text:
Talk:Fish and chips

Picture
Is this picture appropriate for the article? The actual fish and chips is so small that it's hard to see, especially in the thumbnail. The beach and the two guys sitting on it take up most of the space. J I P | Talk 13:20, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Not sure how the woman on the left would feel about the "two guys" description, but that goes to show you that it's hard to tell what's going on in this picture. It's not a good photo, I'd say go ahead and delete or replace it. Also, do we really need to be advertising Gordon Ramsay's restaurant? --IamNotU (talk) 14:00, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Good heavens. Did those poor folks know they were being photographed?! (Is the one on the right Mr Ronay?) Martinevans123 (talk) 14:16, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I've removed the image from the article. J I P  | Talk 21:36, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
 * In fairness, a lot of the images in this article are unneeded. How many photos of fish and chips does one need to get the handle on what it is? I support the removal, certainly. ‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalencia  ᐐT₳LKᐬ  21:48, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

TWO main ingredients imported?/Origin of pairing of foods
I object to fish being called an immigrant food. We have been eating fish in the UK since the first people came here. Batter has been used here so long its not considered fusion either....No one knows where it came from. Stop with your contrived xenophillic nonsense! The Sephardic jewish story is not confirmed and we were eating battered food before they arrived. Its flour and water! Even an English cook can manage that! — Preceding unsigned comment added by EmOgy (talk • contribs) 08:53, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * The article is about "fish battered and fried in oil" and served with potato chips as a single dish. Not about fish in general, or even battered fish in general.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:16, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

I have actually updated this in the lead as it is currently quite misleading to put it that immigrants established it (or to say for certain it came from anywhere else for that matter) and it is disputed between two families - Lees (Manchester) and Malin (London) and I have added sources, but also fried fish and chips existed long before the first shops opened. The first commenter is correct when saying 'No one knows where it came from' in absolute terms. Due to this - asserting that it arrived with immigrants OR that it was purely homogeneous would thus both be incorrect, that is unless cast iron evidence emerges, which is very unlikely. In one of the sources used it even states that 'Who first had the bright idea to marry fish with chips remains the subject of fierce controversy and we will probably never know for sure. It is safe to say it was somewhere in England but arguments rage over whether it was up north or down south. Some credit a northern entrepreneur called John Lees. As early as 1863, it is believed he was selling fish and chips out of a wooden hut at Mossley market in industrial Lancashire. Others claim the first combined fish 'n' chip shop was actually opened by a Jewish immigrant, Joseph Malin, within the sound of Bow Bells in East London around 1860.' Glaaaastonbury88 (talk) 08:23, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

 * Per the earlier reply above and my recent edit summaries, the article regards fish AND chips. Familiarise yourself with WP:BRD and do not WP:SOCK. Mutt Lunker (talk) 10:36, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

 * The first paragraph states that the component ingredients were brought to Britain via immigrants. The fact that most likely Potatoes were brought back by Britons themselves and that Fish are native to Britain dispels that entire idea. Hence why to say Fish and Chips is an immigrant dish based on those factors is false. 86.5.160.43 (talk) 17:00, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
 * You are of course correct, but it's rather naive to assume that the other side of this debate is interested in an accurate history of fish and chips. They are interested in portraying as foreign something which is widely (and correctly) perceived as being quintessentially English and/or British.
 * Yes, potatoes existed in Britain, but finger-shaped chipped potatoes fried in oil are generally considered to have originated in Belgium or France. Similarly, while fish existed, fish coated in batter and fried in oil is considered to have been introduced in London by Jewish immigrants. Please see the article for the numerous cited references. --IamNotU (talk) 18:09, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Correct. The article is about Fish (from the sea) and chips (from potatoes) two basic things that have been available in the UK since...insert date here. The article lead seems to be able to know exactly ('as its two main ingredients were introduced by immigrants) who first paired this and attributes it to 'immigrants' - even though the sources used to assert this themselves say it is not as clear cut as that, thus the lead is false and not factual. I'm not sure why you are struggling with this? To say it was NOT created by immigrants or that it WAS, is not true at this time unless further evidence prevails, thus you are reverting the article to be incorrect and inaccurate.Glaaaastonbury88 (talk) 10:47, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Also - you are accusing me of WP:SOCK - if you look at my IP, I have nothing to do with the other comments. You are totally incorrect, have zero evidence and should refrain from making stupid assumptions. What is causing you to be triggered in this way to accuse me of something, just because I agree with another user? Glaaaastonbury88 (talk) 10:53, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

 * No, it does not attribute the pairing to immigrants, it attributes both elements of that pairing to immigrants. Mutt Lunker (talk) 10:56, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Exactly - and that isn't proven to be true. You are struggling to answer my questions, accuse me of sock-puppetry and cannot seem to understand that the sources are dubious and allude to this fact. Perhaps get your facts right before making these silly assumptions. Thus I have every right to revert the page to be more factual where it states that 'The dish originated in England and is an example of culinary fusion, as its two main ingredients were introduced by immigrants' to 'The dish originated in England and is an example of culinary fusion, as its two main ingredients may have been introduced by immigrants, but this is disputed.' Glaaaastonbury88 (talk) 10:58, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

 * You would need to provide a WP:RS that actively notes this dispute, not your own misrepresentation of sources that say nothing of the kind. Mutt Lunker (talk) 11:05, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

 * Again, WP:BRD. Do not war to impose your edits, discuss to attain consensus. Mutt Lunker (talk) 11:08, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello again, You don't seem to understand or perhaps I don't understand you, and have already wrongly accused me of sockpuppetry. You mention that 'your own misrepresentation of sources that say nothing of the kind.' I have to wonder if you have even read the attributed sources yourself? You seem to be the disruptive one to me and I'm not sure why you accuse me of strange things and are not actually reading my points? Perhaps we need a third opinion as we might be crossing wires?

Source 1 states (and is included in the opening lead): 'Who first had the bright idea to marry fish with chips remains the subject of fierce controversy and we will probably never know for sure. It is safe to say it was somewhere in England but arguments rage over whether it was up north or down south.'

The key words being 'we will probably never know for sure' This renders the opening lead incorrect on it's own. But lets look at some other sources.

Source 2 (that you delete) states: 'The first fish and chip shop in the North of England is thought to have opened in Mossely, near Oldham, Lancashire, around 1863. Mr Lees sold fish and chips from a wooden hut in the market and later he transferred the business to a permanent shop across the road which had the following inscription in the window, “This is the first fish and chip shop in the world”. However in London, it is said that Joseph Malin opened a fish and chip shop in Cleveland Street within the sound of Bow Bells in 1860.'

The key words here being 'thought to have' and 'is said that' - meaning there is ambiguity around these assertions that should be represented in the opening lead for transparency.

Source 3 states that; 'Fish and chips were first served together as a complete dish around 1860 - the Malin family of London and the Lee's of Mossley, near Manchester both staking claims to be the first.'

The key words here being 'both staking claims to be the first' thus they refrain from deciding who did it first because....(drum roll) - no one knows, thus the opening lead is incorrect.

So respectfully I ask, Please do enlighten me - how am I misrepresenting sources? I don't even eat fish (but I do love chips) and I don't care if 'immigrants' (Who HAVE undeniably contributed to what makes this country great in other cuisines etc.) paired the two or not and I don't care if 'non-immigrants' paired it or not - as a member of an 'immigrant' family myself, I just care that wikipedia presents articles fairly and am simply trying to say that; 'we do not know for sure' thus the article opening of 'as its two main ingredients were introduced by immigrants' is incorrect and could be easily corrected by adding 'as its two main ingredients may have been introduced by immigrants, but this is disputed.'Glaaaastonbury88 (talk) 11:40, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

