The Cine Technician (1935-1937)

Record Details:

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.

16 The Journal of the Association of Cine-Technicians Ma\ 19.^ Public and professional interest in cartoon has been greatly on the increase during the last few years, and it would seem that after a somewhat tortuous and intermittent career this form of art has established itself on a firm entertainment basis. Its rise to recognition has all the romantic elements of the famiUar "Local Boy Makes Good" story ; starting in life as the small child of the film programme, permitted as a treat to spend five minutes of "seen and not heard" on the screen, and graduating to the sophisticated glories of the infant prodigy, festooned with press cuttings and girdled with blazing Neon tubes. This, of course, has been a gradual campaign, involving the shedding of quantities of ink and the massacre of the battahons of superlatives, and has been the means of affording endless proof of the doggedness and versatility of those whose business it is to supply information ; indeed, so much has been written about it that there can be very few cartoon fans left to-day who are not familiar with all the essential steps in the process of manufacture. It is a debatable point whether this frank exposure has deepened or dispelled the mystery that seems to have been associated with the art in the pubhc mind ; at least it makes it all the more startling to meet, as one still does from time to time, a genuine surviving theory of the old school, whereby the drawings are placed in a sort of chute and photographed with great speed and dexterity as they "flash past" ; but, apart from visions such as these, the difficulty to-day is not so much to bring the past up-to-date as to identify all the different cartoon characters converging from all sides and to keep in touch with the progress of the various techniques, more than ever diversified by the eruption of colour rashes and the early symptoms of acute stereoscopy. These last two points have a particular bearmg upon cartoon q-uite apart from their relation to straight films, and promise to provide a fruitful source of argument. Cartoon has become expensive enough to be discussed rationally and already there are several schools of thought in existence transferred more or less en bloc from the realms of static art ; thus we have the reaUsts, the fantastics, the comic cuts, the whimsicals and otliers, all building up their particular traditions, techniques and colour scales, and all at variance with each other over most points of treatment from backgrounds to anatomy. It is not surprising in tliese circumstances that mucli new ground is being broken and new names being invented for all the old tricks. The synchronisation ol" nmsic has alone opened up entirely new fields of applied humour almost independent of drawing, and which are only now being realised and exploited. It is true that an original gag has only to "get over," in order to be conscientiously "plugged" and pirated until it falls apart from hard wear and tear and ceases to be recognised as a gag, but the various styles have sorted themselves out so far that it is unusual now to find them trespassing on each other's territory. There is one point, however, where nearly all of these cartoon systems have come to a focus, and that is in the treating of the screen as a page of a book rather than as a window giving on to a view beyond. Until stereoscopy arrives to give true depth to the moving figures, there is little question but that this is the more logical treatment. If the stereoscopic view is to be applied to cartoon it will cause the widest readjustment of technique since the introduction of synchronised music, and the cartoon characters will marry forthwith into the Marionette family against a quasi-model background. It is a matter for speculation whether the union will be blessed. q p ^j I Make a Bet — (continued from page 15). contradictory that the actual cut is like a quick blow in the tummy. And I have never yet seen a British film, with the exception of one or two atrocities turned out by the greenshirted la:ds from the Cafe Royal, with any attempt at rhythmic editing in it. Spare my blushes, but I really do think that it's important. You watch the cutting of the best Hollywood pictures and see the difference. One word before dismissing the thorny subject ; why are so many British pictures printed in that rich old sepia which looks like a mummified old gentleman from the British Museum ? Plain black and white would be so much better. 000 One final word, before we give up the ghost and admit that we have no ideas. While American actresses may think our policemen are wonderful, I think our script writers are adjectival. Show me a single one who is capable of earning £100 a week at Metro Goldwyn and I'll pay you the price of tliis article. And, lads, that's some bet. J-^