Okay, who rated this a 1?
Look, I understand that the quality of a movie is a matter of opinion, but come on, this is the FIRST MOVIE EVER MADE! How can you rate that a 1?
shareHow is it the first movie ever made? It is a series of photos which were taken on more-or-less ordinary cameras, not a movie camera. Secondly, the images were placed on a glass disc (i.e. not film), and projected thru a zoopraxiscope. Ordinarily these images would be painted onto the glass, and one could argue that those were ‘the first animation films’ although they are not on film at all.
I will grant you that a zoopraxiscope show was perhaps more ‘cinematic’ than staring through Edison's kinetoscope, but I don't think it's right to call it ‘the first film ever made’ as ‘Sallie Gardner at a Gallop’ was more of an experiment, like many early attempts at a moving picture. I think it is best to just accept that the Lumière show in December 1895 was the first movie screening and leave it at that.
I have a better question, why are people rating this based off a gif they saw on Wikipedia? Sure Eadweard was an important guy but surely there are better ways to pay tribute to him.
I know this is not a real movie seance its not on film but still it's the first influenced film although there is a lot of confusion to when the film came out it said 1880 but I was given the inpression that it came out in 1878 I looked it up on youtube but got two diferent years 1880 and 1878 inless they remade it in 1880 if anyone can fill me in on the date I will be happy
shareCartoonfan29,
The date you seek is June 15, 1878.
Here's the excerpt from Eadweard Muybridge's wiki page.
This section is titled "Standford and Horse Gaits"
In 1872, the former governor of California Leland Stanford, a businessman and race-horse owner, hired Muybridge for some photographic studies. He had taken a position on a popularly debated question of the day — whether all four feet of a horse were off the ground at the same time while trotting.
The same question had arisen about the actions of horses during a gallop. The human eye could not break down the action at the quick gaits of the trot and gallop. Up until this time, most artists painted horses at a trot with one foot always on the ground; and at a full gallop with the front legs extended forward and the hind legs extended to the rear, and all feet off the ground.[27] Stanford sided with the assertion of "unsupported transit" in the trot and gallop, and decided to have it proven scientifically. Stanford sought out Muybridge and hired him to settle the question.[28]
In 1872, Muybridge settled Stanford's question with a single photographic negative showing his Standardbred trotting horse Occident airborne at the trot. This negative was lost, but the image survives through woodcuts made at the time (the technology for printed reproductions of photographs was still being developed). He later did additional studies, as well as improving his camera for quicker shutter speed and faster film emulsions. By 1878, spurred on by Stanford to expand the experiments, Muybridge had successfully photographed a horse at a trot;[29] lantern slides have survived of this later work.[30] Scientific American was among the publications at the time that carried reports of Muybridge's groundbreaking images.[30]
Stanford also wanted a study of the horse at a gallop. Muybridge planned to take a series of photos on 15 June 1878 at Stanford's Palo Alto Stock Farm. He placed numerous large glass-plate cameras in a line along the edge of the track; the shutter of each was triggered by a thread as the horse passed (in later studies he used a clockwork device to set off the shutters and capture the images).[31] The path was lined with cloth sheets to reflect as much light as possible. He copied the images in the form of silhouettes onto a disc to be viewed in a machine he had invented, which he called a zoopraxiscope. This device was later regarded as an early movie projector, and the process as an intermediate stage toward motion pictures or cinematography.
The study is called Sallie Gardner at a Gallop or The Horse in Motion; it shows images of the horse with all feet off the ground. This did not take place when the horse's legs were extended to the front and back, as imagined by contemporary illustrators, but when its legs were collected beneath its body as it switched from "pulling" with the front legs to "pushing" with the back legs.[28]
Here's the link to said Wiki page - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eadweard_Muybridge
That section features an animation of the pictures that were shot on that day.
Tell me, you love your country?
Well, I've just died for it. share
Muybridge’s photographs weren’t themselves animated (except for maybe in optical toys like the Zoetrope). The “movies” that Muybridge presented with his Zoöpraxiscope were images (sometimes based on his photographs) that were hand painted onto glass discs, as the second poster in the thread said. His first public exhibitions with these were in 1880. I would guess that’s why this so-called “Sallie Gardner at a Gallop” on IMDb is listed as 1880. Muybridge first published his serial photographs on cards titled “The Horse in Motion”. The card of the horse Sallie Gardner dates its recording to 19 June 1878. Photographs of another horse, Abe Edgington, have the earliest date, which is 15 June 1878. Any pictures taken on the 15th of Sallie Gardner are lost.
By the way, YouTube and Wikipedia contain a lot of misinformation in respect to Muybridge. Many of the animations claimed to be of Sallie Gardner aren’t even that, but are of another horse that Muybridge photographed years later.
Technically, the first film ever made, from what I have researched so far, was Passage de Venus (1874)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt3155794/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LowU9vKZzJs
Not a film, not photographed on a strip through a single lense, doesn't count.
----
Even if you hate Uwe Boll, give Postal a try, be offended or entertained.