Download Report - Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences

tubes have been practically discarded for the last
year or two, perhaps since the advent of panchromatic
film. The reason for it is that the radiation
emitted by these lights were not the proper radiation
to be used in conjunction with panchromatic
film, but since the development by the Cooper-
Hewitt Company of the new Neon tubes, experiments
conducted mixing the Mercury and Neon
tubes have proven that this system of lighting is
very efrcient in modern photographic conditions.
IJnfortunately at the time the tests at Warner
Bros. Studio were conducted we had only two units
of Cooper-Hewitt's Mercury and Neon, which were
very crudely arranged to bring about the proper
mixture of the Mercury and Neon radiations.
I do not mean by this to bring any discredit upon
Mr. Shannon who has displayed a great ingenuity
and cleverness in supplying us with these lights in
the very limited time he had at his disposal.
I do personally believe that Cooper-Hewitt illumination
o{ Mercury tubes in conjunction with
Neon tubes ought to be kept ever present in our
minds, especially when we are called upon to photograph
large sets. The Cooper-Hewitt Mercury
lights, before the advent o{ panchromatic film were
used for general illumination purposes. They gave
us the foundation of illumination upon which we
would build our high lights, in other words, our
detailed system of illumination.
Now these lights can be used to the same efiect
providing the proper mixture o{ radiations is
obtained, with the added advantage of avoiding a
great amount of the heat radiation that would be
emitted by the Mazda lamps necessary to give the
same light intensity.
We don't want to enter into repetition of discussions
which have been quite well exhausted
during the meetings held in'the past week and a
half, but I wish to give a rapid survey of the consideration
in which we have taken all the elements
that concur to make a perfectly photographed picture,
if such a thing can exist.
We have for instance, taken into consideration
photograph;c lenses used in cinematography' Now,
a photographic objective is a very delicate instrument
and the knowledge of its qualities and properties
require long study and a scientific trend of mind.
I want to state here again publicly, what I have
several times stated to you gentlemen in private
conversation, a cinematographer to be a successful
cinematographer, must have a well developed sense
of artistry, in other words, he must have a certain
artistic temperament (i{ you take this word temperament
in the proper sense that I assign to it)
and a scientific mind, very seldom, if ever, can
blend together completely with an artistic mind. I
think we can all agree on this. We ought, perhaps,
to be scientists and artists at the same time but
then, we should be too perfect, I think.
Nevertheless, our work is so exacting that we pay
a great deal of attention to all scientific development
and we devote a great deal of our time to
the study and solution o{ our technical problems.
Some conclusions we have derived from the in'l'estigation
of large aperature lenses we have submitted
to the Society of Motion Picture Engineers, not a
a statement of facts, but as a series of thoughts, so
to speak, which were in our estimation worth while
to be taken into consideration. Mr. Rayton last
night gave us a very splendid lecture on this subject
from which we have derived a gieat deal of benefit.
Nevertheless I do not hesitate to state that I am
personally still "{rom Missouri" and that I am
not convinced as yet of the fact that lenses of new
design are not advisable when used in conjunction
with Mazda lighting. I wish to refer you to a
paper submitted to the S.M.P.E. on this subiect.
It would be vgry unfair for me to make any definite
statement here on the subject unless I personally
were absolutely convinced of being in error. The
A. S. C., through its rese arch committee, will
further investigate this matter, and finally atrive at
some definite conclusion.
Another question which has called our attention
was the matter of "make-up," a very, very important
matter. Many times we go on the set all ready
for work and we usually find that our principals
(I mean our stars and picture players) have well
taken care of themselves in the matter of make-up
through the experience they have acquired in the
course of their work. Stars and principals feel
deeply the sense of responsibility that falls upon
them due to the importance of the perfect rendition
of their expression and their physical appearance'
due to the importance of the roles they portray.
Of course, we often have to instruct even stars and
feature players about certain phases of make-up, and
we usually find a wonderful response on their part,
but there are other players who are just as important
as a star in their particular work. For instance
a player of minor importance in the cast of a picture
may appear on the screen at certain intervals
either in a close-up or a semi-close-up. Right at the
moment of his appearance in such scenes and no
matter how short this appearance may be, this actor
is at this particular moment as important to the
production as the star, and his physical appearance
should be photographically perfect. Unfortunately
many times we do not find as good a response {rom
this category of actors as we could expect. Many
times we are told by them: "I have seen myself on
the screen for years in this make-up and I photograph
well and I don't know why I should change
it." Of course we cannot enter into discussion or
open a course on make-up at the moment we are
ready to "shoot." In such cases we have to take
either one of the following stands: just photograph
the actor as he is, though we know the results will
be disadvantageous to him, or her, and our work
be rendered more difficult by the lack of proper
make-up; or demand that the make-up be changed
or modified according to our conception, which entails
loss o{ time and not very pleasant {eelings. I
t 60:l