Documentary News Letter (1947-1949)

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.

DOCUMENTARY NEWS LETTER 1-43 NEW DOCUMENTARY FILMS HOW AN AEROPLANE FLIES Part I. Lift Part II. Drag Part VI. Controls Made by Shell Film Unit. Camera: Sidney Beadle. Animation: Francis Rodker and A. J. Shaw . These three self-contained parts of Shell's new films on aerodynamics, for the use of students of aviation, flying personnel and ground staff in training, and senior forms in schools, were previewed in August. The remaining three parts will be completed shortly. The three parts shown represent a considerable achievement on the part of the team which planned and made them, among whom were Sydney Beadle, photography, John Rodker and A. J. Shaw, diagrams. They are, in fact, first-class teaching films which physics and general science masters will find of the utmost value for their senior forms — age group 1 3 if belonging to A stream ; though they will be more appreciated by 14 and 15-year-olds who are able to think in abstract terms. Yet, while the ability to think in abstract terms and to understand abstract principles is necessary in the student who is going to learn most from these films, the empirical method has been very rightly used. Progressing from the known to the unknown and proving the latter in terms of the former, is the accepted practice among the most advanced teachers; it is also the essence of good instructional film-making in my opinion, especially in the realms of physics and general science. Part I — Lift, shows how an aeroplane actually rises and remains airborne, a mystery many i scientists from Icarus and Leonardo da Vinci onwards have guessed at but never been able to control. The introductory sequences, showing the action of the wind above and below the flat surface of a piece of paper and of leaves fluttering to the ground, are admirably done, though they are perhaps over-long. The 'known' in this case is so easily recognized and understood that it could have been cut down by several examples and a longer time spent on the "unknown', the Venturi tube and the effect of the change in air pressure on the upper and lower -hich controls the force which keeps the aeroplane in the air. How much the amount of lift is governed by the angle of the wing is also shown clearly. Diagram and model are ingeniously used, sometimes in conjunction with each other as in most Shell films. Part II — Drag, is the simplest of the three films to grasp at one showing; it could also have been reduced to the standard length of one reel, which to my mind makes a good maximum length for a direct teaching film. (Part I is 1 [ reels in length; Part II \\ reels and Part VI 1 red ) Drag shows the wind's resistance to forward movement, first of the human body and then an aeroplane. Technical construction, such as stream-lining, is shown as reducing this impediment to speed. Part VI — Controls, surprises by the apparent simplicity by which an aeroplane is controlled, but this apparent simplicity is misleading. The control of an aircraft is shown to be an exact science based on precise knowledge of the effect of the slightest pressure on the elevators and the control surfaces at the wing tips which will change the aircraft's motion and direction from dive to climb, from bank to roll, from a straight course to a sharp turn. . . . I his film has less than the other two of the gradual build-up technique and is perhaps the least satisfactory for that reason, although its lessons are taught clearly and well, with no burking of the difficult flying shots. After seeing these three films I am more than ever convinced that the Shell Unit are making some of the best educational films of today, and have a good deal to teach the rest of us who are working in this difficult field about good, clear, sound instructional film technique. AN EDUC II I FILM PRODUCER Convection, Conduction and Radiation. Realist for British Gas Council in association with Film Centre. Direction and Photography : Alec Strasser. Distribution: British Gas Council. 8 mins. each film. While the Committees have been conferring, British Gas Council and Realist have acted. Strasser, Bennell, Parsons, Dorothy Grayson (which of them to single out for credit who can say? Let's think of it as a team) have produced abiding models of what teaching films should be. Each of these three films is made up of a series of short sequences which take us step by step towards an understanding of the subject. Each sequence ends with a question which it leaves the audience to answer. In other words, here are three films which can be shown together, or separately, or in bits — according to the requirements and capabilities of teacher, class and curriculum. What is perhaps even more impressive, the short sequences (some of which may not run to more than half-a-dozen shots) are devised with quite outstanding imagination. Going back to the words with which this review opened, it seems likely that to Alec Strasser must go the lion's share of the bouquets. There was real genius in Your Children' < I that fantastic and yet completely logical sequence of the orange — and there is genius here again. All this may sound too much of a p Of course, the films aren't perfect; of course, everybody, including r . has a lot to learn about making teaching films (for example, the spoken word was perhaps over-complicated, and its deliver) oddly inhuman), bu; even if we must proceed in arithmetical progression before we lin.illv re ich a perfect Standard, at least Realist has found something which has eluded everyone else, the first term to start us on the way. Committee H has emitted many vague pages adumbrating, in what they think to be specific terms, which I ducer must dare to contradict, some scores ,>• films thev w.mt to make. In fairness to the teachers they represent, and to the producers whom thev apparently dismiss .is amateurs, thev should see ( bnvection. Conduction ami Radiation. They might learn a lot. Twenty-four Square Miles. Basic tort 01. Production: R. K Neilson Baxter. Direction: 'Mander. Photography: A. Englander. Editing: Adam Dawson. Animation: Cynthia Whitby. Vfodel: J. P. McCrum. Distribution: NonTheatrical. 43 nuns. The twenty-four square miles are a section of Oxfordshire covered by one sheet of the (> in. ordnance survey map. The film illustrates a detailed survey of this once made by the Agricultural Economics Research Institute of the University of Oxford in 1943. Everythin covered: occupations, housing and public service^ education, entertainments, local ment. It is rather surprising that the point of farm workers as such is not dealt with: for instance, the tied cottage — important in any consideration of rural problems is not mentioned. But, by and large, the facts are given honestly and thoroughly, even if the superobjectivity of the presentation makes for flatness. Technical execution is very good. The director has managed in very short scenes, to capture unerringly the atmosphere of village whistdrives, Women's Institute lectures and Parish Council meetings. Both photography and cutting are crisp and to the point. Two weaknesses stand out. One is the use of the large contour map. Were this confined to an explanation of the lavout of the area in its various aspects, the only complaint could be of an occasional lack of clarity in the direction. Unfortunately, the map is also used to cover statistics and other commentary points which could more clearly and more excitingly have been put over by actuality shots. The other weakness is in the effects tr which never quite makes up its mind whether to be there or not. The great problem is to discover why. in spue of thoroughness, honesty, and technical excellence, the film remains unsatisfying. To those actively engaged on planning, it will be an inv aluable w ork of reference. But reference v are for specialists. The conviction, the imagination that will arouse interest and w ill cj understanduv' hive no place in them. 1 he man is apt to gain from this perusal only an impression o\ a lot oi \\w\ and figures, and perhaps a memory of some v\ the main head A more compelling picture o\' the problems of rural reconstruction might have been achi by taking a smaller area s.iv a single vil!. and giving it a fuller, warmer, more int treatment But even using all o\ the twenty-four square miles, some positive feeling might resulted from keying all the analvsis to definite acth ii '■■ it ls 'he layman it likely to walk out feehii all very complex and difficult', and then forget all about it. Owing to lot held over lor tin next i*> :ion on L. Baxtei