 * , you wrote: it is currently quite misleading to put it that immigrants established it. You seem to be misreading the sentence, which to me is quite clear: it says "its two main ingredients were introduced by immigrants". That means:
 * Chips of potatoes fried in oil were introduced by immigrants from France or Belgium (or wherever).
 * Fish coated in batter and fried in oil was introduced by immigrants from the Netherlands (or Spain, Portugal, or wherever).
 * That is all.
 * It does not mean:
 * The two ingredients were first combined by immigrants to create the dish "fish and chips".
 * The first fish and chip shop was opened by an immigrant.
 * Anything else.
 * It says this (first list) makes it an example of culinary fusion. Culinary fusion is the combination of traditional dishes or techniques and ingredients from two or more different regional or ethnic cuisines, to create a novel dish. It doesn't imply that the person creating the fusion is affiliated with either of the constituent cuisines, and it's often the case that they aren't.
 * You have talked at length regarding a dispute about whether the new dish "fish and chips" was established, or the ingredients first paired, by immigrants or by persons unknown. Your arguments, and the sources you've given, do support the idea that we don't know for certain who did the things in the second list. But there is no actual dispute about this; the sentence does not purport to address that question, but rather the things in the first list only.
 * Claiming that the sources support a dispute about the first list, rather than the second list, would be a misrepresentation of said sources.
 * Note that the original comment claimed that battered fried fish on its own was not introduced to the UK by immigrants, but has been popular there since time immemorial, and No one knows where it came from. ... The Sephardic jewish story is not confirmed and we were eating battered food before they arrived. - this is a completely different claim, and I have not seen any sources that support it. --IamNotU (talk) 13:21, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
 * IamNotU Ahhhhhh I see! Thank you for taking the time to point this out. It makes more sense now. In that case, I of course concede the point.I would perhaps suggest that to make this clearer to us dunces it should read ' The dish originated in England and is an example of culinary fusion, as its two main ingredients were introduced by immigrants and then combined together to be sold in different cities.' Or something like that, I just think it might need to be spelled out in more detail and wrapped up a bit better. As for the latter part of battering fish - I read a blog that it was indeed Jewish settlers who introduced batter to fish, although I would not say this means that it never happened before in the UK - but this is mentioned in the article. Thanks again. Glaaaastonbury88 (talk) 13:57, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
 * What about something like this?
 * Does that solve it? (PS, could you look at WP:INDENT? Thanks.) --IamNotU (talk) 15:04, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Wow yes, I think that makes it much clearer and adds to the alluring 'mystery' in a positive and informing way, but also helps to later explain the information better where it 'supposes' upon who first combined it. Ah yes sorry about not indenting. I read the page you suggested and think I have the hang of it now now. Thanks very much. :) Glaaaastonbury88 (talk) 15:12, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
 * It's even worse, though. The word immigrant shouldn't even be in there. There's literally no evidence to say that immigrants brought Potatoes/Chips to Britain other than conjecture. It's arguably far more likely that Britons themselves brought back Potatoes from abroad. Fish are native to Britain. Frying Fish and making Chips are very much in the scope of possibility for a native origin. I would say likely. So to say it was immigrants, especially Jewish immigrants which seems oddly specific and biased, flies in the face of Occam's Razor when not presented with sufficient evidence to make such claims, at the least. 86.5.160.43 (talk) 17:00, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Wow yes, I think that makes it much clearer and adds to the alluring 'mystery' in a positive and informing way, but also helps to later explain the information better where it 'supposes' upon who first combined it. Ah yes sorry about not indenting. I read the page you suggested and think I have the hang of it now now. Thanks very much. :) Glaaaastonbury88 (talk) 15:12, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
 * It's even worse, though. The word immigrant shouldn't even be in there. There's literally no evidence to say that immigrants brought Potatoes/Chips to Britain other than conjecture. It's arguably far more likely that Britons themselves brought back Potatoes from abroad. Fish are native to Britain. Frying Fish and making Chips are very much in the scope of possibility for a native origin. I would say likely. So to say it was immigrants, especially Jewish immigrants which seems oddly specific and biased, flies in the face of Occam's Razor when not presented with sufficient evidence to make such claims, at the least. 86.5.160.43 (talk) 17:00, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

thanks for engaging with this user at what should be quite unnecessary lengths, regarding the same unfounded claims about the article that I had countered this morning. Their very long, confused post, which came after my last engagement this morning, starts to convey that it was actually that they really were so obtuse that they were drawing these wholly unwarranted conclusions from the text.

I don't think your added wording is necessary for the lede, think it is more succinct without it, would be interested to hear if there are any objections from others but will hold off from opposing it if it somehow helps stem the periodic attacks on this aspect of the article. Mutt Lunker (talk) 19:27, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes some of what you said was quite obtuse - like accusing me of being a sockpuppet. All IamNotU did was kindly take some time to explain the text and actually read my posts - that's how he resolved it. You mention that you will 'hold off from opposing it if it somehow helps stem the periodic attacks on this aspect of the article' - you are conceding that there is an issue with the lede then given that there are these dramatic 'periodic attacks' on the article that you mention, thus an update would surely help stop these vicious and nasty attacks from obtuse and confused non-neurotypical editors like myself. Glaaaastonbury88 (talk) 20:05, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I think that 's proposal is an improvement. Accusing other editors of being "obtuse" is rarely a good idea - it usually simply shows that the text needs to be clarified.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 20:09, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

 * "Obtuse" does not imply that good faith is lacking, as your link would indicate you believe it to.
 * If I am conceding anything about the lede, it is that the element of immigrant involvement in the subject's origins has attracted the negative attention of those who appear to be offended at such a notion, rather than contesting it on factual grounds. If this change assists in rebutting such, well and good.
 * I very evidently also read your posts since I pointed out the flaws in their claims from the start. Do not expect every editor to be as patient as IamNotU, particularly if you war as you did. Mutt Lunker (talk) 23:24, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
 * You also need to take more care about who you are responding to. I haven't commented before in this discussion, so I haven't made any claims, "flawed" or not.   And it would be good if you withdrew the claim that I have "warred".  Thanks.   Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:42, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

 * For clarity, the responses were to the various statements made by those who made them. I was pointing out to Ghmyrtle that whatever "obtuse" means, it doesn't imply bad faith; clarification rather than backpeddling (Glaaaastonbury88). That was a substantial part of my point, in that, with Glaaaastonbury88's subsequent posts it was clearer that they seemingly genuinely hadn't understood the article and either hadn't read or hadn't understood my responses to their misunderstanding, rather than the bad faith POV-pushing mischaracterisation of the article that I had assumed their editing had been. (The warring/disruptiveness is not so good on the GF front though...)
 * The comments regarding flawed claims and warring were intended for the editor responsible, ie. Glaaaastonbury88. Apologies to Ghmyrtle if it seemed I was atrributing this to them; I'm well aware of their editing and it would be highly out of character of them. Mutt Lunker (talk) 16:34, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

 * I think it's worthwhile to mention not only that it's a "common take-away food" in the UK, but to give some indication of its legendary status... but it may be that my suggestion makes the second sentence a bit long. Happy to accept improvements. Let's keep the comments focused on the content and improving the article, ok? --IamNotU (talk) 21:07, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Your replies have clearly come from a place of condescension though and now you back peddle on the use of 'Obtuse' - just own it instead. Definition of Obtuse: 'annoyingly insensitive or slow to understand.' Similar words linked include 'stupid, dull, slow-witted, slow, dull-witted, unintelligent'. You clearly think I am all of those things and a quick look in the dictionary reveals it's meaning so nice try. And still no apology for accusing me of being a puppet person and you have revealed your own true discrimination's; 'it is that the element of immigrant involvement in the subject's origins has attracted the negative attention of those who appear to be offended at such a notion' - so you admit to thinking there is some kind of conspiracy to changing it because one previous editor (who doesn't seem to exist anymore?) and then myself brought up a link we felt didn't make sense? You also make another daft assumption that some kind of 'taking of offence' took place? I think you actually accused me of being a puppet to try and undermine my answers by pretending my 'attack' was linked to the other editor. You further try to demean me (despite conceding the point after someone bothered to reply to me properly) by assuming I am offended by immigrants - despite my Grandfathers family being of immigrants. Bizarre logic - so nobody in your world is able to criticise things if 'immigrants' are involved by the sound of it. Quite frankly you seem to be a bit of a bully and I won't be replying to you anymore and will now move on - wishing you all the best anyway.Glaaaastonbury88 (talk) 07:12, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

 * There have been several other editors, or identities, not just one, targetting this aspect of the text in recent weeks; one on the talk page and at least two four to the article itself. I think historically there has been similar targetting of it, though I have not checked further back. Again, per above, the objections of at least some of these editors appeared to be offence at the text, yours now appears instead to be an understanding of the text other than what was intended, of which it is apparent that IAmNotU successfully disabused you. Mutt Lunker (talk) 16:34, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Now on the subject of Fish and chips, I can't really think of any better way of improving the lede better than has already suggested, sorry - apart from maybe inserting the word 'traditional' somewhere to allude to it's legendary status?

 * Maybe? I don't mind if not. Glaaaastonbury88 (talk) 07:06, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm not keen on "traditional", especially as there is clear evidence that the pairing was made in the relatively recent historical past, by person or persons unknown. And it's definitely not "legendary".   Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:45, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Fair enough, I thought that because of the 'Fish Friday' tradition that is still adhered to (well judging when I go past the local chippy) today, but not precious about it.Glaaaastonbury88 (talk) 08:08, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
 * That's just a commercial take on old religious traditions - article here - so not directly related to the "..and chips" meal. Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:18, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm late to the conversation, but shouldn't it be "two main components" rather than "two main ingredients" as suggested? Ingredient usually only refers to the "raw materials" (for lack of a better term) that go into the dish; once they are fried they are no longer ingredients. And I don't think anyone is suggesting that fish is something that wasn't eaten in England before immigrants brought it to the country. -- Calidum  17:17, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes - "components" would be better than "ingredients". Ghmyrtle (talk) 17:28, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Hmmm not sure on 'components' over 'ingredients' - sounds very clinical. Unless that is how say a culinary school would describe them? I am thinking about a dish called 'Bubble & Squeak' which uses up food leftovers from a 'roast dinner'. They simply become ingredients again to remake a new dish so not sure on the rules. But take for example this recipe page - the cooked foods being used as called 'ingredients' again. Glaaaastonbury88 (talk) 20:31, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I'd agree that, as they are two distinct elements, themselves composed of ingredients, ingredients is not really a satisfactory term. "Components" would be preferable or, though I have no preference for them, "component parts", "constituent (part)s", "items", "elements". Mutt Lunker (talk) 21:01, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm open to other terms, I just don't think ingredients is the right fit. -- Calidum  00:19, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
 * This article says "parts"... "The dish has two parts and the fish came first...."  OK with me.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:36, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

In response to Mutt Lunker's comment about being succint, and the other comments above, I did some work to tighten it up a bit. This isn't much longer than the existing version:

--IamNotU (talk) 21:32, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

I think ingredients is fine', personally...it is the most natural sounding word out of all the alternatives toyed with, and I very sincerely doubt that any reader of this article would not know what 'ingredients' means in this case, nor would such usage implant any wrongful ideas in their heads regarding how the word ought to be used, or what it means...I attribute this getting carried away to you all being in a (justified) state of shell shock in this war-ravaged discussion thread. Firejuggler86 (talk) 09:32, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

There were a few edits recently that left the sentence in a poor condition, with an incorrect explanation of what "culinary fusion" is - it's not just putting two foods together. Rather than revert to the older version, I went ahead with this, hope it's ok. I just referred to the "two components" because "component foods" sounds awkward to me.

