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

THE CINEMA AS A GRAPHIC ART i; his valuable assets : the ability to reveal the shot content in a distinctly orig form corresponding to any one of the possible positions of the surroumbj reality. Suppose a scenario contains the following shot : " Looking out of (hi window, he sees a man striding energetically along the pavement." We cell shoot this scene by a long-shot at normal height, and the man would be recec^ in the distance. But we could also use this shot to convey the sensation ( momentary downward glance, and then we should get a viewpoint similar to 1 a of Fig. 1 6. Here we get the strongly defined movement of a man striding along a squ;e cobbled road. The nature of the road strikes the eye ; it is emphasised by he camera viewpoint ; and we can distinguish the rectangular shape of each sepajfa stone. From such a viewpoint the regular movements of arms and legs acia unbroken rhythmic strokes. Dynamism becomes the basic, predominant elemn in the composition. Out of a momentary glance a long-remembered impressir is created : one stronger than if the shot had been taken from the * usual ' viwpoint. Undoubtedly such a method gives organic, and not merely mechanai expression to the task we were set. But this example must not be regarded as confirmation of the supremacy di 1 original ' over ' usual ' viewpoints. In this case we were given an exact instr:tion, which served as our motivation for choosing a viewpoint from above. Th-e was no need to avoid the vertical in looking at the object ; on the contrary, le very task dictated that viewpoint, and in such cases the camera-man need have I fear that the representational form will be ' unintelligible \ Such ' unintelliibility ' to the perception only occurs when there is no corresponding motivatin for such a viewpoint in the editing construction of the scenario. Then sucla view definitely constitutes a formalistic approach to the task, in other wor<$, there is a discrepancy between the constructional form and its intended purpo;, And so we get the self-sufficient aestheticism of ' original ' foreshortening, whi'-b we frequently come across in cinematography. We must now consider the interaction of the viewpoint with the other compositional elements. In any compositional construction of a long-shot we cl clearly establish that the height of the horizon functionally depends upon t: chosen camera viewpoint. If we film our object from the lowest viewpoint, i , from ground level, the shot will not show any horizon, for the latter will be bek, the lower limit of the frame. As we raise the viewpoint, so the horizon line wl come into and rise in the shot. But if we reach the highest viewpoint, in whir the optic axis of the lens is directed vertically downward, the horizon line w disappear above the upper limit of the frame. This invariable dependence the horizon height upon the level of the viewpoint is a highly important factor compositional construction. Figs. 17 and 18 show the changes in the character of the image arising froi a change in the viewpoint and the horizon. The dotted line h-h1 marks tl horizon line in both illustrations. In the first case, owing to the lower viewpoint the horizon has dropped, ar simultaneously the distant perspective creating the impression of depth has di appeared. In the second case the raised viewpoint brings the horizon line aero the middle of the picture. Here the landscape perspective is clearly visib through the span of the arches. In cinema construction changing the camera viewpoint in order arbitrari to change the height of the horizon in the shot is utilised as a compositional methoi By raising or dropping the horizon on the shot we can set the chief object beir 44