead.

As with many early cinematographers, Le Prince's films do not survive. Eastman's celluloid turned out to be volatile; it could disintegrate into a brown powder, burst into flame, or even explode without warning. However, at some point, paper prints were made of three of his films, and these have been reconstructed into short, viewable sequences. The films were made in 1888, earlier than any others. His first film, "Roundhay Garden Scene," shows his family dancing about in his father-in-law's back garden; his second, "Leeds Bridge," shows traffic and pedestrians crossing a bridge in the city where he worked; the third, untitled, shows his young son playing an accordion as he dances upon a set of stairs. The only question is: with what camera were these shot? Distortions and perspective problems with the frames, as well as the fact that there are rarely more than 16 of them, suggest that the 16-lens camera is the most likely source, but some believe he used his single-lens camera for some or all of the films. If so, he was certainly the first person in the world to make what we have come to regard as cinema film.

5 comments:

  1. Le Prince's story always fascinates me, the fact that he disappeared before his demonstration and the theories that circulated about what might have happened add more drama to the mystery. The quality of "Leeds Bridge" is a little rough but it seemed like it was well on its way to becoming an innovative step towards cinema. I also think it's interesting that Edison always has a hand in some technological quarrel where he claims to be the inventor of something while they've already taken the steps to patent the idea. There is a theory that he may have had some involvement in Le Prince's disappearance, but alas, we'll never get an answer.

    ReplyDelete
  2. My mind can simply not wrap around the idea of a 16 lens camera. It's funny how throughout history, we go in between the ideas that "bigger is better" and "smaller is better" for different technologies. I think we are in a current "bigger" is better society, because all of our phones are getting bigger screens, TV's are bigger larger, etc. Maybe the 16 lens camera could make a come back! It seems like a good time in history for that to happen !

    ReplyDelete
  3. The Youtube video of the film where Le Prince's son is playing the accordion starts with a slide by the poster of the video that states the clip is the "first seventeen frames" of the film. The frames are all very distinct and the bit of film seems like a patchwork of sorts. Therefore, I agree that the most likely source for at least this particular film is the 16-lens camera, based on the description provided above, and also based on the fact that the single-lens camera is, I assume, smoother in post and therefore the frames would not be so, as I said, patch-worked.
    I was wondering how the jump from 16-lenses to just one lens came about, and hoping to find out in class/read more on the topic in order to find out.

    ReplyDelete
  4. With everything that we've read, it's apparent how much these technologies (and the advancement of photography) rely on the work of others. There are so many great minds who looked into these problems, but it was only through the collective advancements that they were able to take these steps. Moving from glass to celluloid. Developing the necessary shutters. It's clear that inventions are really never the work of one person. I think that's especially true in this case. That's why we've had so much trouble pointing to who created photography. It was a group effort.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I remember a story on National Geographic or the History Channel some years ago, about old celluloid films in an old archive or museum. When I looked into it, I was able to narrow the likely suspects down to the 1937 Fox vault fire, where, according to the casual references I found, a mixture of poor ventilation and heat in the underground storage room led to the film reels catching fire on their own. We're supposed to have lost a lot of films that couldn't be replaced, though before looking at articles, I couldn't have said what. Apparently, Fox's entire archive of silent films went up in the fire, and with it, a substantial slice of film history.

    ReplyDelete