--IamNotU (talk) 12:51, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

 * Originated in England? No, fish and chips originated in the Netherlands. See Lekkerbekje!(Tongue in cheek)
 * Maybe the article should say something like: "the etymology of the words 'fish' and 'chips' suggests that 'fish and chips' originated in England, although other identical dishes are known throught the world." ;-)
 * One thing is certain, old world fish and chips did not exist before 1492!Aid1969 (talk) 16:24, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

 * Tongue in cheek never sounds that appetising to me. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:30, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

Fish and chips in Mexico
I found this image in the category "Fish and chips in Mexico" at Commons. Is this really fish and chips? There is certainly fish in the picture, and chips, but the fish don't appear to be battered or deep-fried. Therefore I think this represents "fish" and "chips" but not "fish and chips". J I P | Talk 15:04, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
 * What's your point? Are you proposing to add this to the article? No, that should not be done. --IamNotU (talk) 16:07, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
 * No, I am asking whether the food in the picture is "fish and chips" or not. J I P  | Talk 16:31, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I would say that this is just fish with chips, and has nothing to do with this article ADookie (talk) 16:59, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

British cuisine
I'm no culinary researcher, especially not in English cuisine, but should this be added to the English cuisine category article? I mean fish and chip shops is literally a section in the normal English Cuisine article. ECPBlue (talk) 01:08, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

"A" dish?
How is this "a" dish? Is "burger and fries" a single dish? No. This is no different.--Khajidha (talk) 16:47, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Why is burger and fries not a dish? But there is a difference, as this one has no burger. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:55, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Because they are separate items. Calling "fish and chips" a single dish is like saying that any two things eaten at the same meal is one dish. --Khajidha (talk) 18:22, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I think the metonymical use of noun is sufficiently loose to allow several components. So you'd have a dish of fish with a separate dish of chips? The Daily Express says here "FISH and chips is a dish more loved by this nation than any pie, pasty or Marmite soldier"? Martinevans123 (talk)
 * Yes, this is two dishes. A main dish of fish and a side dish of chips. --Khajidha (talk) 18:42, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
 * It's usually wrapped in the same paper. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:11, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
 * The assumption that two meal components eaten together should be described as two "dishes" is incorrect. Beans on toast.  Curry with rice.  Ham and eggs.  Fish and chips.  They are all single dishes, components of a meal.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 06:48, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Beans on toast and curry on rice are no longer separable, just like biscuits and gravy or spaghetti with meat sauce. But ham and eggs or fish and chips retain their distinct identities. At least where I am from, those would not be described as single dishes. --Khajidha (talk) 12:51, 10 August 2021 (UTC) \
 * PS- if the curry is served beside the rice instead of over it, it would be two dishes. --Khajidha (talk) 12:55, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Where I'm from, "biscuits and gravy" is something one might feed a dog. So I suspect something may have been lost in translation here. I'm sure beans still have an identity, even when they are on toast. But what about very runny egg that runs all over the ham? Martinevans123 (talk) 12:58, 10 August 2021 (UTC) p.s. if the curry and rice were served in two different restaurants, yes they would be separate dishes.

 * Fish and chips is "a dish" just as steak frites is a dish. Both dishes include proteins paired with friend potatoes. -- Calidum  19:34, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
 * That wouldn't be a single dish either. --Khajidha (talk) 20:16, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, that article also calls it "a dish." "Haggis, neeps and tatties (mashed swede and potatoes) is a dish traditionally served on Burns' Night, the celebration of Scottish poet Robert Burns' birthday." Martinevans123 (talk) 20:26, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
 * User:Khajidha where are you from, it sounds fantastic. How many dishes is kedgeree? Irish stew must be at least five dishes, and corned beef hash is probably a culinary nightmare. Proper fish, chips, mushy peas, brown bread and butter and a pot of tea might just be divided into two dishes by a pedant, but an encyclopedia wont label a dish such as F+C as TWO dishes. hahaha. -Roxy the grumpy dog . wooF 13:07, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
 * North Carolina. And kedgeree, Irish stew, and corned beef hash would all be individual dishes as they are mixed during the cooking. --Khajidha (talk) 13:18, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Liver and onions is a dish, it seems. But I suspect it's because the onions have lost their identity. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:20, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
 * In NC, nobody eats shakshouka, they eat eggs and tomatoes. -Roxy the grumpy dog . wooF 13:25, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Mixtures of things thrown together and cooked in a single pot or pan are "one thing", while things cooked separately and placed beside each other on a plate are "multiple things", and things covered in glops of something (like a sauce, gravy, or baked beans) are "one thing". --Khajidha (talk) 13:32, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Ah, so the application of tomato ketchup makes fish and chips into a single dish?? Martinevans123 (talk) 13:35, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I've never seen anyone apply that much ketchup to the plate, but sure, if you drown the plate in ketchup to make the whole thing an indistinguishable mass. I'd more commonly see the ketchup on the side and each piece of fish or chip dunked into it, leaving the two still separate. --Khajidha (talk) 13:39, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
 * In the UK some folks actually have their fish and chips with gravy (even non-dog owners). I guess the chips might drown. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:55, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Do you mean real brown gravy Martin, or the white sauce that americans put on their scones? -Roxy the grumpy dog . wooF 14:13, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
 * "Real brown gravy?? You were lucky.... we 'ad to suck on a piece of damp cloth!" Martinevans123 (talk) 14:16, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

About the oil
I recall hearing on the radio (NPR) about the cotton industry history. This program mentioned the growth of cottonseed exports to Britain along with the cotton itself for the oil to be used for fish and chips. This seems sensible as the oil was certainly available and Lancashire was both an origin of commercial fish and chips as well as a cotton textile center. A quick examination didn't turn up info about cottonseed and fish and chips but the assertion that animal fat was the primary source doesn't wash. The volume of oil required suggests something in addition to those sources.24.93.109.183 (talk) 19:32, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

 * So how much oil was required? Why could that amount not be met with animal fat alone? And what period are we talking about, anyway? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:41, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
 * You'll need references to back it up, but it doesn't sound right. There's always been plenty of animal fats and tallow in the UK plus other oils, so it doesn't seem likely. Canterbury Tail talk 20:44, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

Chips: a philosophical inquiry
Are chips a type of french fry? Or are they something else entirely? Editors who are interested in this question are encouraged to join the discussion at Talk:Chip butty. (Please post there and not here, to keep the discussion all in one place. Thanks.)  — Mudwater (Talk) 22:21, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

Rock salmon: wrong link?
In the Choice of fish subsection (the first subsection within Composition), the first paragraph mentions "… vendors also sell many other kinds of fish, especially other white fish, such as pollock, hake or coley, plaice, skate, ray, and huss or rock salmon (a term covering several species of dogfish and similar fish)." [Note: All links removed from the quote except the relevant one.] That given description of rock salmon does not match the description of "rock salmon" on the rock salmon page. The rock salmon page is for a separate dish called "rock salmon", which seems to me to be distinct from the dish of fish and chips here.

My questions are, first, am I just missing something here, and does it all actually make sense? (I’m not from a culture that eats much fish and chips, so perhaps this is just me misunderstanding terminology or something.)

Second, assuming it’s not just me, then how is this issue corrected? Should there be a new, separate article to which this points, something like Rock salmon (types of fish), with a basic description that reads something like "Rock salmon is a term covering several species of dogfish and similar fish, which are commonly used in fish and chips in the United Kingdom and Ireland."? Or should the current rock salmon page be amended in some way to clarify the different meanings, if perhaps the two are more closely linked than I realized?

