Documentary News Letter (1944-1945)

DOCUMENTARY NEWS LETTER JANUARY AND FEBRUARY 1944 series of large tactical problems which change from day to day just as the war itself changes from day to day. The movement, the pattern of strategy, the war equipment that won a battle yesterday may not win the battle at some future date for which we are building, and yet, we have to make training films on these problems too. One such problem has kept us involved for over a year. In that time, tactics have changed, equipment has changed, and personnel has changed. Technical advisors who were considered authorities when we began may no longer be considered authorities, or they have been removed to fields of operation inaccessible to the Training Film Branch, for every day, more men must go to combat areas whether they are working on training films or not. It is safe to say that within the year, typewritten material a foot thick has been accumulated on this particular problem. Dozens of experts have been consulted and countless manoeuvres have been watched for the purpose of accumulating authentic, operational data. There must be continuous checking and crosschecking— for an error, made real and in effect true by projection on the screen of the classroom, could conceivably lose a battle if enough people believed it and acted accordingly. Conversely, the truth projected and made real — simply and operationally — might niti the battle. It is this admitted effectiveness that justifies the production of training films; in fact, demands it. Such a job of research and analysis is not an easy task. It is difficult enough to get a consensus on problems where standard mechanisms are involved. It is overwhelmingly difficult to get a consensus when broad tactical problems and intricate new machines of war are involved. Often, much valuable time is lost in getting a decision on a simple point, and these delays are not easy to overcome or explain; for in the end, there is the project file in the Training Film Branch which indicates that a certain training film has been in production an inordinately long period of time. With a few projects like this, the total production programme is bound to look out of joint. But the research, pre-planning, checking, and crossdecking must be done. The second research technique — that which is without benefit of doctrine to begin with — is largely observational. The project supervisor, educational consultant, and technical advisor .ravel to the training activity that is to furnish he problem and the pattern for the training film. A typical example would be the assembly of a xmtoon bridge. Let us assume that this is a new ictivity for the Navy, that the pontoons are new, hat the total job is a part of an entirely new operation which extends the function of an :stablished Navy rating. On such a problem, the "esearchers scrutinise what is going on. This may ake a couple of days or a couple of weeks or onger. It may mean a trip to the South Pacific or he Caribbean, to one location or many locations. Jut inevitably, it means a detailed analysis of vork under many conditions. With the training >fficer in charge, project personnel attempt to letermine what tools are best and what techni[ues are best for the job to be done, wherever md however it must be done. The training film must, of necessity, set high standards for this tarticular operation wherever it is shown. Pertaps the training officer had never thought of his ob in terms of the best tools and best techniques ; ierhaps it had been done previously with whatver tools were at hand by whatever method ieemed most appropriate at the moment. Obiously, this is not precise enough for the dis cerning eye of the camera. When a simple wrench in use is projected on the screen, it may appear at once to be either too large or too small, or badly handled. Unskilled and indecisive workmanship and inappropriate equipment become readily apparent when reviewed on the single plane of the classroom screen. A recent example of this happened in a series of films being undertaken by the Branch on the disassembly of a certain engine. The two machinist's mates assigned to appear in the films were thought to be thoroughly qualified for the job. Aboard ship in the engine room, they could undoubtedly get by as able mechanics. And yet, when the first sequences of the particular training films were projected, it became apparent immediately that these two men were inept with tools and frequently used methods that could not be considered as standards for the training film. The sequences were reshot and the films continued with more experienced mechanics who knew the proper tools and techniques. The writing of a script for an effective training film requires first of all the ability to penetrate the obvious and the loosely accepted truths in a given situation. It requires persistence and a prying curiosity. It requires incisiveness and straight-line thinking, and with it all, the ability to put it on paper in acceptable English with an economy of words. The writer of a training film script must, of necessity, have a vivid imagination. He must be picture-minded first and wordminded second. In analysing his subject matter, he must ask himself constantly, "What is the picture at this point that will tell the story in terms of the objective?" And, having determined the picture, he