Talk:Mutoscope

Citation

This article has a lot of good information but almost no citations for any of it. Are these going to be added? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.152.81.47 (talk) 05:30, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Trademark

If anyone wishes to claim that the term "Mutoscope" is still a registered trademark in the United States, he or she should be able to cite the registration number and date from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. If not, he or she should stop removing this provable fact from the article. — Walloon 16:21, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

~~Apologies, that was apparently a mistake on my part.~~Oh, it wasn't me that removed it, it was User:AM&BCInc.

I removed the link to the website of the American Mutoscope and Biograph Company, because that site has nothing much of interest to anyone seeking information on Mutoscopes. It is, of course, a highly relevant link in the article on American Mutoscope and Biograph Company. Dpbsmith (talk) 16:59, 30 March 2006 (UTC) Dpbsmith (talk) 17:01, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

New Mutoscopes

From reading the article, I learn that a mutoscope is a device which creates the illusion of movement by flipping cards rapidly. If that is the case, how is it possible that mutoscopes are available for cell phones? These are not, it seems, video versions of mutoscopes. Instead, from the added text, they appear to be short humorous films, not mutoscopes. Unless someone can explain this paradox the material should be removed. -Will Beback 05:58, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A "Mutoscope" is a term for the "Arcade" machine, AND the "Films" that go in them. The original films have been digitized and re-issued. The term "Mutoscope was also used for "Trading Cards" that have nothing to do with the machine, and the new films produced are also called "Mutoscopes".

--Roger the red 01:58, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The old mutoscopes have been digitized? That isn't clear from the press release. New films are just short films and have nothing to do with the topic of this article, except that the producers are calling them "mutoscopes". -Will Beback 05:47, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with what Will Beback says. — Walloon 06:22, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

First, gentlemen... I checked the press release, "American Mutoscope and Biograph Company along with Strom Magallon Entertainment and they will not only be releasing early 'Mutoscope' films" that is a partial quote from the press release. This means they are releasing them along with new "Mutoscopes", which the company has called the new short films. As it having nothing to do with the topic of this article, then you need to delete the "Mutoscope Cards" as well, because it is completely unrelated and has nothing to do with "Mutoscope" arcade machines. Yet, there has been no objections to that being in the article, which is odd. Again, I am not going to quibble over every little detail as long as it is verifiable, which it is. Again, this seems to be being blown out of proportion. I am here to add, inform, and actually to try to enjoy contributing.

--Roger the red 18:20, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I notice that almost all of your contributions to Wikipedia have been related to American Mutoscope & Biograph, and to the personnel of the current company with that name. Are you associated with that company in any way? — Walloon 18:33, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, if I were I would mention it. I am interested in film and working from oldest to newest, and work one subject at a time. With that answer, I feel as now I am under scrutiny, since your statement does not reflect on contributing knowledge to the article about the term "Mutoscope" at all. I recognize your knowledge in film and history. However, after reading your statement I also checked and found that a considerable amount of your corrections and attention has been towards American Mutoscope & Biograph and to the personnel of the current company with that name as well. With the archives I have read, I noticed that mainly you and Mr. Will beback vehemently pursued rather heated arguments about the old company and new company that is not found on any other subject you have contributed to. I do not "demand" an answer to this, just a curious thought since this format promotes the freedom to edit and contribute. One other item, is that I refuse to turn any of this into a "Personal" battle. I am too busy with life but to only contribute periodically. As I stated before, this format promotes the freedom to edit and contribute, and this should be an enjoyable experience as long as the facts are verifiable and the knowledge is helpful. If it ceases to be this way, I will not participate nor will any of my colleagues.

--Roger the red 20:25, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My AM&B contributions represent only a small portion of the hundreds of articles that I have contributed to on Wikipedia. On the other hand, your contributions on AM&B and its personnel represent almost your entire involvement with Wikipedia. That's why I asked if you had any association with the current company or its personnel. Seems like a very logical question, doesn't it? You seem awfully defensive about a simply yes or no question. — Walloon 20:50, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing defensive, just an equal question as you inquired to me. Again from your recent posting above, it has nothing to do with the subject of the article "Mutoscope". I refuse to turn anyone's contributions into a personal battle, including my own. We are free to edit and contribute as long as it goes with the policies of Wikipedia.

--Roger the red 02:15, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Removing Mutoscope cell-phone section

On reading the citations, which are entirely in the future tense, it appears these products does not yet exist and no evidence is presented that they are of any importance. I am removing it because, according to longstanding policy, Wikipedia is not a crystal ball and is not for promoting forthcoming media releases.