I wasn’t sure what to do here, so I figured I’d add it to the talk page. Just some food – specifically fish and chips – for thought! Phatmatt12188 (talk) 18:32, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

 * I think the image on the rock salmon page is misleading, as is the statement there that it is "a dish popular in Britain, based on shark...".  The photo is apparently from a restaurant in Santorini, Greece - https://www.flickr.com/photos/jabbarman/2600406103/ - and I have no idea what species it shows.  I have never seen a dish like it in Britain - though I'm sure it could be done - and have never known rock salmon outside the context of it being sometimes part of fish and chips.  I think the solution is to amend the rock salmon page - which I've now done.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 19:28, 5 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Agreed. The rock salmon mention in this article seems correct, it's the actual rock salmon article that needs just a little tweaking. Canterbury Tail talk 19:28, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

"John Lennon"
Is the reference to John Lennon's liking of ketchup vital to the article? OptimizeAllTheThings (talk) 18:03, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Absolutely not. If it was someone like Harry Ramsden then it may be up for discussion, but a random celeb with no connection to fish and chips who takes ketchup, definitely not. Canterbury Tail talk 18:06, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
 * He preferred fish and finger pies. Allegedly. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:46, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 April 2024
Because fish and chips was not invented in England so the place of origin is wrong. Fish and chips was invented in Portugal. So putting as England is misinformation. Rin1990 (talk) 05:45, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

https://docksidehhi.com/the-history-of-fish-and-chips/ https://www.rescue.org/uk/article/little-known-history-fish-and-chips#:~:text=Some%20argue%20that%20the%20first,Spanish%2C%20and%20Eastern%20European%20refugees.
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: The first website is that of a restaurant and hence isn't considered a reliable source. The same probably also applies for the second website, but that doesn't matter, because it says "it’s likely the popular dish originated from our capital", which explicitly contradicts your claim. Liu1126 (talk) 11:49, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

Fish and chips sold in Iceland - traditional dish includes its Icelandic Cod.
Last year, I took a trip to Iceland and only visited the Southern part of the country. Throughout my time there, I have noticed that restaurants and food trailers do in fact serve fish and chips, per part of the Icelandic cod. However, I highly recommend doing some deep searching for sources to prove this, unless you can spend some time yourself going to the country or do similar search results to find out this reliability. Also consider expanding into looking for more countries that house this recipe. Thank you, Ｍｏｄ ｃｒｅａｔｏｒ 🏡 🗨 📝 18:58, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
 * You are not a reliable source, you'll need reliable sources and the source you used previously in no way supported the content. Canterbury Tail talk 22:30, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
 * That's why I said, in quote "I highly recommend doing some deep searching for sources to prove this, unless you can spend some time yourself going to the country or do similar search results to find out this reliability." Ｍｏｄ ｃｒｅａｔｏｒ 🏡 🗨 📝 00:33, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Not up to me to do any research into it. The WP:ONUS is on the person trying to add the information to ensure its properly referenced. <b style="color: Blue;">Canterbury Tail</b> <i style="color: Blue;">talk</i> 01:19, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Well others can find the discussion right here, and then they'll really start looking for that stuff, or per my recommendation to go visit the country to see for themselves. Say what you gotta say. Ｍｏｄ ｃｒｅａｔｏｒ 🏡 🗨 📝 03:03, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Fish and chips


text:
Sowing

Sowing is the process of planting seeds. An area or object that has had seeds planted in it will be described as a sowed or sown area.

Plants which are usually sown
Among the major field crops, oats, wheat, and rye are sown, grasses and legumes are seeded and maize and soybeans are planted. In planting, wider rows (generally 75 cm (30 in) or more) are used, and the intent is to have precise; even spacing between individual seeds in the row, various mechanisms have been devised to count out individual seeds at exact intervals.

Depth of sowing

In sowing, little if any soil is placed over the seeds, as seeds can be generally sown into the soil by maintaining a planting depth of about 2-3 times the size of the seed.

Sowing types and patterns
For hand sowing, several sowing types exist; these include:
 * Flat sowing
 * Ridge sowing
 * Wide bed sowing

Several patterns for sowing may be used together with these types; these include:
 * Rows that are indented at the even rows (so that the seeds are
 * Symmetrical grid pattern – using the pattern described in The Garden of Cyrus placed in a crossed pattern). This method is much better, as more light may fall on the seedlings as they come out.

Hand sowing
Hand sowing or (planting) is the process of casting handfuls of seed over prepared ground: broadcasting, that is, broadcast seeding (from which the technological term is derived). Usually, a drag or harrow is employed to incorporate the seed into the soil. Though labor-intensive for any but small areas, this method is still used in some situations. Practice is required to sow evenly and at the desired rate. A hand seeder can be used for sowing, though it is less of a help than it is for the smaller seeds of grasses and legumes.

Hand sowing may be combined with pre-sowing in seed trays. This allows the plants to come to strength indoors during cold periods (e.g. spring in temperate countries).

Seed drill
In agriculture, most seed is now sown using a seed drill, which offers greater precision; seed is sown evenly and at the desired rate. The drill also places the seed at a measured distance below the soil, so that less seed is required. The standard design uses a fluted feed metering system, which is volumetric in nature; individual seeds are not counted. Rows are typically about 10–30 cm apart, depending on the crop species and growing conditions. Several row opener types are used depending on soil type and local tradition. Grain drills are most often drawn by tractors, but can also be pulled by horses. Pickup trucks are sometimes used, since little draft is required.

A seed rate of about 100 kg of seed per hectare (2 bushels per acre) is typical, though rates vary considerably depending on crop species, soil conditions, and farmer's preference. Excessive rates can cause the crop to lodge, while too thin a rate will result in poor utilisation of the land, competition with weeds and a reduction in the yield.

Open field
Open-field planting refers to the form of sowing used historically in the agricultural context whereby fields are prepared generically and left open, as the name suggests, before being sown directly with seed. The seed is frequently left uncovered at the surface of the soil before germinating and therefore exposed to the prevailing climate and conditions like storms etc. This is in contrast to the seedbed method used more commonly in domestic gardening or more specific (modern) agricultural scenarios where the seed is applied beneath the soil surface and monitored and manually tended frequently to ensure more successful growth rates and better yields.

Pre-treatment of seed and soil before sowing

Before sowing, certain seeds first require a treatment prior to the sowing process. This treatment may be seed scarification, stratification, seed soaking or seed cleaning with cold (or medium hot) water.

Seed soaking is generally done by placing seeds in medium hot water for at least 24 to up to 48 hours Seed cleaning is done especially with fruit, as the flesh of the fruit around the seed can quickly become prone to attack from insects or plagues. Seed washing is generally done by submerging cleansed seeds 20 minutes in 50 degree Celsius water. This (rather hot than moderately hot) water kills any organisms that may have survived on the skin of a seed. Especially with easily infected tropical fruit such as lychees and rambutans, seed washing with high-temperature water is vital.

In addition to the mentioned seed pretreatments, seed germination is also assisted when a disease-free soil is used. Especially when trying to germinate difficult seed (e.g. certain tropical fruit), prior treatment of the soil (along with the usage of the most suitable soil; e.g. potting soil, prepared soil or other substrates) is vital. The two most used soil treatments are pasteurisation and sterilisation. Depending on the necessity, pasteurisation is to be preferred as this does not kill all organisms. Sterilisation can be done when trying to grow truly difficult crops. To pasteurise the soil, the soil is heated for 15 minutes in an oven of 120 °C.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Sowing


text:
16 mm film

16 mm film is a historically popular and economical gauge of film. 16 mm refers to the width of the film (about $2/3$ inch); other common film gauges include 8 mm and 35 mm. It is generally used for non-theatrical (e.g., industrial, educational, televisual) film-making, or for low-budget motion pictures. It also existed as a popular amateur or home movie-making format for several decades, alongside 8 mm film and later Super 8 film. Eastman Kodak released the first 16 mm "outfit" in 1923, consisting of a camera, projector, tripod, screen and splicer, for US$335. RCA-Victor introduced a 16 mm sound movie projector in 1932, and developed an optical sound-on-film 16 mm camera, released in 1935.

History
Eastman Kodak introduced 16 mm film in 1923, as a less expensive alternative to 35 mm film for amateurs. The same year the Victor Animatograph Corporation started producing their own 16 mm cameras and projectors. During the 1920s, the format was often referred to by the professional industry as 'sub-standard'.

Kodak hired Willard Beech Cook from his 28 mm Pathescope of America company to create the new 16 mm 'Kodascope Library'. In addition to making home movies, people could buy or rent films from the library, a key selling aspect of the format.

Intended for amateur use, 16 mm film was one of the first formats to use acetate safety film as a film base. Kodak never used nitrate film for the format, owing to the high flammability of the nitrate base. 35 mm nitrate was discontinued in 1952.

Production evolution
The silent 16 mm format was initially aimed at the home enthusiast, but by the 1930s it had begun to make inroads into the educational market. The addition of optical sound tracks and, most notably, Kodachrome in 1935, gave an enormous boost to its popularity. The format was used extensively during World War II, and there was a huge expansion of 16 mm professional filmmaking in the post-war years. Films for government, business, medical and industrial clients created a large network of 16 mm professional filmmakers and related service industries in the 1950s and 1960s. The advent of television production also enhanced the use of 16 mm film, initially for its advantage of cost and portability over 35 mm. At first used as a news-gathering format, the 16 mm format was also used to create television programming shot outside the confines of the more rigid television studio production sets. The home movie market gradually switched to the even less expensive 8 mm and Super 8 mm film formats.

