The cinema as a graphic art : on a theory of representation in the cinema (1959)

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.

THE COMPOSITIONAL CONSTRUCTION OF THE SHOT Fig. 12. — Change of viewpoint for direct perception of action. ship to the object photographed. With every change in the viewpoint there is a change in the spectator's perception of the object, and therefore in the meaning and significance of that object. Ordinarily we see surrounding reality from innumerable viewpoints. But our visual notion of the perceived objects is preserved in our memory only in the form corresponding to the most frequently repeated forms of our perception. If we think of a man walking along the street, as in Fig. 12, we see that his view changes its direction with every step. As we glance around at surrounding objects, we obtain an unbroken series of visual impressions, which provoke ideas of the form and peculiar features of the objects we have seen. Since our memory retains only those visual ideas corresponding to the most frequently repeated aspects of what we see, we evoke in the cinema audience associations of an object only if we shoot that object in a customary aspect, which does not differ from the customary visual notion of it. In cinematographic construction we pick out the shot object from its surroundings by fixing it within the frame limits. By doing so we violate the continuity of visual perception, only to recreate it in a different form by means of editing. By transferring the object to the abstract space and time of the shot, we compel the emergence of a visual idea of it in different associations, i.e. by revealing the content, the significance of the object in a new expressive form. Naturally, this changes the character of our perception of the object shot, so there cannot be absolute identity between the everyday viewpoint and that of an object shown on the screen. When we take a long-shot of a scene from any point, the camera-angle gives a picture of the scene which is that of an ' outside observer '. If we bring the camera within the mise en scene, and break the scene up into mid-shots and closeups, the picture acquires the viewpoint of the persons taking part in the scene, and reveals the shot objects in the form in which these perceive them. In other words, by giving the camera such a viewpoint we reveal the actual sensations provoked in the actors by the surrounding objects. In such viewpoints the cinema camera is brought into the action of the scene, and picks out shots corresponding to the momentary glances and sensations of those taking part. This complex projection of the camera into the mise en scene y conditioned by the logic of the scenario's editing scheme, engenders the emotional intensity and reality 37