Tweet Stills from the silent era

Does anyone know, roughly, when studios started to print the title and actors names on the bottom, front, white border of stills? Most of the stills I've seen have no info other than the numbers on the picture itself.

Thanks.

[silentfilm]

Tim,
It became more common in the late 1920s. By the 1930s and 1940s, the stills almost always had the actors (and producer's and director's) names on the still. Part of this was because studios began adding a copyright notice to every still.

I have several United Artist stills from the late 1920s that have all of this information on the white border on the bottom. Paramount and Universal stills from the 1920s that were sent to newspapers have the main actor, studio, and title in tiny white letters around the border of the still. If a still was not intended for a newspaper or magazine, it did not have this identification.

Fox tended to stamp the title, stars, and director on the back with a ink and a rubber stamp. MGM (and Goldwyn and Metro) tended to type the stars and title on the back with a typewriter (or stenograph?).

But I do have a three George Kleine stills from about 1915-1916 that do have the title and star printed at the bottom of the still.

Many, many stills were issued to theaters with no identification at all, which makes the job of identifying them 90 years later difficult.

[silentfilm]

Well, I was wrong because almost all studios issued stills with an identification printed at the bottom by the end of the 1920s.











George Kleine was doing this as early as 1915.


During the teens, Paramount issued mini 8x10 lobby cards that had an identification block like this:



During the teens and early twenties, Fox would stamp film information on the back of each photo:




MGM would stencil a typewritten description on the back of their photos:


Universal usually had small type on the edge of each photo to identify it. Paramount did this for photos that were sent to newspapers.



Other studios would attach a typewritten "snipe" to the back describing the scene on the photo.

I have two identical stills of Two Arabian Knights. One still has the studio ID printed at the bottom and the other is missing it. Apparently, there were different versions of photos that were sent to theaters, distributors, and newspapers and magazines. A huge number of these had no identification on them at all, making it difficult to identify them today.

By the mid-1930s, photos always carried and ID and a copyright notice down at the bottom.

Thanks Bruce, that's great info.

Tim

Bruce is right-- most stills that carried the snipe at the bottom are meant for theaters or explicitly to be published in newspapers in conjunction with the film. The ones without are generally for magazine, newspaper and studio archive work (ie. anything not in conjunction with the film).

The snipes were made by simultaneously printing the picture negative with a snipe negative. Generally, these would be filed with the rest of the negatives, but if they were lost, subsequent printings would have no snipe or a replaced one (generally they were replaced anyway in order to mention that the picture was a reissue and to add the National Screen Service number for that reissue).

Thanks again guys. I have very few original stills but now I know what to look for.