The material should not be reinserted until sources meeting WP:RS can be cited that show that the product a) exists, b) has received enough mainstream press coverage to establish notability, and c) can be clearly connected to the Mutoscope itself, not to the complex corporate history of the American Mutoscope and Biograph Company. Dpbsmith (talk) 09:59, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

New Mutoscopes

American Mutoscope and Biograph Company has re-issued original Mutoscope "Short Films" made during the early 1900s, through its wireless entertainment division, and has produced new Mutoscope Short Films for cellphone and wireless downloads worldwide, distributed by Strom-Magallon Entertainment.

http://www.emediawire.com/releases/2006/6/emw393395.htm

http://thevoipdigest.com/category/american-mutoscope-and-biograph-company/

Mutoscope Article Corrections/Deletions

In reference to your "Edit" on the "Mutoscope" article, the "Mutoscopes" (Old and new) do exist, and are out on two webpages that I have seen so far.

On "Importance", it was no more important than the inclusion of the "Mutoscope Cards" section, hence the inclusion.

The third reason and connection for the inclusion is that the "Mutoscope" is that the Old films from the "Mutoscope" machines were being released (i.e. Connection with old Mutoscopes).

The "New" films inclusion was because they were coined (Named) "Mutoscopes" and short films. Again, this related to the article no more than the "Mutoscope cards" which is in no way connected with the "Mutoscope" machine, except in name only (This is why I went on that line of contributing).

On your last comment, my inclusion did not reflect on the "Complex corporate history of the American Mutoscope and Biograph Company", nor was intended to. I included it since that company was the one producing and releasing them. As I had posted on the other discussion page, I feel there is a certain bias in regards to anything mentioned or included about the other "Biograph" company. It is a "Hot potato" that even had me being accused by certain other "Editors" of being affiliated with the company. that is unusual and almost to the point of paranoia, which is ridiculous and also completely against Wikipedia policy.

Everyone is suppose to be able to equally, and freely add and contribute without any harassment. But this has been taken up with the Wiki-Board already. Also, as long as the sources are "Verifiable" (And this can be one or more acredited sources), there should be no radical deletions of contributions or inclusions.

However, because of this, I have deleted any and all information that does not directly pertain too the "Mutoscope" machine in the Mutoscope article, and will continue to do so.

I do agree with the "Crystal Ball" and until there is more information on the Mutoscope releases, then that is acceptable, but I am now getting out of my realm which is film history. --Roger the red 20:30, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion relating to redirect from Kinora

Editors,

While I have no significant suggestions for the contents of the article on Mutoscopes, please note that as currently configured, searches on the term "Kinora" redirect to this topic. Kinoras, flipbooks and Mutoscopes certainly all share a close mechanical resemblance, but strictly speaking, a Kinora is distinguishable from a Mutoscope in several ways. First, the Kinora (a trademark term used by the device's manufacturer) was designed for portability and personal use, and (like stereo-optic pictures and viewers) was a Victorian household entertainment. The picture reel was constructed in a manner almost identical to the construction of a Mutoscope reel, but was smaller and had less content, on average (around 30-45 seconds of footage). The viewer (as evidenced in the current article's link to a demonstrative video of a Kinora) was mechanically simpler than the clamshell Mutoscope; the crank turned a worm gear directly linked to the shaft driving the rotation of the picture reel. As an accessory to the Kinora, well-heeled families could purchase a specialized moving picture camera whose output could be developed and transferred to a reel, making it the first widely available camera for the creation of amateur-produced filmed movement.

In contrast to the Kinora, the Mutoscope was a direct competitor to the business model established by the Nickleodeon - the Mutoscope's mechanism was more complex than the Kinora's (although still simple compared to other motor-driven or hand-cranked devices of the same era), and was designed as a relatively non-portable freestanding moving picture display unit, operable only upon insertion of money.

Because Mutoscope is a narrower term than early moving picture devices, this article's scope may need to be expanded and retitled.

Incidently, some of the other commentators have mentioned the reference to Mutoscope cards in the external links. While the confusion is understandable (the American Mutoscope and Biograph Company produced advertising postcards with cheesecake pictures; these cards were not individual frames from Mutoscope reels, but rather were published "girlie" pictures that were only tangentially related to the Mutoscope in the sense that they had evolved from advertising placards for the racier Mutoscope titles into pin-up pictures that bore no connection to or derivation from any Mutoscope moving picture products), I agree that some disambiguation notice may be needed, given the confusingly similar name for these objects. Mutoscope cards are sufficiently unrelated to Mutoscopes that the individuals who collect the former may or may not have any interest in or knowledge of the latter. — 204.65.104.241 16:48, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vintage Mutoscope Sequences Digitized?

I would think all the "videos" are out of copyright by now. Is there a site, or sites where they have been scanned into videos or animated GIFs? If so, I think that would be a good thing to add. Google isn't really helpful trying to find any such.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.202.33.17 (talk) 21:27, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]