16 mm, using light cameras, was extensively used for television production in many countries before portable video cameras appeared. In Britain, the BBC's Ealing-based film department made significant use of 16mm film and, during its peak, employed over 50 film crews. Throughout much of the 1960s–1990s period, these crews made use of cameras such as the Arriflex ST and Eclair NPR in combination with quarter-inch sound recorders, such as the Nagra III. Using these professional tools, film department crews would work on some of the most significant programmes produced by the BBC, including Man Alive, Panorama and Chronicle. Usually made up of five people, these small crews were able to work incredibly efficiently and, even in hostile environments, were able to film an entire programme with a shooting ratio of less than 5:1.

Beginning in the 1950s, news organizations and documentarians in the United States frequently shot on portable Auricon and, later, CP-16 cameras that were self-blimped and had the ability to record sound directly on film. The introduction of magnetic striped film further improved sound fidelity.

Replacing analog video devices, digital video has made significant inroads in television production use. Nevertheless, 16 mm is still in use in its Super 16 ratio (see below) for productions seeking its specific look.

Perforations
Two perforation pitches are available for 16 mm film. One specification, known as "long pitch", has a spacing of 7.62 mm and is used primarily for print and reversal film stocks. Negative and intermediate film stocks have perforations spaced 7.605 mm, known as "short pitch". These differences allow for the sharpest and smoothest possible image when making prints using a contact printer.

Film stocks are available in either 'single-perf' or 'double-perf', meaning the film is perforated on either one or both edges. A perforation for 16 mm film is 1.829 x with a radius curve on all four corners of 0.25 mm. Tolerances are ±0.001 mm.

Standard 16 mm
The picture-taking area of standard 16 mm is 10.26 x, an aspect ratio of 1.37:1, the standard pre-widescreen Academy ratio for 35 mm. The "nominal" picture projection area (per SMPTE RP 20-2003) is 0.380 in by 0.284 in, and the maximum picture projection area (per SMPTE ST 233-2003) is 0.384 in by 0.286 in, each implying an aspect ratio of 1.34:1. Double-perf 16 mm film, the original format, has a perforation at both sides of every frame line. Single-perf is perforated at one side only, making room for an optical or magnetic soundtrack along the other side.

Super 16 mm
The variant called Super 16 mm, Super 16, or 16 mm Type W is an adaptation of the 1.66 (1.66:1 or 15:9) aspect ratio of the "Paramount format" to 16 mm film. It was developed by Swedish cinematographer Rune Ericson in 1969, using single-sprocket film and taking advantage of the extra room for an expanded picture area of 12.52 x.

Super 16 cameras are usually 16 mm cameras that have had the film gate and ground glass in the viewfinder modified for the wider frame, and, since this process widens the frame by affecting only one side of the film, the various cameras' front mounting plate or turret areas must also be re-machined to shift and re-center the mounts for any lenses used. Because the resulting, new, Super 16 aspect ratio takes up the space originally reserved for the 16mm soundtrack, films shot in this format must be enlarged by optical printing to 35 mm for sound-projection, and, in order to preserve the proper 1.66:1, or (slightly cropped) 1.85:1 theatrical aspect ratios which this format was designed to provide. And, with the recent development of digital intermediate workflows, it is now possible to digitally enlarge to a 35 mm sound print with virtually no quality loss (given a high quality digital scan), or alternatively to use high-quality video equipment for the original image capture.

In 2009, German lens manufacturer Vantage introduced a series of anamorphic lenses under its HAWK brand. These provided a 1.30x squeeze factor (as opposed to the standard 2×) specifically for the Super 16 format, allowing nearly all of the Super 16 frame to be used for 2.39:1 widescreen photography.

Ultra 16 mm
The DIY-crafted Ultra 16 is a variation of Super 16. Cinematographer Frank G. DeMarco is credited with inventing Ultra 16 in 1996 while shooting tests for Darren Aronofsky's Pi. Ultra 16 is created by widening the left and right sides of the gate of a standard 16 mm camera by 0.7 mm to expose part of the horizontal area between the perforations. Perforation placement on standard 16 mm film at the divisions between frames accommodates use of these normally unexposed areas.

The Ultra 16 format, with frame dimensions of 11.66 x, provides a frame size between standard 16 mm and Super 16—while avoiding the expense of converting a 16 mm camera to Super 16, the larger lens-element requirements for proper aperture field coverage on Super 16 camera conversions, and, the potential image vignetting caused by trying to use some "conventional" 16 mm lenses on those Super 16 converted cameras. Thus, almost all standard 16 mm optics can now achieve the wider image in Ultra 16, but without the above pitfalls and optical "shortcomings" encountered when attempting their use for Super 16.

The 1.89 ratio image readily converts to NTSC/PAL (1.33 ratio), HDTV (1.78 ratio) and to 35 mm film (1.66 [European] and 1.85 wide screen ratios), using either the full vertical frame, or the full width (intersprocket) frame, and at times, portions of both, depending upon the required application.

Modern usage
The only supplier of 16 mm color reversal/negative film in 2022 is Kodak and Orwo. Agfa and Fuji closed their film manufacturing facilities in the 2010s. B&W films are still produced by Foma and ORWO/Filmotec, with ORWO/Filmotec having begun sales of a new color negative film in April of 2023.

16 mm film is used in television, such as for the Hallmark Hall of Fame anthology (it has since been produced in 16:9 high definition) and Friday Night Lights and The O.C. as well as The Walking Dead in the US. In the UK, the format is exceedingly popular for television series such as Doc Martin, dramas and commercials.

The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) played a large part in the development of the format. It worked extensively with Kodak during the 1950s and 1960s to bring 16 mm to a professional level, since the BBC needed cheaper, more portable production solutions while maintaining a higher quality than was offered at the time, when the format was mostly for home display of theatrical shorts, newsreels, and cartoons, documentary capture and display for various purposes (including education), and limited "high end" amateur use.

, the format was frequently used for student films, while its use in documentaries had almost disappeared. With the advent of HDTV, Super 16 film is still used for some productions destined for HD. Some low-budget theatrical features are shot on 16 mm and super 16 mm such as Kevin Smith's 16 mm 1994 independent hit Clerks, or Man Bites Dog, Mid90s and Closer to Home.

Thanks to advances in film stock and digital technology—specifically digital intermediate (DI)—the format has dramatically improved in picture quality since the 1970s, and is now a revitalized option. Vera Drake, for example, was shot on Super 16 mm film, digitally scanned at a high resolution, edited and color graded, and then printed out onto 35 mm film via a laser film recorder. Because of the digital process, the final 35 mm print quality is good enough to fool some professionals into thinking it was shot on 35 mm.

In Britain, most exterior television footage was shot on 16 mm from the 1960s until the 1990s, when the development of more portable television cameras and videotape machines led to video replacing 16 mm in many instances. Many drama shows and documentaries were made entirely on 16 mm, notably Brideshead Revisited, The Jewel in the Crown, The Ascent of Man, Life on Earth, and the early seasons of Poirot. More recently, the advent of widescreen television has led to the use of Super 16. For example, the 2008 BBC fantasy drama series Merlin was shot in Super 16.

As recently as 2010, Scrubs was shot on Super16 and aired either as 4:3 SD (first 7 seasons) or as 16:9 HD (seasons 8 and 9). John Inwood, the cinematographer of the series, believed that footage from his Aaton XTR Prod camera was not only sufficient to air in high definition, it "looked terrific".

The Academy Award winning Leaving Las Vegas (1995) was shot on 16 mm.

The first two seasons of Buffy the Vampire Slayer were shot on 16 mm and switched to 35 mm for its later seasons.

The first season of Sex and the City was shot on 16 mm. Later seasons were shot on 35 mm. All three seasons of Veronica Mars were shot on 16 mm and aired in HD. This Is Spinal Tap, and Christopher Guest's subsequent mockumentary films, are shot in Super 16 mm.

The first three seasons of Stargate SG-1 (bar the season 3 finale and the effects shots) were shot in 16 mm, before switching to 35 mm for later seasons.

Peter Jackson's 1992 zombie comedy Braindead was shot on Super 16mm, so that more of its $3 million budget could be spent on its extensive gore effects.

The 2009 Academy Award winner for Best Picture, The Hurt Locker, was shot using Aaton Super 16 mm cameras and Fujifilm 16 mm film stocks. The cost savings over 35 mm allowed the production to utilize multiple cameras for many shots, exposing over one million feet of film.

British Napoleonic-era TV drama Sharpe was shot on Super 16 mm right through to the film Sharpe's Challenge (2006). For the last film in the series, Sharpe's Peril (2008), the producers switched to 35 mm.

Moonrise Kingdom was shot using super 16 mm.

Darren Aronofsky shot mother! on 16 mm.

Linus Sandgren shot most of the 2018 biographical drama First Man on Super 16.

Spike Lee shot the Netflix film Da 5 Bloods' flashback scenes on 16 mm film, which was part of the reason cinematographer Newton Thomas Sigel was considered for an Oscar nomination. The Insider reports that Netflix was "initially concerned about having the movie's flashback scenes shot on grainy 16 mm film ... There was pushback because it opened up a lot of challenges." According to Sigel, the film stock Lee wanted to use was expensive because it is rarely used. It would be even more expensive to shoot on 16mm film while on location in Vietnam and then ship the film back to the United States to be processed at a film lab. Lee was "pretty adamant" about using 16mm for the flashbacks; Sigel said "I would never have been able to do it without such fervent support from him." Sigel had pitched to Lee the idea to shoot the Vietnam sequences using the kind of camera and film stock that would have been available during the Vietnam era.

