From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Paper print
Paper print
Paper prints were an early mechanism to establish the Congress. By the time of their rediscovery in the early
copyright of motion pictures by depositing them with 1940s, over 3000 were stored within a vault of the copy-
the Library of Congress. Thomas Alva Edison’s company right office. Librarian Howard Walls made the discovery
was first to register each frame of movie film onto a and described the scene this way,
positive paper print, in 1893. The Library of Congress
processed and cataloged each of the films as one photo- That vault had been open to all kinds of weather,
graph, accepting thousands of photocopies of films over but the grating was over a shaft so it never rained
a twenty year period. in there, it never snowed in there. And the succes-
The unintended but fortunate other outcome is that sive wrappings on these paper rolls protected them.
while the actual films and negatives of this period de- Each time it was wrapped around, the picture un-
cayed or were destroyed, the paper prints sat ignored derneath was protected.[3]
and more or less preserved. When this deposit policy
ended in 1912 and actual film prints were registered and Walls recruited a National Archives (NARA) motion pic-
immediately returned to the copyright holder, many ture engineer, Carl Louis Gregory, to help get the movies
films in the following three decades were lost forever back into shape for screening. Gregory observed the frag-
because their original elements were too unstable for ile state of the paper, some of which had sprocket perfo-
any lasting preservation or conservation. Paper prints, rations punched through. Sprocket holes or not, the pa-
though, came with their own unpredictable nature, per could never travel through a projector or automated
bringing migration challenges that rival the difficulties printer without being shredded.
involved with the analog/digital conversions of today. Gregory designed a system that adopted many of the
traits involved with shooting animation in that era. He
“modified a process optical printer” and was able to ex-
Physical aspects change sprocket heads and pull down pins that were nec-
Paper prints were the positive opaque copies of their essary to advance the film and yet not tear it to pieces.[3]
transparent film negative source. Just like film wound An adjustable aperture plate was added to frame images
on a film core, the paper print was also tightly wound that had been produced by a variety of cameras without
in the same way. Most accounts of the paper prints col- any uniform standardization. The transfer of the paper
lection never mention the chemical composition of the prints was done at one exposure setting without any con-
photographs, but archivists at Ohio State University[1] sideration for the variations in image density of the neg-
who received one of the restoration printers used for ative, so Gregory adjusted his lighting that reflected off
the conversion project refer to these photographic prints the print to maximize the information captured to a new
as existing on bromide photographic paper. No specifi- film negative. There is no record of the film format used
cations could be found on the composition of bromide to recapture the paper prints.
paper of the time, but one manufacturer today is Kent- The war years interrupted plans to migrate more
mere. Their bromide paper “features a conventional dou- films. Later, Howard Walls would devote his time primar-
ble weight fiber-base, coated with a neutral tone bromide ily to the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences
emulsion…Glossy unglazed surface only. The double and would try to initiate a program to rescue the paper
weight paper is approximately 276 g/m² and a thickness prints at LC. Nothing seemed to get beyond the fundrais-
of approximately 260 μm.”[2] Photos of the paper on ing stage, though, as Walls was enveloped in manage-
cores have a density that look very much like the films ment intrigue and other responsibilities to the Academy.
would, although there are no specifications on film of
the time. Motion picture film was not standardized in Second effort at reformatting
the early years, and therefore, neither were their paper
copies. The Academy did take up Walls’ cause, but only with his
departure in 1953. The real work began with Kemp R.
Niver. For roughly a decade, the former filmmaker mi-
First effort at reformatting grated over two million feet of films from paper. He es-
By 1902, the paper prints had accumulated to 1413 ac- tablished the Renovare Company and process (“to re-
cording to the Annual Report of the Librarian of store” in Latin) and with initial funding from the Acade-
my (later funding would be private and then by congres-
1
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Paper print
sional appropriation), Niver unwound film history. He al- ple to use, storage space was not in abundance, and costs
so wrote a good amount about this program. were kept low.
As mentioned, the filmmaking process hadn’t been Kemp Niver was lauded at first (an Honorary Acade-
standardized. In fact, many manufacturers purposely my Award in 1954). He also publicized his efforts, which
avoided the exact workings of Edison’s well-regarded led to “a great number of requests for copies of early
Kinetograph, thereby avoiding infringement, while copy- films.”[5] The Mark VIII is now with the UCLA film
ing the essential functions with a few tweaks to the for- archive while an original restoration printer went into
mat. Niver also supposed that amateur engineers and use at Ohio State. Still he did have at least one critic at
filmmakers were designing their own cameras for a time, the time, a film historian who found the guide to his work
each one producing a different image size, with variation “full of curious categorization and arbitrary cross-index-
in sprocket hole number, size and pattern. He ranted ing, as well as a great deal of needless duplication.” [6]
about “some little man with a movie picture camera of
his very own, constructed from a cigar box, some spare
parts from a plow, and pieces of his grandmother’s
Current migration effort
sewing machine.”[4] Further criticism would come upon reflection of his
With adjustments, issues of frame lines and sprocket work. Simply put; as standards changed, Niver’s migra-
holes were resolved with each incoming print, but hand tion looked sub-standard. By 1993, a project was already
cranked film speed was also a nagging issue. Renovare underway. LC had reported “widespread dissatisfaction
would capture each frame, but a film could have been un- with image loss in the earlier… preservation” and re-
dercranked and exposed only for twelve frames per sec- solved to recopy the paper prints to 35 mm.[7] LC was
ond. Playback on today’s film projectors might require 18 praised for this and for not leaving anything out. The
or 24 frame/s. Everything would appear comically fast. new collection of over 200 films was studied by two
The solution was to expose a frame or every other frame French film historians who visited LC in 2003. They made
twice, thereby making the action appear realistic. The re- comparisons to the original paper prints and discovered
verse was true as well, with overcranked exposures, and that these “new restorations that the Library of Congress
frames would have to be removed to avoid slow motion has recently carried out..., unlike Niver’s reconstitutions,
films. are exact copies of the original paper prints.” [8]
Another problem encountered by Niver and not dis- Now, LC’s website for the Motion Picture, Broadcast-
covered in any details of Gregory’s efforts at LC, is just ing & Recorded Sound Division proudly announces that
what happens to photographs that have been tightly the paper prints, their most active collection, are trans-
rolled up for four decades or more. Niver explained it by ferring to “vastly superior new 35 mm copies.”[9] They
way of this example: plan on continuing “until the entire collection has been
re-photographed.”[9] The events that began over a centu-
Look at the palm of your hand when it is in a re- ry ago with the moving image at the Library of Congress
laxed position. Notice the soft wrinkles. Then open continue to unfold.
