Cinematographic annual : 1930 (1930)

Record Details:

Title:
Cinematographic annual : 1930
Date:
1930
Publisher:
Hollywood : The American Society of Cinematographers, Inc.
Volume:
Cinematographic annual : 1930
Leaf #:
00045
Language:
English
Subjects:
Motion Pictures, Motion Picture Technology
Collection:
Books
Format:
Books
Contributor:
Media History Digital Library
Sponsor:
{"Media History Digital Library","Richard Koszarski","Jeff Joseph"}
Coordinator:
Media History Digital Library
Description:
Date Added:
March 21, 2024
Something wrong or inaccurate about this page? Let us Know!

Thanks for helping us continually improve the quality of the Lantern search engine for all of our users! We have millions of scanned pages, so user reports are incredibly helpful for us to identify places where we can improve and update the metadata.

Please describe the issue below, and click "Submit" to send your comments to our team! If you'd prefer, you can also send us an email to mhdl@commarts.wisc.edu with your comments.




We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.

Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.

CINEMATOGRAPHY AN ART FORM 27 mannerisms; there is a treatment of the various elements that marks it with his individuality. Ere we see the signature, we exclaim, "there's a Vandyke! a Hals! an Inness! a Moran!" It is something which that ancient potter put into his work, as he wet his fingers and gently touched the spinning clay, modifying and perfecting the form that might have satisfied most of his brother potters. He gave it the stamp of his individuality; he imbued it with his feeling. Now, can a cinematographer justly claim this great attribute? Why not? He is working through a medium capable of individual expression, — susceptible to reflecting moods and temperament. Who can gauge his feelings — this cinematographer — as he squints through his monotonic glass, shifting the lights around, stationing reflectors, maneuvering shades and gauzes, determining the use of lenses and diffusers? Why do critics recognize his work upon the screen? Why do the various players demand his services? Why do producers secure his services by contract? It is because he is an artist. Let him make no mistake about the nature of his profession, and he must, therefore, realize the degree of his responsibility. Let the public, likewise, be persuaded of this, for his work must carry this conviction. Let his employers be convinced of this by the manner in which he discharges the obligations of his high calling.