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 CINEMA AS A GRAPHIC ART Fig. 70. — Anonymous photograph taken in the 'fifties. With the aid of photography, both Daguerre and Hill created artistic work; because both of them were genuine artists, creatively applying the new techniqu of representation. The works of these first masters of photography astonish 1 first and foremost by their clear expression of character, by their extreme endeavou to perceive the individual lines essential to the given object. The photographi portraits produced by both Daguerre and Hill are typical for the extraordinar profundity of their work on the characteristics of the subject portrayed. The work of the pioneers of artistic photography was realistic, but at th same time it was by no means a simple passive reflection of the object. Mechanic reproduction, the technicalism of so-called ' documentary record ' photograph had no place in it. The creative elements predominated over the bare techniqu brought into the service of the artistic tasks, and this was the main reason fc the success of the first artists in photography. It is possible that, paradoxical a it may seem, this was conduced to by the imperfection of the lens with whicl Daguerre and Hill worked. The limitations of the visual angle of the lens an< the lack of definition in the extreme limits of the image demanded a very exac planning of the object, an exact choice of the visible field of vision. And thi necessitated thoughtful attention to the represented object, and selection of th< most characteristic, most essential aspects on which attention had to be con centrated. In the years of emergence of artistic photography, portrait photography wa accepted as an art on the same level as painting. In this period photographi productions were hard to come by and were of considerable value. 138