Cornish filmmaker Mark Jenkin is notable for using 16 mm film and a hand-cranked 1978 Bolex camera, most notably in his films Bait (2019) and Enys Men (2022).

Digital 16 mm
A number of digital cameras approximate the look of the 16 mm format by using 16 mm-sized sensors and taking 16 mm lenses. These cameras include the Ikonoskop A-Cam DII (2008) and the Digital Bolex (2012). The Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera (2013) and the Blackmagic Micro Cinema Camera (2015) has a Super 16-sized sensor. The Z CAM E2G (2019) even offers Digital 16 mm in 4K and with a global shutter.

Professional cameras
The professional industry tends to use 16 mm cameras from Aaton and Arri, most notably the Aaton Xtera, Aaton XTRprod, Arriflex 16SR3, and Arriflex 416. Aaton also released the A-Minima, which is about the size of a video camcorder and is used for specialized filming requiring smaller, more versatile cameras. Photo Sonics have special extremely high speed cameras for 16 mm that film at up to 1,000 frames per second. Panavision has produced the Panaflex 16, nicknamed "Elaine".

Amateur cameras
For amateur, hobbyist, and student use, it is more economical to use older models from Arri, Aaton, Auricon, Beaulieu, Bell and Howell, Bolex, Canon, Cinema Products, Eclair, Keystone, Krasnogorsk, Mitchell, and others.

Film reproduction methods
Most original movie production companies that use film shoot on 35 mm. The 35 mm size must be converted or reduced to 16 mm for 16 mm systems. There are multiple ways of obtaining a 16 mm print from 35 mm. The preferred method is to strike a 16 mm negative from the original 35 mm negative and then make a print from the new 16 mm negative. A 16 mm negative struck from the original 35 mm negative is called an original. A new 16 mm print made from a print with no negative is called a reversal. 16 mm prints can be made from many combinations of size and format, each with a distinct, descriptive name:
 * A 16 mm negative struck from an original 35 mm print is a print down.
 * A 16 mm negative struck from an original 16 mm print that was struck from a 35 mm original is a dupe down.
 * A 16 mm print struck directly from a 16 mm print is a double dupe.
 * A 16 mm print struck directly from a 35 mm print is a double dupe down.

Film traders often refer to 16 mm prints by the print's production method, i.e., an original, reversal, dupe down, double dupe, or double dupe down.

Color fading of old film and color recovery
Over time, the cyan, magenta and yellow dyes that form the image in color 16 mm film inevitably fade. The rate of deterioration depends on storage conditions and the film type. In the case of Kodachrome amateur and documentary films and Technicolor IB (imbibition process) color prints, the dyes are so stable and the deterioration so slow that even prints now over 70 years old typically show no obvious problems.

Dyes in the far more common Eastmancolor print film and similar products from other manufacturers are notoriously unstable. Prior to the introduction of a longer-lasting "low fade" type in 1979, Eastmancolor prints routinely suffered from easily seen color shift and fading within ten years. The dyes degrade at different rates, with magenta being the longest-lasting, eventually resulting in a pale reddish image with little if any other color discernible.

In the process of digitizing old color films, even badly faded source material can sometimes be restored to full color through digital techniques that amplify the faded dye colors. A digital intermediate scanned from the original negative (if it was processed and stored correctly) can often fully restore colors.

Technical specifications

 * 7.62 mm per frame (40 frames per foot) for print stock—7.605 mm per frame for camera stock
 * 122 m (400 feet) = about 11 minutes at 24 frame/s
 * vertical pulldown

16 mm

 * 1.37 aspect ratio
 * enlarging ratio of 1:4.58 for 35 mm Academy format prints
 * camera aperture: 10.26 by 7.49 mm (0.404 by 0.295 in)
 * projector aperture: 9.65 by 7.21 mm (0.380 by 0.284 in)
 * projector aperture (1.85): 9.60 by 5.20 mm (0.378 by 0.205 in)
 * TV station aperture: 9.65 by 7.26 mm (0.380 by 0.286 in)
 * TV transmission: 9.34 by 7.01 mm (0.368 by 0.276 in)
 * TV safe action: 8.40 by 6.29 mm (0.331 by 0.248 in); corner radii: 1.67 mm (0.066 in)
 * TV safe titles: 7.44 by 5.61 mm (0.293 by 0.221 in); corner radii: 1.47 mm (0.058 in)
 * 1 perforation per frame (may also be double perf, i.e. one on each side)
 * Picture to sound separation: sound in advance of picture by 26 frames for optical sound and 28 frames for magnetic.

Super 16

 * 1.66 aspect ratio
 * camera aperture: 12.52 by 7.41 mm (0.493 by 0.292 in)
 * projector aperture (full 1.66): 11.76 by 7.08 mm (0.463 by 0.279 in)
 * projector aperture (1.85): 11.76 by 6.37 mm (0.463 by 0.251 in)
 * 1 perforation per frame, always single perf

Ultra 16

 * 1.85 aspect ratio
 * camera aperture: 11.66 mm by 7.49 mm (0.459 by 0.295 in)
 * projector aperture: 11.66 mm by 6.15 mm (0.459 by 0.242 in)
 * 1 perforation per frame (may also be double perf, i.e. one on each side)

Techniques

 * List of film formats
 * Sync sound
 * Pilottone

Related film genres

 * Direct cinema
 * Cinéma vérité
 * Docufiction
 * Ethnographic film
 * Ethnofiction

title: 16 mm film


text:
8 mm film

8 mm film is a motion picture film format in which the film strip is 8 mm wide. It exists in two main versions – the original standard 8 mm film, also known as regular 8 mm, and Super 8. Although both standard 8 mm and Super 8 are 8 mm wide, Super 8 has a larger image area because of its smaller and more widely spaced perforations.

There are also two other varieties of Super 8 – Single 8 mm and Straight-8 – that require different cameras but produce a final film with the same dimensions.

Standard 8

The standard 8 mm (also known as regular 8 or double 8) film format was developed by the Eastman Kodak company during the Great Depression and released to the market in 1932 to create a home movie format that was less expensive than 16 mm.

Double 8 spools actually contain a 16 mm film with twice as many perforations along each edge as normal 16 mm film; on its first pass through the camera, the film is exposed only along half of its width. When the first pass is complete, the operator opens the camera and flips and swaps the spools (the design of the spool hole ensures that the operator does this properly) and the same film is subsequently exposed along its other edge, the edge left unexposed on the first pass. After the film is developed, the processor splits it down the middle, resulting in two lengths of 8 mm film, each with a single row of perforations along one edge. Each frame is half the width and half the height of a 16 mm frame, so there are four times the number of frames in a given film area, which is what makes it cost less. Because of the two passes of the film, the format was sometimes called Double 8. The frame size of regular 8 mm is 4.8 mm × 3.5 mm, and 1 meter of film contains 264 pictures. Normally, Double 8 is filmed at 16 or 18 frames per second.

Common length film spools allowed filming of about 3 to $4 1/2$ minutes at 12, 15, 16, and 18 frames per second.

Kodak ceased sales of standard 8 mm film under its own brand in the early 1990s but continued to manufacture the film, which was sold via independent film stores. Black-and-white 8 mm film is still manufactured in the Czech Republic, and several companies buy bulk quantities of 16 mm film to make regular 8 mm by re-perforating the stock, cutting it into 25 foot (7.6 m) lengths, and collecting it into special standard 8 mm spools, which they then sell. Re-perforation requires special equipment. Some specialists also produce Super 8 mm film from existing 16 mm or even 35 mm film stock.

Sound
When Eastman Kodak first conceived the 8 mm format, no provision was made for the addition of a sound track. Nevertheless, in the 1960s, projectors appeared on the market that were capable of recording and replaying sound from a magnetic stripe applied to the film after it had been processed. The only part of the film wide enough to accept such a magnetic stripe was the area between the edge and the perforations. A much narrower stripe was sometimes added to the opposite edge so that the film piled up evenly on the spool, but was never used for sound. The sound to picture separation was the same dimensionally as 16 mm film, and as that format is 28 frames, that meant that the Double-8 system was 56 frames. The proximity of the sound stripe to the perforations caused some problems in keeping the film in close contact with the sound head. There was never an optical system.

A few sound prints appeared for use in Double 8 projectors.

Super 8
In 1965, Super-8 film was released and was quickly adopted by many amateur film-makers. It featured a better quality image and was easier to use mainly due to a cartridge-loading system that did not require reloading and rethreading halfway through.

To easily differentiate Super 8 film from Standard 8, projector spools for the former had larger spindle holes. Therefore, it was not possible to mount a Super 8 spool on a Standard 8 projector, and vice versa.

Sound
The Super 8 format was designed from the start to accommodate a sound track (one of the few film formats to do so). This track would occupy the area between the edge of the film and the image area. As in the double 8 system, a second stripe was sometimes added between the edge and the perforations. The image to sound distance was much shorter for the Super 8 system at just 18 frames.

