Image as Collective A History of Optical Effects in Hollywood’s Studio System Thesis presented to the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences of the University of Zurich for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy by Birk Weiberg Accepted in the fall semester 2014 on the recommendation of the doctoral committee: Prof. Dr. Bettina Gockel (main supervisor) and Prof. Dr. Barbara Flückiger. Zurich, 2016 Abstract Birk Weiberg Image as Collective: A History of Optical Effects in Hollywood’s Studio System This dissertation provides a historical account of a until now neglected field of moving image production. It identifies and focuses on optical effects as a practice of montage within moving images as opposed to the montage of like images in time. Drawing on a wide range of new archival material, my dissertation presents previously unknown rea- sons for the developments of different techniques of image compositing such as traveling mattes, color-based processes, rear projection, and optical printing. This field has currently gained relevance as a forerunner to contemporary digital effects and image processing, a fact that in part also explains the marginal presence optical effects in earlier scholarship. My work collects original publications by participants and critically relates them to each other and akin areas of film production. As a result I will show that there were no single privileged sources of agency but rather chains of translation that involve humans as much as non-humans. I will draw on Actor-Network-Theory as a methodological framework as it provides an approach that tries to avoid presumptions that inform the analytical descriptions. There- fore, I will deploy individual case studies, in which I explore the specific functions of such different entities as groups of studio employees, the studios themselves, entrepreneurs and manufacturers, professional associations and organizations, devices and sets, patents and other publications, and finally images. The image as the result of these production prac- tices (rather than as an aesthetic phenomenon alone) here is regarded as representation and aim of its production practices that at the same time it tries to conceal. It thus assem- bles its own collective which I will understand not as a model but as an hypothesis that guides my historical descriptions. Acknowledgments A project like this that is driven by an interest in primary sources would not be possible without excellent archives and the people working there. Therefore, my primary acknowl- edgments go to the Academy Film Archive (May Haduong), the Margaret Herrick Library (Barbara Hall, Jenny Romero), UCLA Performing Arts Special Collections (Julie Graham), the Warner Brothers Archive at USC (Sandra J. Lee, Jonathon Auxier), the Hugh M. Hefner Mov- ing Image Archive at USC (Dino Everett), the USC Cinematic Arts Library (Ned Comstock), the Frank Mt. Pleasant Library of Special Collections and Archives at Chapman University (Claudia Horn), the Naval History and Heritage Command (John W. Greco), and the National Archives and Records Administration in Washington, DC, College Park, MD, and Riverside, CA. After a unwieldy start at the xerox machines of several libraries, I could witness how during my research increasing amounts of publication became available in digital archives that will change scholarly research substantially. My most relevant resource here was the marvelous Internet Archive and later its partner, the Lantern project at the Media History Digital Library. Personally, I want to express my gratitude to my two supervisors, Bettina Gockel and Bar- bara Flückiger, at the University of Zurich for their support (and trust) in my transdisci- plinary venture. I am indebted to my former superiors at the Zurich University of the Arts, Nils Röller and Felix Stalder, for their appreciation and words of advice. The Swiss Na- tional Science Foundation provided me with a generous grant that allowed me to enjoy six months in Los Angeles and to work intensely with the above-named archives. I want to thank the California Institute of the Arts as my host during that stay and especially Nor- man Klein for our intriguing discussions and Charlotte Pryce and her students for sharing their optical printer magic with me. Furthermore, Stewart McSherry and the iotaCenter generously gave me shelter. John Kiel of Acme/Photo-Sonics and special effects expert Bill Taylor provided professional insights into the history of their craft. Last but not least, I am gleefully indebted to Margarete Vöhringer and Margit Rosen for acting as shining examples to follow, and to Daniela Müller most simply for being there. Contents 1 Introduction: The Problem of Writing on Film as Technique 3 1.1 Bazin and Technique 4 1.2 Application-orientated Publishing on Cinema Techniques and Special Effects 8 1.3 Liberal Arts Approaches to Film Techniques 11 1.4 Actor-Network-Theory 15 1.5 ANT and