Cinematographic annual : 1931 (1931)

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.

INTRODUCTION John Arnold* ALTHOUGH the past year has been one of the most trying that the motion picture industry has ever experienced, it is gratifying to note that it has been a year of considerable progress as far as cinematography is concerned. As a matter of fact, rather notable strides have been made in this art. It is difficult to define cinematography, for like the moving picture, it is art, a science and a business. But, at any rate, it is the foundation of the motion picture industry; for in the final analysis, all that the industry has to sell is a succession of individual pictures which, when thrown on the screen, give us our motion picture. Take away the picture, and how salable is your product? Even in these days of depression, nearly fifteen million people daily pay to see the motion pictures. But, if anyone were foolish enough to try the experiment, not even a handful would pay to merely listen to the best sound-track you could possibly produce — if projected without the picture. Therefore, it is highly significant that in the past year the trend of the industry has been more and more toward the return to the old moving picture technique of telling stories with a camera, rather than with just a lot of meaningless conversation. Dialogue is all right in its place. But the fact remains that dialogue — especially when it is far from brilliant or scintillating — can never take the place of camera technique in telling a story. When sound was first introduced it was a novelty and, naturally, attracted the curious. But it did not take long to bring about a condition where the public tired of mere sound and conversation and wanted to see some of the technique of the silent pictures again — a technique that really tells a story in a fast-moving manner. It is highly pleasing to note that during the past year great strides have been taken to bring back such a condition in the picture making industry. The first step was the development of light, sound-proof camera housings which restored to the camera something of its presound mobility, thus making it a more useful tool for the intelligent photographer and director. Two creditably noiseless cameras were also developed; one made by one of the outstanding camera manufacturing companies; the other made experimentally by one of the major studios. This was a decided benefit as it enabled the photographer to work faster and more efficiently. Other cameras which are already being proclaimed as absolutely silent are in process of development, and it is hoped that they will soon reach the studios. Another step has been taken by the production executives themselves. This step has been to cut down on dialogue to a large degree and tell the stories with the technique of the silent pictures. This has been done to a notable degree during the past year, and present indications are that action will more and more replace dialogue in this .objective. •President, American Society of Cinematographers. [9]