At first, the magnetic stripe had to be applied after the film was processed and recorded on a suitable projector. In the 1970s, cameras appeared which were able to record live sound directly onto pre-striped film. This film was loaded into oversize cartridges that provided access for the camera's sound recording head. The camera would also accept non sound cartridges, but silent cameras could not accept sound cartridges. One major advantage of the Super 8 system was that as the camera pressure plate was a part of the cartridge, it could be moulded to the profile of the stripe(s) on the film.

Projectors also appeared on the market which took advantage of the balance stripe next to the perforations by recording and replaying stereo sound.

Projectors appeared in the late 1970s that featured the ability to play films with an optical soundtrack. The image-sound separation for the optical format was 22 frames. These were never popular in the English speaking world and are consequently very rare in those countries, but they did enjoy some popularity in the Far East and Europe mainly because optical prints were cheaper.

Sound prints in Super 8 were plentiful and considering that they were very expensive by modern-day standards, sold in appreciable quantities. A two-reel print (running approximately 17 minutes) cost around $50 with feature films costing at least $150-plus. A few prints were also released with stereo sound. In Europe, optical prints were also popular and were appreciated for their often superior sound quality. In theory, magnetic prints should have been superior, but Super 8 magnetic prints were often poorly recorded after the picture was processed, due to high-speed, mass production techniques. An optical track, on the other hand, could be printed at the same time as the image and in equivalent quality.

Single 8
Another version of Super 8 film, Single-8, was produced by Fuji in Japan. Introduced in 1965 as an alternative to the Kodak Super 8 format, it had the same final film dimensions but with a different cassette. Unlike the co-axial design of Super 8, the Single 8 cartridge featured one spool above the other.

Sound
Single 8's film format being identical to Super 8 means that everything written above regarding projectors for Super 8 applies equally to Single 8.

Cameras also appeared for the Single 8 system that were capable of directly recording to pre-striped film which was presented in an oversize Single-8 cartridge which provided access for the camera's sound recording head in a similar manner to Super 8. The only difference was that film manufacturers initially had to manufacture the film with a rebated area for the sound stripe. This was because the pressure plate ensuring good film registration was part of the camera and not the cartridge. The sound film had to be the same overall thickness as silent film which the camera could also accept. Although the rebated stock was more expensive to manufacture, a balance stripe on the opposite side of the film was rendered unnecessary and offset the cost. Fuji later developed a thinner film that did not require rebating, but the balance stripe was required because the thickness of the sound stripe was almost the same as the film base.

Straight Eight
A number of camera companies offered single-width 8 mm film in magazines or spools, but the format faded when Kodak introduced Kodachrome, as this was only available in the Double 8 mm format. The first single-run 8 mm film was offered in 1935 with a Bell & Howell movie camera Filmo 127-A called Straight Eight. Single-width 8 mm film revived in the United States by Bolsey-8 in 1956 and continued for some time outside the United States, with Germany between 1937 and 1950s and Soviet Union KOMZ Ekran movie cameras and Svema offering reversal film in 1960s.

UltraPan 8
Introduced in 2011 by Nicholas Kovats and implemented by Jean-Louis Seguin, this format uses Standard 8 film in a modified Bolex (H16 or H8) camera. Similar to the Techniscope cameras of the 1960s, UltraPan 8 achieves wider aspect ratios generally reserved for camera systems with anamorphic lenses through manipulating film negative exposure instead of light capture. The area of film exposed per frame is 10.52 mm × 3.75 mm, having an aspect ratio of 2.8:1. There are effectively two UP8 frames for every one 16 mm frame. The design means there is no waste of film emulsion for the targeted aspect ratio. Earlier versions of this general idea date from the 1950s and exactly the same design occurs in implementations of the 1960s and 1970s. The current implementation of the idea gains impetus from the relative ease with which digital delivery systems can handle what would otherwise have required, in the past, either a dedicated mechanical projector or the transfer to another film format for which projectors were already available.

title: 8 mm film


text:
Anthony Zinni

Anthony Charles Zinni (born September 17, 1943) is a retired United States Marine Corps general and a former Commander in Chief of the United States Central Command (CENTCOM). From 2001 to 2003, he served as a special envoy for the United States to Israel and the Palestinian Authority. From 2017 to 2019, he served as a special envoy to help resolve the Qatar diplomatic crisis.

While serving as a special envoy, Zinni was also an instructor in the Department of International Studies at the Virginia Military Institute. He later served as an instructor at the Sanford School of Public Policy at Duke University, a public speaker, and an author of best-selling books on his military career and foreign affairs, including Battle for Peace. , he was involved in the corporate world, joining M.I.C. Industries as its president for International Operations in 2005.

Zinni also serves or has served on the advisory boards of a number of companies, including the security testing firm, Mu Dynamics, based in Sunnyvale, California. He joined Duke University's Terry Sanford Institute of Public Policy in spring 2008 as the Sanford Distinguished Lecturer in Residence and taught a new course in the Hart Leadership Program. Zinni also serves on the board of directors for Caliburn International, a military contracting conglomerate that includes operations for Homestead Temporary Shelter for Unaccompanied Children.

He has been credited for foresight in predicting the dangers of terrorism coming out of Afghanistan before the September 11 attacks of 2001, and for supporting the Iraq War troop surge of 2007. In October 2009, he came out firmly in support of General Stanley A. McChrystal's request for up to 40,000 additional troops in Afghanistan.

Early life and education
Zinni was born in Bryn Mawr, Pennsylvania and raised in Conshohocken, Pennsylvania, the son of Lilla (née Disabatino), a seamstress and homemaker, and Antonio Zinni, a chauffeur. His parents were of Italian descent. His father was drafted into the U.S. Army shortly after immigrating and served in World War I, being promoted to corporal and later receiving citizenship. Zinni's brother served in the Korean War.

In 1965, Zinni graduated from Villanova University with a B.S. degree in economics and was commissioned a second lieutenant in the United States Marine Corps. He later earned an M.A. degree in management and supervision from Central Michigan University in 1984 and a second M.A. degree in international relations from Salve Regina College in 1987. Zinni graduated from the Marine Corps Command and Staff College in 1978 and the National War College in 1984. He attended the John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center and School in 1967 and the Amphibious Warfare School in 1970. In 2023, Zinni was awarded an honorary degree from Salve Regina University.

U.S. Marine Corps
After completion of the Basic School in 1965, Zinni was assigned to the 2nd Marine Division, where he served as a platoon commander, company executive officer, and company commander in the 1st Battalion, 6th Marines. He also served as a company commander in the 1st Infantry Training Regiment during this tour. In 1967, Zinni was assigned as an infantry battalion advisor to the Vietnamese Marine Corps. Following his service in the Vietnam War, he was ordered to the Basic School where he served as a tactics instructor, platoon commander, and company executive officer. In 1970, he returned to Vietnam as a company commander in 1st Battalion, 5th Marines where he was wounded, evacuated, and subsequently assigned to the 3rd Force Service Support Group on Okinawa. There he served as a company commander and guard officer. In 1971, Zinni returned to the 2nd Marine Division, where he served as a company commander in the 1st Battalion, 8th Marines, Aide de Camp to the Commanding General, and Officer in Charge of the Infantry Training Center. In 1974, he was assigned to Headquarters Marine Corps, where he was assigned as the Retention and Release Officer and Plans Officer in the Officer Assignment Branch of the Manpower Department.

Zinni again served in the 2nd Marine Division in 1978, as the Operations Officer of the 3rd Battalion, 2nd Marines, Executive Officer of the 1st Battalion, 8th Marines, Executive Officer of the 8th Marine Regiment and Commanding Officer of the 2nd Battalion, 8th Marines. In 1981, he was assigned as an operations and tactics instructor at the Marine Corps Command and Staff College at Quantico, Virginia. He was next assigned to the Operations Division at Headquarters, U.S. Marine Corps where he served as the Head of the Special Operations and Terrorism Counteraction Section and as the Head, Marine Air-Ground Task Force Concepts and Capabilities Branch. In 1984, he earned his master's degree from Central Michigan University. In 1986, he was selected as a fellow on the Chief of Naval Operations Strategic Studies Group. From 1987 to 1989, Zinni served on Okinawa as the regimental commander of the 9th Marine Regiment and the Commanding Officer of the 35th Marine Expeditionary Unit, which was twice deployed to the Philippines to conduct emergency security operations and disaster relief operations. Upon his return to the U.S., he was assigned as the Chief of Staff of the Marine Air-Ground Training and Education Center at Marine Corps Base Quantico.

His initial general officer assignment was as the Deputy Director of Operations at the U.S. European Command. In 1991, he served as the Chief of Staff and Deputy Commanding General of Combined Task Force Operation Provide Comfort during the Kurdish relief effort in Turkey and Iraq. He also served as the Military Coordinator for Operation Provide Hope, the relief effort for the former Soviet Union. In 1992–93, he served as the Director for Operations for the Unified Task Force in Somalia for Operation Restore Hope. Also in 1993, he served as the Assistant to the U.S. Special Envoy to Somalia during Operation Continue Hope/UNOSOM II. Zinni was assigned as the Deputy Commanding General, U.S. Marine Corps Combat Development Command, Quantico, Virginia, from 1992 to 1994.

From 1994 to 1996, he served as the Commanding General, 1st Marine Expeditionary Force. During early 1995, Zinni served as Commander of the Combined Task Force for Operation United Shield, protecting the withdrawal of U.N. forces from Somalia.