your hand—there are no wrinkles on the palm. Now In 2004, Kinetta built a new digital scanner specifical-
you know what happens to the emulsion of a pho- ly for the LOC’s Paper Print Collection. Used with digital
tograph that is laid out flat after having been in a restoration software, and a special Kinetta 35mm B&W
curved position for half a century.[4] Film Recorder, films are scanned from the paper prints
at 2K resolution, digitally restored, and output to 35mm
Niver reached out to a preservation expert who told him B&W film. The resulting restorations are significantly
to soak the paper and dry it by heated drum. Both of better than the photochemical versions in many aspects.
these are standard last steps in photo development. Niv- Films restored using this system include two Chaplin
er saw the prints gain some of their original flat dispo- shorts. There is an article about this work on the kinet-
sition and found an added benefit of a soft surface glaze ta.com website.
which made for a more definitive image for capture back
to film.
Renovare worked through the variety of problems in- References
herent in a collection without uniformity and developed [1] http://publications.ohiohistory.org/
the machinery that would adapt to those problems. By ohstemplate.cfm?action=detail&Page=0078138.html&StartPage=13
the end of the program, the Mark VIII, an optical printer, [2] Kentmere Photographic. (2005, February 10).
could capture about 16,000 frames every six hours. The Bromide technical data sheet. [Electronic version].
resulting films were produced on 16 mm acetate safety Retrieved April 11, 2008, from
film stock. Niver’s rationale for this is three-fold: the end http://www.kentmereusa.com/
users would likely be students and the format was sim-
2
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Paper print
[3] ^ Slide, A. (1992). Nitrate won’t wait: A history of film [Electronic version]. Library of Congress information
preservation in the United States. Jefferson, NC: bulletin. 56(16).
McFarland & Company. • Academy of Motion Picture arts and Sciences (n.d.).
[4] ^ Niver, K.R. (1964, October). From film to paper to Kemp Niver biography. Retrieved April 8, 2008, from
film. The quarterly journal of the Library of Congress. https://www.oscars.org/mhl/hn/
21(4), 248-264. niver_kemp_hn.html
[5] Library of Congress (1968). Annual report of the • Edmondson, R. (2004). Audiovisual archiving:
Librarian of Congress. Washington, DC: U.S. philosophy and principles. [Electronic version]. Paris:
Government Printing Office. UNESCO.
[6] Leyda, J. (1968, Summer). A note on progress. • Grimm, B. (1997, Spring). A short history of the paper
[Electronic version]. Film quarterly. 21(4), 28-33. print restoration at the Library of Congress.
[7] Melville, A. & Simmon, S. (1993, June). Film [Electronic version]. AMIA newsletter. (36).
preservation 1993: a study of the current state of • Herrick, D. (1980). Toward a national film collection:
American film preservation. [Electronic version]. Motion pictures at the Library of Congress. Film
Report of the Librarian of Congress. 1. Library Quarterly. 13(2/3), 5-25.
[8] Gaudreault, A. (2003). Fragmentation and • Library of Congress (1962–1963, Winter).[Electronic
segmentation in the Lumiere “Animated Views.” version]. Film quarterly. 16(2), 42-44.
[Electronic version]. The Moving Image. 3(1), 110-131. • National Film Preservation Foundation (Producer).
[9] ^ Motion Picture & Television Reading Room. (2005). Treasures from American Film Archives: 50
(n.d.). Early motion pictures free of copyright preserved films. [Motion Picture]. United States: Image
restrictions in the Library of Congress. Retrieved April Entertainment.
9, 2008, from http://www.loc.gov/rr/mopic/ • Niver, K.R. (1968). The first twenty years; a segment of
mptvrrsub.html film history. Los Angeles: Locare Research Group.
• Spehr, P.C. (1975). Edison films in the Library of
Further reading Congress. The quarterly journal of the Library of
Congress. 32(1), 34-45.
• Abrams, B. (1997, November). Images of the silent • Wagner, R.W. (1969, Spring). Preservation of the
era: The Library’s paper print fragment collection. newsreel films of President Harding. [Electronic
version]. Ohio history 78(2) 138-140.
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Paper_print&oldid=386171786"
Categories:
• Film preservation
This page was last modified on 21 September 2010 at 21:00. Text is available under the Creative Commons
Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. See Terms of use for details. Wikipedia® is a registered
trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.Contact us
Privacy policy About Wikipedia Disclaimers
3