How did the early inventors create an illusion of moving figures?

The illusion of motion pictures is based on the optical phenomena known as persistence of vision and the phi phenomenon. The first of these causes the brain to retain images cast upon the retina of the eye for a fraction of a second beyond their disappearance from the field of sight, while the latter creates apparent movement between images when they succeed one another rapidly. Together these phenomena permit the succession of still frames on a motion-picture film strip to represent continuous movement when projected at the proper speed (traditionally 16 frames per second for silent films and 24 frames per second for sound films). Before the invention of photography, a variety of optical toys exploited this effect by mounting successive phase drawings of things in motion on the face of a twirling disk (the phenakistoscope, c. 1832) or inside a rotating drum (the zoetrope, c. 1834). Then, in 1839, Louis-Jacques-Mandé Daguerre, a French painter, perfected the positive photographic process known as daguerreotypy, and that same year the English scientist William Henry Fox Talbot successfully demonstrated a negative photographic process that theoretically allowed unlimited positive prints to be produced from each negative. As photography was innovated and refined over the next few decades, it became possible to replace the phase drawings in the early optical toys and devices with individually posed phase photographs, a practice that was widely and popularly carried out.

There would be no true motion pictures, however, until live action could be photographed spontaneously and simultaneously. This required a reduction in exposure time from the hour or so necessary for the pioneer photographic processes to the one-hundredth (and, ultimately, one-thousandth) of a second achieved in 1870. It also required the development of the technology of series photography by the British American photographer Eadweard Muybridge between 1872 and 1877. During that time, Muybridge was employed by Gov. Leland Stanford of California, a zealous racehorse breeder, to prove that at some point in its gallop a running horse lifts all four hooves off the ground at once. Conventions of 19th-century illustration suggested otherwise, and the movement itself occurred too rapidly for perception by the naked eye, so Muybridge experimented with multiple cameras to take successive photographs of horses in motion. Finally, in 1877, he set up a battery of 12 cameras along a Sacramento racecourse with wires stretched across the track to operate their shutters. As a horse strode down the track, its hooves tripped each shutter individually to expose a successive photograph of the gallop, confirming Stanford’s belief. When Muybridge later mounted these images on a rotating disk and projected them on a screen through a magic lantern, they produced a “moving picture” of the horse at full gallop as it had actually occurred in life.

guy above me copied and pasted an article

Explanation:

early inventors (1830's) used a twirling disk with drawn pictures inside a rotating drum (like a worse version of modern frame per second)

the hunger games, written by  suzanne collins, is fiction in the young adult genre, which is not my age group, but i found myself unable to put it down. its combination of nerve-racking tension, thrilling action, and engaging love story kept me up until the wee hours. i was surprised at how completely engrossing the plot was. like  brave new world, this story is set in a future where the government oppresses its people, but the book also borrows ideas from the greek myth of theseus and the minotaur.

divided into 12 districts, ruled by an oppressive government located at the  capitol. katniss everdeen, a 16-year-old girl from district 12, takes her younger sister’s place as one of 24 “tributes” selected every year to participate in the hunger games at the capitol.

while i found this book absolutely enthralling, i was surprised it was aimed at an audience of young adults. it seems extremely intense for anyone younger than 16 or 17. for example, there is a scene where one young tribute is slowly eaten alive by wolf-like creatures all night long, and katniss has to finally throw a weapon at him to end his misery. i found this a little too disturbing when i considered the age of the character.

the intensity of the action was something one would find in a more mature book, but the age of the characters and the simplicity of the prose were aimed at a much younger audience. in addition, this book was written in present tense, which i found annoying, but that’s more of a personal preference than a stylistic fault. it was also edited somewhat poorly, but that rarely distracted from the plot. for example, the author often spoke in sentence fragments to describe how katniss felt, which might have been an attempt to reflect on her thought process, but i found it disorienting to read a lot of really short sentences all together. it would have been better to vary the sentence length on occasion, but the story was still coherently.

overall,  the hunger games  was an excellent, enthralling read that i highly recommend. if it was more clearly marked for older teens, it would have been better, but it was a fantastic book with a wonderfully creative plot.

happy to .

pls mark as brainliest.

what are the phrases to choose from?