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

CREATIVE PROBLEMS OF THE ART OF THE CAMERA-MAN pplied that even in regard to close-ups and landscapes special ' types ' of ' artistic hotographing have been established. In regard to methods of organising the camera-man's work, America has its wn system, which is determined by the standard character of production. The sual standard film is shot by several camera-men, at the head of whom is the irector of the group, the chief camera-man.1 All trick photography is isolated i a separate studio equipped with special apparatus, and is partially produced i the laboratory. Sometimes a division is made between those who take studio nd those who take exterior shots. There are also more highly specialised cateories of camera-men, such as one taking only portrait close-ups, another only light shots, and so on. While a differentiation of camera-men on the basis of their specialisation n various forms of cinema production is undoubtedly necessary and valuable wherever it is required by the specific nature of the work, any specialisation on arious forms of photography within the limits of a single film, if it be evoked by ommercial considerations only, is in our view a negative phenomenon which lepersonalises the camera-man, a creative worker, and transforms him into a echnical photographer mechanic. In any such organisation of the shooting irocess the integrity of the artistic production is seriously threatened so far as the epresentational treatment of the film is concerned. From the aspect of the technical factors [says E. K. Tisse] the work of the American amera-man is undoubtedly on a very high level, and both the organisational side and the technique of working up the material ought to be studied for application to our [Soviet] ionditions. The situation is different in regard to the methods of shooting. The American 'amera-man does not exploit one tenth part of the creative possibilities which could be lis on the basis of the technique at his service. He exploits every technical method, very resource only as purposeless trickery, to create superficial effects of " sensational " ,hots. The American camera-man does not set himself the task of revealing the content >f the editing unit, of manifesting it with the aid of expressive resources, by which we nean the composition of the shot, lighting, etc. For him the shot is an end in itself, a nctorial construction, which frequently is in sharp antagonism to the general tendency. The standardisation of the general lighting, its reduction to ready prepared lighting ichemes for a sunny morning, evening, sunset, and so on, may perhaps be admitted as expedient within the limits of the American cinema. But attempts to standardise lighting py creating definite lighting schemes for long-shots, mid-shots and close-ups should indoubtedly be regarded with disfavour, since it leads to the introduction of stamp into :he work of the camera-man artist.2 The director G. V. Alexandrov also speaks of ' standardised methods ' of vork and the narrowly technical specialisation of the American camera-man in lis article on the organisation of American cinema production. For each film the shooting group has not one camera-man but several, differentiated iccording to narrow specialisation. For instance, exteriors are taken by one camera-man expert, tricks by another, while studio sets are taken by a specialist in photography by artificial lighting. Such a system is adopted chiefly for standard production, which comprises the bulk 3f American cinema production. Of course directors like Chaplin, Griffith or Lubitsch >vork outside this system. But the standardised system is predominant even in the best companies, releasing six or seven pictures every month. The entire shooting process is Droken up into separate specialities, to be taken simultaneously in various departments )f the production factory.3 1 Nowadays usually called the ' lighting expert. ' — Ed. 2 Shorthand report of E. K. Tisse 's lecture at the conference of Moscow camera-men n A.R.R.K. (the Association of Russian Revolutionary Kinema), 1932. — N. 3 G. V. Alexandrov, op. cit. — N. 183