Prominent Optometrist States that Eyes Found to Be Source of Trouble
By Herbert S. Marshutz, A.B, D.O.
From American Cinematographer April 1926 pg.7
The effect of motion pictures upon eyes has been misunderstood for years.
The first impressions on the subject date back to a time when fewer people attended pictures, and to a period when motion picture projection was not at all like it is today.
At the present time several millions of people of all ages visit motion picture houses every day. Ninety per cent of them will suffer no inconvenience to their eyes. But there is nevertheless an undercurrent of belief firmly imbedded in the public mind in the United States and wherever pictures are shown, that movies hurt the eyes. Now why is this the case?
In preparing this material, we have analyzed the conditions under which the human eye functions in a motion picture theater. Every condition that is somewhat unusual, and any circumstance under which the eye must work differently than in any other visual effort, are a hundred times less objectionable than 15 or 20 years ago. During that early period, there were many flaws both in picture making and picture showing. Today they are either greatly lessened or omitted entirely.
“Dark-Adaptation” Necessary
Now what are the unusual conditions under which the eye must function in a picture house? There are quite a few. First of all, there is a great reduction in the amount of light. Even the brightest and whitest scenes are dim in contrast with daylight illumination. And the theater is still darker. Consequently, the eye is working in reduced light. Even though the eye is observing detail he pupil is larger than would be the case in an ordinary room or office. Between the screen and the corners of the auditorium, is a decided contrast of lighting. Another unusual feature in spite of the impression of flowing motion, the picture on the screen is, of course, a series of rapidly changing scenes. Then again, there is no depth—the screen is a flat surface. And the eye is seeing world without its accustomed perspective. What one sees is not an image of any object but the image of an image. It is not in natural colors as a rule, but in monotonous tones of black and white.
Abnormal Functioning
All these point to the undeniable fact that the eye must function under abnormal conditions while viewing a photoplay. But we must not be too harsh. Most eyes should have no difficulty. The old viewpoint that motion pictures are bad for the eyes is based on conditions of many years ago. At the present time, the abnormal conditions present in the showing of a photoplay are for the most part present in the legitimate theater, at the lantern lecture, at the opera and even in some of our badly illuminated homes and offices. Except for the ntotion and the quick changes of shading on the screen, motion pictures and the theaters have much in common when it comes to the eyes.
How to Rest Eyes
The average photoplay lasts almost two hours, during which time the audience usually has the opportunity to rest the eyes by listening to music or viewing a vaudeville act. Such rest periods are very valuable and by all means should be taken advantage of. Trying to read programs in the usually dim light between acts is just as apt to bring on visual fatigue as watching the picture too steadily. For years I have made a practice of looking around the theatre, studying the decorative effects, noting the ornamentations -anything to get the eyes on different light and at different angles. This has proven very restful. Nothing will tire eyes more than looking too steadily at one point or at one kind of object. Even gazing for just a minute at one color, one letter, produces what we know as retinal fatigue. This is involved in most discomforts experienced from prolonged use of the eyes at theaters, or any steady observation at any distance, near or far.
An Improved Situation
Since the nickelodeon of long ago, so much improvement has been made in the showing of pictures that no one who has investigated the subject today can come to the conclusion that the movies harm the eyes in any way. I believe that if pictures bother the eyes, it’s the eyes, not the pictures. Those persons who sit very far down in front are apt to feel quite some eyestrain – due to the increased brilliancy of the screen at this point, the undesirable angle at which the head must be held, and the close position itself. If movies do give you uncomfortable eye sensations, by no means sit closer than half-way down. It is better to wait for a good seat than to take a bad one. If you can’t see clearly or comfortably three-fourths of the way back, it is quite likely that it is not the picture at all and your eyes should be examined.
Where Fault Lies
Today the owners of picture theaters are doing a great deal to make the eyes of their audiences more comfortable. To begin with, better films are being made—better and more gentle lighting effects, less harsh contrasts, fewer glaring white surfaces. Then, theaters are not the terrible black holes they used to be. Faint house-lights are on continually— the theater is partly illuminated. here are special acts in various colors. We have “non-flickering” projection, and film without flaws and scratches. All these are factors that have led investigators to the same conclusion.
And this is the conclusion
—
if the movies hurt your eyes, nine chances out of ten, it’s your eyes, not the movies.
—
Those eyes which never have rest except when in sleep, are the eyes that suffer from any unusual work. Possibly a long day’s drive, possibly even reading or other close application of the eyes, possibly the theater or a picture show bring discomfort or headaches—such eyes are doing more than their normal work. For them, unfortunately, the act of seeing distant objects is labor—a steady task —instead of relaxation, unless the owner of such eyes is wise enough to get optometric relief through glasses.
Picture Not at Fault
We are glad to note that in accordance with our own views on the subject, such organizations as the Eyesight Council of America, the British Committee on Eyestrain in Cinemas, The New York City Department of Health, Optometrists and Opthalmologists, illuminating engineers and optical scientists throughout the world are agreed that even though present-day picture theatres cause the eye to function under unusual conditions, such conditions are seldom at fault if the eyes cannot view a half-dozen reels of film without inconvenience or bad after effect.
The concentration necessary in the comparatively dim light is the underlying cause of discomfort in motion picture houses. But such concentration should not affect a normal pair of eyes to any considerable extent n o r should it affect eyes that are functioning normally with the aid of glasses. Persons whose eyes suffer at the movies owe it to themselves to do everything possible to prevent such an undesirable aftermath to an evening’s entertainment. Complete relief is nearly always within their reach with the proper optical help. Wewho meet the lens-wearing multitude rarely hear a complaint that motion pictures are bothersome.
It is certainly to be hoped that the bettered conditions in our finer picture theatres will continue to improve, and that the smaller theatres and the small houses in country towns will not fail to take advantage of every improvement and innovation to make the evening’s pleasure less strenuous on the public eye.
There are still millions of men and women who stay away and keep their children away from movie theaters. These people are either harboring old ideas about the harmful effect of pictures or else they are suffering from unnecessary eyestrain without knowing it. It should not be a very difficult task to re-educate them upon the subject. By endeavoring to tell these men and women the truth about eyes and the movies andat the same time continuing the good work in improving visual conditions in the motion picture theatre is one of the best ways we can think of to insure bigger and happier audiences.
