The technique of film editing (1958)

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.

It is interesting to note, moreover, that in this instance the rhythmic variations in the passage (which are controlled by the sound) explain the sense of the sequence : the quick, accelerating rhythm in shot 21 and onwards, for instance, in itself conveys to the audience that the train is free-wheeling downhill— the fact is not established visually or in the commentary. The control of rhythm is here the decisive factor in making film sense of the images. The order of procedure which was adopted — editing the visuals after the sound-track — is, of course, the reverse of the usual. Here, it has obvious advantages : the passage depends in the first instance on establishing a rhythm and it was therefore easier to " anchor " the beat (i.e., record the sound-track) before finally settling the visual continuity. This is not to say that the method is always preferable to the more normal routine : each problem and each individual director must choose his procedure on the merits of the individual case. But the fact that it is perfectly reasonable to compose the sound-track before the picture in imaginative documentaries of this sort shows that here the sound has become more than a mere adjunct to the picture : the two are of equal and complementary importance. Documentary film-making is, to-day, more and more tending towards the straight propaganda film : sponsors usually insist on a clearly stated " message." This, unfortunately, means that more and more directors are coming to rely on the commentary to carry the substance of their films : the images remain useful only to illustrate or to clarify certain concepts which are more readily demonstrated in pictures than in words. The result is, at best, a pleasantly illustrated government pamphlet or an ingeniously contrived commercial brochure with pictures. From an aesthetic point of view, however, these films are valueless — as perhaps in some cases they are meant to be. This does seem to be a waste of good opportunity. Documentary directors are in a uniquely favourable position to experiment with the use of their sound-tracks. To throw away this chance by using a continuous — however beautifully written — descriptive commentary is to waste one of the modern film's main and yet only partially explored assets — imaginative sound. 170