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.
often cuts from one close shot to another. From a shot of B taken over A's shoulder, he cuts to a reverse angle : to a shot of A taken over B's shoulder. In doing so, he is changing the direction of view as well as the position from which the picture is taken. Clearly, there can be no analogous experience in real life. No simple theoretical justification of such cuts is possible by comparing the film treatment with normal experience.
When a director sets out to film a story, he is normally not concerned with showing it as an exact record of one person's experience. Instead, he interprets events, shows them in the way he considers dramatically most appropriate. When making a dialogue scene, to take the example already mentioned, he does not attempt to show it through the eyes of one of the characters on the screen : that would mean keeping the camera still, showing all the time only the close shot of the opposite actor. Nor does he try to show it through the eyes of an impartial observer physically present at the scene : that would mean that he could only cut to shots which were all taken from a fixed camera position. Instead, the director's aim is to give an ideal picture of the scene, in each case placing his camera in such a position that it records most effectively the particular piece of action or detail which is dramatically significant. He becomes, as it were, a ubiquitous observer, giving the audience at each moment of the action the best possible viewpoint. He selects the images which he considers most telling, irrespective of the fact that no single individual could view a scene in this way in real life.
In doing this, the director does no more than exercise his elementary right as an artist : namely, to select from a given situation particular aspects which he considers significant and to present them in the manner he feels to be most useful to his purpose. Thus if we can find no parallel in actual experience for certain editing devices, it is simply because the editor and director do not want to reproduce the physical world as one normally sees it. A spectator, moreover, does not expect to see a film unfold like an episode of real life — any more than he expects a novel to read like a diary. He accepts the film-maker's right to select and emphasise, to show a piece of action in a way which is obviously more suitable to dramatic presentation than is our normal perception.
This is as far as a theoretical justification of editing can take us. In so far as the editor changes images abruptly, he is reproducing the normal mental mechanism by which we alter our attention from object to object in real life. This justifies the mechanical
215