must then ask, "What is the simplest meaningful statement that I can make that will extend the effectiveness of the picture and add to its retention potentiality?" The writer with genuine ability for training film production understands that he is working with a medium in which the primary value is visual and the secondary value is auditory. He knows that he is not writing lectures with pictures "to fit" ; he is organising pertinent pictures of subject matter in movement, using the fewest possible words to describe, to emphasise, to extend. Does the Training Film Branch get what it wants in the way of scripts for its films? Frequently it does, but time after time it does not. There is much revising, much compromising, and occasionally the accepting of the obviously bad in the name of urgency. Generally, no one can be blamed for the inadequacies. Perhaps, in spite of all research, sufficient data were not available to give continuity of the picture plan. Perhaps certain pictures were known to be unobtainable and without them the plan would have blind spots. Then again, perhaps, there had been insufficient experience with a given piece of equipment to furnish the facts about a certain operation. However, there are times when script shortcomings stand out as direct evidence of the writer's refusal to accept the training film as a special instrument with a special purpose. When writers insist upon using pictorial cliches at the beginnings and ends of all training films, it becomes obvious that they do not know how to begin and how to end the film in terms of the objective originally set forth. It points to a limited concept of the job to be done and a definite lack of ability to work in the film medium. Words cannot describe the fatigue that comes from going to the projection room and seeing film after film begin and end with the opticals made up of the same twenty-five best shock shots of ships ploughing through the waves, big guns shooting at nothing, and planes peeling off, accompanied by ominous words in sepulchral tones on the scope of the war and the size of the job and the beauties of democracy and the beating we are going to give Hirohito, etc., etc. And we must not forget, indeed, cannot forget, the overloud, strident music that fits the film the way ice cream goes with dill pickles. The writer may not wish to take credit for all this, but he sets the pattern — good or bad — and the director, the cameraman, the editor, cutter, and narrator all follow the line. Photography itself is probably the least of our problems, Most cameramen are able to get some kind of image on the film. Inasmuch as a large part of the shooting of training fims must go on in spite of weather conditions and countless other limitations, it is generally necessary to accept photography that is adequate, rather than good. To insist upon photography that is the best possible under ideal conditions in a given situation would often delay projects beyond reasonable limits. Producers who work on training films for the Navy are always conscious of the demands for close-ups, for better definition, and maximum depth of field. These are essential in operational training films, Of great importance also are the orientation and re-orientation shots for which the Training Film Branch asks over and over again. A training film that skips around over an engine or a ship or anything else with close-ups and medium close-ups is certain to lose and confuse the trainee. He must be orientated to the problem in the beginning, and must be reorientated at intervals throughout the film This orientation must be operational ; that is, it must be from a position in which the trainee would find himself if he were working with the real thing in a tactile relationship. Frequently, effective orientation shots are not possible in live photography, and it becomes necessary to resort to diagrams or other pictorial devices. Any device is legitimate if it achieves the purpose for which it is intended. Here again, like all the other complicated aspects of training film production, the photography is right when it gets to the screen the cogent picture information that the training situation demands. It is not necessary to have beautiful clouds in all exterior shots and to have every Diesel mechanic backlighted in close-ups to make him glamorous, but realistic aesthetics have a place in training films. The cameraman who understands his medium, who uses his camera creatively and not like a garden hose, can combine on the screen the document of an activity in a composition of values from white to black that adds immeasurably to the value of the film and the pleasure of the audience. Considerable time could be spent on other subjects as they relate to the production of training films. These include music, colour, animation, sound effects, narrators — their voice quality and delivery — and the subtle but emphatic values of the great range of screen devices. There are others,but they are beyond the scope of this paper. We can look at the work being accomplished for the armed services by all the facilities of the motion picture industry with considerable satisfaction. But, in terms of the job to be done, we must look to the future with an expanding concept of the function of the motion picture and a more profound understanding of its value as a training instrument.