From September 1996 until August 1997, Zinni served as the Deputy Commander in Chief, United States Central Command. His final tour was from August 1997 to September 2000 as the Commander in Chief, United States Central Command, MacDill Air Force Base, Florida. He organized Operation Desert Fox, a series of airstrikes against Iraq during December 1998, with the stated purpose of degrading Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program. As CinCCENT, he and General Wesley Clark, CINCEUR, held a mini-summit between their commands to determine policies over Africa. Clark was reluctant to support Zinni's activist attempts to engage more in Africa. Following his command of CENTCOM, he retired in autumn 2000.

Testimony before Congress
On March 15, 2000, Zinni testified before Congress: Iraq remains the most significant near-term threat to U.S. interests in the Persian Gulf region. This is primarily due to its large conventional military force, the pursuit of WMD, oppressive treatment of Iraqi citizens, refusal to comply with United Nations Security Council resolutions (UNSCR), persistent threats to the enforcement of the no-fly zones (NFZ), and continued efforts to violate UN Security Council sanctions through oil smuggling.

While Iraq's WMD capabilities were degraded under UN supervision and set back by Coalition strikes, some capabilities remain and others could quickly be regenerated. Despite claims that WMD efforts have ceased, Iraq probably is continuing clandestine nuclear research, retains stocks of chemical and biological munitions, and is concealing extended-range SCUD missiles, possibly equipped with CBW payloads. Even if Baghdad reversed its course and surrendered all WMD capabilities, it retains the scientific, technical, and industrial infrastructure to replace agents and munitions within weeks or months. A special concern is the absence of a UN inspection and monitoring presence, which until December 1998 had been paramount to preventing a large-scale resumption of prohibited weapons programs. A new disarmament regime must be reintroduced into Iraq as soon as possible and allowed to carry out the mandates dictated by the post-Gulf War UN resolutions.

Zinni also warned about terrorism: "Extremists like Osama bin Laden and his World Islamic Front network benefit from the global nature of communications that permits recruitment, fundraising, and direct connections to sub-elements worldwide ... Terrorists are seeking more lethal weaponry to include: chemical, biological, radiological, and even nuclear components with which to perpetrate more sensational attacks ... Three [Iraq, Iran, & Sudan ] of the seven recognized state-sponsors of terrorism are within this potentially volatile area, and the Taliban regime in Afghanistan has been sanctioned by the UN Security Council for its harboring of Osama bin Laden. Nearly one-half of the 28 recognized terrorist organizations have operational sites within the region. Afghanistan has emerged as a catalyst for regional instability offering sanctuary, support, and training facilities to a growing number of extremist elements."

Special envoy
From 2001 to 2003, Zinni served as a special envoy for the U.S. to Israel and the Palestinian Authority.

In August 2017, he traveled to the Persian Gulf at the request of United States Secretary of State Rex Tillerson to help mediate the Qatar diplomatic crisis. Zinni resigned from his position as an envoy in January 2019, for he thought he could not resolve the dispute.

CNA Military Advisory Board
Gen. Zinni served on the CNA Military Advisory Board,[8] the first group of retired generals and admirals to examine the national security implications of climate change. Founded in 2006 by Sherri Goodman, the CNA Military Advisory board brought together military leaders from the United States Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps. The landmark report of the CNA Military Advisory Board, National Security and the Threat of Climate Change, established the concept of climate change as a “threat multiplier.” In the 2007 report, General Zinni referenced the inevitability of climate change and the need to take action now. General Zinni was one of the first leaders to appreciate the link between climate change, migration, terrorism, and instability. He wanted to “look at how climate change effects could drive populations to migrate. . . . What kinds of conflicts might result from their migration? You may also have a population that is traumatized by an event or change in condition triggered by climate change... It’s not hard to make the connection between climate change and instability and climate change and terrorism.”

Personal life
Zinni's son, Anthony Zinni, serves in the Marine Corps and was promoted to the rank of major effective September 1, 2010.

Zinni holds positions on several boards of directors of major U.S. corporations. In addition, he has held academic positions that include the Stanley Chair in Ethics at the Virginia Military Institute, the Nimitz Chair at the University of California, Berkeley, the Hofheimer Chair at the Joint Forces Staff College, and the Harriman Professorship of Government and membership on the board of the Reves Center for International Studies at the College of William and Mary. He has worked as Chairman of the Board of the Middle East Institute, with the University of California's Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation and the Henry Dunant Centre for humanitarian dialogue in Geneva. He is also a Distinguished Advisor at the Center for Strategic and International Studies and a member of the Council on Foreign Relations. He was the Executive Vice President for Dyncorp International from July 18, 2007, to the end of 2008. He served on the Board of Directors of DynCorp International prior to that position.

He serves or has served on the board of trustees of the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia, which is a museum dedicated to the U.S. Constitution.

, he serves as chairman of the board of governors of the Middle East Institute. He has been named honorary chairman of that institution. Zinni also serves as an honorary board member of the non-profit Wine Country Marines – a 501(c)3 dedicated to helping wounded service members, and aiding the welfare of currently serving service members, as well as addressing veterans employment and transition and healthcare.

In April 2004, Zinni gave a lecture entitled "From the Battlefield to the Negotiating Table: Preventing Deadly Conflict" at the University of San Diego's Joan B. Kroc Institute for Peace & Justice Distinguished Lecture Series.

In 2004, Zinni was named in an investigative report by Diana B. Henriques of The New York Times as being among the "retired or former military people" recruited to the corporate boards and sales forces of investment firms engaged in deceptive marketing of financial instruments aimed at military veterans in order to lend them credibility. The investment firm that had recruited Zinni, First Command Financial Planning, Inc., responded in written comments to a subsequent United States House of Representatives investigation that "It would be unfortunate if anyone inferred that these honorable individuals would take any action or support any organization that did not act in the best interests of service members." The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and National Association of Securities Dealers (NASD) subsequently concluded that First Command "willfully violated the Securities Act of 1933 Section 17(a)(2) dealing with inter-state fraud." In particular, the SEC concluded that First Command had sold mutual fund investments to veterans termed "systematic plans" which had very high sales charges termed "front-end sales loads", "by, in part, making misleading statements and omissions concerning, among other things: (a) comparisons between the systematic plan and other mutual fund investments; (b) the availability of the Thrift Savings Plan ("TSP"), which offers military investors many of the features of a systematic plan at lower costs; and (c) the efficacy of the front-end sales load in ensuring that investors remain committed to the systematic plan." In December 2004, First Command entered into a $12 million settlement with the SEC and NASD without admitting guilt.

In 2006, Zinni argued that more troops were needed in Iraq in the context of preventing the then-budding civil war.

In 2007, he worked on a report entitled "National Security and the Threat of Climate Change" with 11 other retired military commanders. The report stated that global warming would act as a threat multiplier to global conflict.

General Zinni is also a "Distinguished Military Fellow" for the Center for Defense Information, a part of the World Security Institute.

In 2009, Zinni reported that he had been offered and accepted the post of United States Ambassador to Iraq for the Barack Obama administration, but that the appointment had been subsequently withdrawn without explanation. The administration's final choice for the ambassadorship was Christopher R. Hill.

On June 26, 2009, General Anthony (Tony) Zinni (USMC ret.), then a member of the BAE Systems, Inc. Board, has been appointed Chairman of the BAE Systems, Inc. Board and, pending appointment of a permanent successor to Walt Havenstein, Acting President and CEO of BAE Systems, Inc. Tony will also join the BAE Systems Executive Committee in his capacity as Acting President and CEO of BAE Systems, Inc.

General Zinni also serves or has served on the board of Kaseman which has teamed up with Blackwater to pursue security work for the State Department.

Since 2011, Anthony Zinni is a member of the board of the Peace Research Endowment.

Political involvement
An effort to get him to run for the U.S. Senate has stalled indefinitely, Zinni having said he will never run for office. He says his decision to endorse President George W. Bush in 2000 was a mistake, and in 2003, indicated that he plans to avoid politics in the future. However, on March 3, 2006, Zinni joined fellow former United States Marines General Joseph P. Hoar, Lt. General Greg Newbold, Lt. General Frank Petersen, and Congressman Jack Murtha in endorsing fellow former U.S. Marine and Secretary of the Navy Jim Webb for U.S. Senate in Virginia. Zinni had been floated as a possible vice presidential running mate of Barack Obama, the 2008 presidential nominee of the Democratic Party.

Awards and decorations
Zinni's decorations include the following:

In addition to his U.S. military decorations, Zinni holds decorations from France, Italy, Bahrain, Egypt, Yemen, Vietnam, and Kuwait.

His civilian awards include the Papal Gold Cross of Honor, the Union League's Abraham Lincoln Award, the Italic Studies Institute's Global Peace Award, the Distinguished Sea Service Award from the Naval Order of the United States, the Eisenhower Distinguished Service Award from the Veterans of Foreign Wars, The Chapman Award from the Marine Corps University Foundation, the Penn Club Award, the St. Thomas of Villanova Alumni Medal, the George P. Shultz Award for Public Service from the U.S. Department of State, and UNICO National's Grand Patriot Award.

title: Anthony Zinni