American cinematographer (Jan-Dec 1926)

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.

Twelve AMERICAN CINEMATOGRAPHER March, 1926 The EDITORS9 LENS * • focused by foster goss "Culture" and Cinematoqraphij ^ Under the head, "Claims Cameramen Are Incompetent," Film Mercury, Hollywood, reports that Milton Sills, in a recent speech before the National Board of Review, New York, "was especially severe on the limitations of the cameramen, saying that many of them knew nothing whatever about the physics of light and had not the cultural background which would aid them in extracting from scenes the full measure of artistry." (§ Despite Mr. Sill's more or less widely publicized collegiate background in Chicago, we do not believe that any reason should exist for him to entertain a warped academic perspective. Mr. Sills has endeavored to portray life enough during his esteemed career to lift him from the role of a cloistered pedagogue, so that we might venture that whatever premium might be placed on "cultural" foundations for cinematographers, Mr. Sills must rightly recognize that cinematography as an art or science must rise or fall on the strength of its practical application. We believe that Mr. Sills will stipulate that cinematography certainly has not failed in its practical renditions. After all, what shows on the screen does not have to dome, in order to meet the most critical artistic standards, through the medium of a university degree or its equivalent — no more than did the works of the master painters have to come from minds, "cultured" according to Mr. Sills' precepts. i§ "Culture," through university courses or otherwise, is as desirable for cinematographers as it is for presidents, but good cinematography is no more predicated thereon as is masterful statesmanship.