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.

46 DOCUMENTARY FILM NEWS the question 'What is a scientific film?' has begun to rank with the famous 'What is Truth?' and attempts at definition of either are equally elusive. Here, a new question is offered for answer — 'Why scientific film societies?' Why has interest in scientific and documentary films increased so rapidly during the past ten years? In 1938, the first scientific film society — the London SFS — was formed by enthusiastic members of the Association of Scientific Workers. 1948, ten years later, is a suitable point at which to pause and take stock. Arising directly from this small beginning came the Scientific Film Association which has gained a world-wide prestige and reputation making it the recognized authority on all aspects of the use of scientific films. The past decade has been one of great progress but let no one, however lofty his aspirations for the future, ever forget that the scientific film societies were responsible for starting the movement. In this same ten years, a number of new societies have been formed and 43 are now affiliated to the Scientific Film Association. From a total membership of 260 in 1938, the film society audience has grown to approximately 10,000 in 1948. This figure takes no account of the occasional shows put on by scientific and other bodies in connection with their general activities. It is of interest to see what sort of composition the scientific film society audience has and speculate on the reasons for their presence. Some societies, such as those formed in Government departments, have a restricted membership but many are open to anyone. The London SFS is such a society and in 1945-46 carried out an analysis of the professions of its members. The professions were classified under four main headings — 1. Scientific (chemists, physicists, engineers, etc.); 2. Technical (filmworkers, laboratory assistants, etc.); 3. Education (teachers and students); and 4. Non-scientific (clerks, typists, accountants, etc.). This classification may have been somewhat arbitrary but the results of analysis of some 800 members' professions gave the following results : Scientific 40 per cent Technical 15 percent Education 20 per cent Non-scientific 25 per cent It is probable that the scientific and technical sections do not expect to learn a great deal that is new in their own subjects, but want to know what the other fellow is thinking and doing. The chemist wants to find out how the engineer is tackling his particular problems, the engineer is interested in the activities of the physicist. The scientific film society provides a valuable centre for keeping scientists in touch with the many and varied aspects of subjects with which they are not in daily contact. Films are being used to a greater extent than ever before for educational purposes and if only for this reason, those concerned with teaching join scientific film societies to see what is available and form some idea of how the films may be used. It is more difficult to find reasons for the Why Scientific Film Societies? by James W. Oswald presence of the quarter of the audience that has been given the label 'non-scientific'. Is it that there are 'mute, inglorious' Darwins and Rutherfords in the world of commerce? Is it that they cannot find the films they want in the local cinemas? The most probable reason is satisfaction of curiosity in wanting to know 'what makes the wheels go round'. The scientific film society audience must not be confused with that to be found in the commercial cinema in that trance-like state engendered by the vapourings of Hollywood. Any society secretary will confirm that his members are wide awake and very critical of the films put before them. Probably the most common criticism is that the films are not 'scientific' enough. Although shots of cranes silhouetted against a background of steam may be aesthetically satisfying, they do not add to our knowledge of the cranes. It is treatments such as this that form the basis of such criticism. When one society showed Atomic Physics recently, there was such a flood of applications that the programme had to be repeated— an event unprecedented in the history of the society. Needless to say, there were no criticisms of this film being 'unscientific'. Many societies have carried out audience re action experiments to find out what their members think of certain films. The results, although of interest, have a somewhat academic flavour in that they apply to the finished product only. It seems strange that no documentary producer has yet made use of this ready-made audience as a body of opinion on a film he has in the making. It would be a worthwhile experiment to take a scientific film society audience into his confidence from the start, explain what he is setting out to do and the lines on which he proposes to work. Let them see the bits and pieces of the film as it is being made and ask for criticism. This may seem a bold and new procedure but much valuable information might be obtained and here might be found a way to that freshness of treatment lacking in so many documentaries of today. COMPETITIONS readers apparently did not feel inspired to write to their cinema managers in COMPETITION No. 2. No entries were received. COMPETITION No. 4 will be a CLERIHEW on anything concerning the documentary film world. Entries before May 1st please.