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

THE CINEMA AS A GRAPHIC ART down the verticals. In the closed studio the first lighting equipment was t up on the same principle. All that was thought necessary was to light the sce> sufficiently for exposure in the studio to become possible. At that time the; was no thought of its being possible to regulate and direct the light rays. Fom long time artificial light was regarded in cinematography as only a techni<| necessity, an ' inevitable evil ', arising out of the peculiarities of the cinematogra J film and rendering the camera-man's work more difficult, for he saw his task or' as that of filling the frame with equal, diffused lighting predominantly from abo: and from the sides. As studio technique grew more complicated, and not only work in natui i.e. exterior shooting in the true sense, but also ' naturalistic ' sets with artifici lighting were brought into practice, there was a considerable change in the meth< of constructing the shot. The first outdoor use of the pan broke down tl immobility of the orthodox theatrical proscenium. But the absence of the close-i compelled the camera-man to introduce the * mask ' as a means of concentratii the spectator's attention on a definite detail. We may note in passing that tl ' mask ', which as an isolator has fallen into desuetude, played a considerable pa in the process of realising the new possibilities of shooting, since it showed tl way of applying isolation to an object in exposing the shot, and also opened tl way to methods of composite work with silhouetted and lighted objects. Certain other movements away from theatrical influence were also observab in the methods of constructing the shot at this time, and especially in lightin But they were still far from being indicative of any creative understanding of tl tasks of composition. Now developed the first theory of ' studio lighting ', worked out on the bas of primitive naturalism. In accordance with this theory the light had first an" foremost to be ' natural ', and, if a scene at a window was being taken, for example the light rays had to penetrate into the room only through that window. N other lighting methods were employed. The violation of this law was regarde as indicative of illiteracy, just as, in its time, the change of the height of th horizon or asymmetry in the frame was regarded as indicating lack of taste in th camera-man. This tendency had such strong influence that even to-day th vestiges of the former fear of ' unnatural ' light sources are to be observed in th work of many camera-men. In America this lighting naturalism resulted in th camera-men regarding it as correct to give only such lighting as would not b noticed at all by the spectator, and even to-day the average American camera-mai regards this reduction of artificial light to the level of a simple technical necessity as showing a high degree of perfection in his art. From the aspect of the artistic organisation of the cinema shot no essentia changes were to be noted during this period. The camera-man was requirec chiefly to provide a clear photographic image, or in the best case a few picture postcard pictorial effects and landscapes. As cinematography as a whole was still not regarded as an art, the cinema shot also remained outside the confines of artistic treatment, and so it was still impossible to speak of any shot composition in the real sense of the word. Thus, during the first decade of extensive cinematographic practice the creative tendencies of the camera-man's art amounted simply to the technical, mechanical reproduction of the object filmed. To his share fell the ungrateful task of cinematographically illustrating the literary theme of the scenario. The sovereign hegemony of the director, who came to the cinema from adjacent spheres of art, thrust the camera-man out of the sphere of creative work, leaving him !5°