Media 19 1.6 Collecting the Mediators 22 1.7 Image as Collective 31 2 Antecedents: Published Knowledge of Trick Films 33 2.1 Basic Operations 33 2.2 Features of Temporality 39 2.3 Canonizing Trick Cinematography 42 3 From Static to Motion Compositing: Optical Effects in the Silent Era 45 3.1 The Dawley Patent 45 3.2 Glass Shots and Other Static Mattes 48 3.3 Frank D. Williams and the Emergence of the Traveling Matte 64 3.4 Duplication and Panchromatic Film Stocks 73 3.5 Color-separation Processes 77 3.6 Alternative Processes and Resulting Conflicts 100 3.7 Jackman-Pomeroy-Interference 105 3.8 The Role of Fred Jackman 107 3.9 The Patent Pool 112 4 Rear Projection 115 4.1 Reasons for Delay 117 4.2 Early Rear Projection at Fox 125 4.3 Special Effects at Warner Bros around 1930 131 4.4 Development of a Concept and Patent History 133 4.5 Paramount’s Turn to Rear Projection 141 4.6 Adoption and Presentation of Rear Projection from 1932 145 4.7 Examples of Early Integration into Contemporary Standards 147 4.8 Improvements in Devices and Infrastructure 151 4.9 The Way of RKO 161 4.10 Discovering Distinct Styles and Methods 174 4.11 Collecting Plates (and Places) 183 4.12 Staged Worlds 192 4.13 Closing the Black Box 197 i 5 Optical Printing 213 5.1 Optical Printing in the 1920s 215 5.2 Duplication Film Stocks 225 5.3 RKO 226 5.4 The Acme-Dunn Optical Printer 251 6 Epilogue 267 Appendix 273 List of Figures 273 Bibliography 280 Filmography 311 Acronyms Journals and Newspapers AC American Cinematographer FD Film Daily IP International Photographer JSMPE Journal of the Society of Motion Picture Engineers JSMPTE Journal of the Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers LAT Los Angeles Times NYT New York Times TSMPE Transactions of the Society of Motion Picture Engineers Associations AMPAS Academy of Motion Pictures Arts and Sciences ASC American Society of Cinematographers SMPE Society of Motion Picture Engineers SMPTE Society of Motion Picture Television Engineers Archives AFA Academy Film Archive, Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, Los Angeles FMPL Frank Mt. Pleasant Library of Special Collections and Archives, Chapman University, CA HMIA Hugh M. Hefner Moving Image Archive, School of Cinematic Arts, University of Southern California, Los Angeles MHL Margaret Herrick Library, Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, Los Angeles NARA DC National Archives and Records Administration, Washington, DC NARA MD National Archives and Records Administration, College Park, MD NARA RS National Archives and Records Administration, Riverside, CA NHC Operational Archives of the Naval Historical Center, Washington, DC PASC Performing Arts Special Collections, University of California, Los Angeles WBA Warner Bros Archives, School of Cinematic Arts, University of Southern California, Los Angeles Establishing Shot The fade-in reveals first a door, under which light enters an otherwise darkened room. This central slit is the lightest area of the image. Its fore- ground is dominated by a large drinking glass holding a silver spoon. These two objects occupy an area as big as that of the door in the back- ground. To the right stands a little pharmaceutical bottle. The cork lies next to it on the silver plate, which carries all foreground objects. The ensemble implies the earlier ingestion of drugs. Between plate and door we dimly see a bed with a body that is only recognizable as such through the lifting and lowering of the chest. Above the body rises a defocused silhouette of shaggy hair. We hear a breathing that follows the move- ment of the body. Behind the bed unfurls a room that suggests wealth and appears still not larger than it has to be. To the breathing the sound of knocking is added. We hear somebody rattling at the door. Shadows, which interrupt the floor light under the door, prefigure further actions. The door opens with a swing and two men tumble into the room. One of the two precedes with age-related stiffness. The other follows tentatively. The old man comes up to the bed, knees down, and turns the woman’s head in profile. While his mouth steadily moves, he does not speak a single word, until he turns to the second man. “Get Dr. Corey,” remains the only dialog spoken in this scene. The addressed speeds out of the room. The kneeling stays behind with the woman and both—along with the room—disappear in a slow fade-out. 1 1 Introduction: The Problem of Writing on Film as Technique Special effects in the movies have become an apparent matter with the modern block- buster since Star Wars (George Lucas, 1977) and some twenty years later again with the digitization of movie production. Digital technology through increasing virtualization has also merged two previously distinct domains, those of mechanical effects—everything that takes place before the camera from miniatures to pyrotechnics—and optical effects—ev- erything that happens by means of cameras and related devices.