AIC, 1988 - AIC Associazione Italiana Autori della Fotografia ...

AIC
10% (escludendo le lavorazioni
su 3/4 e 1/2 pollice che scadono
da un 20% ad un 30%).
Si deve dare atto, all'Ente
Statale Televisivo,
dell'attenzione che pone nella
"Sperimentazione". Le
produzioni che ha realizzato con
il sistema H.D.V.S. — alta
definizione — (1250 righe)
convalidano lo sforzo e l'impegno
per migliorare con alte
tecnologie la qualità
dell'immagine.
In questo contesto, di buoni
propositi, mi sfugge la logica
dell'atteggiamento dell'Ente
Televisivo dello Stato, avallando
produzioni che realizzano filmati
(serial, telefilm) su negativo
amatoriale 16m/m.
Che cosa ne pensa T'ufficio
tecnico" della qualità ottenuta
nei suddetti lavori con negativo
amatoriale 16m/m?
Perché l'Ente Televisivo dello
Stato si contraddice sulla
qualità? il materiale che si
ottiene con il negativo
amatoriale 16m/m. vendendolo
all'estero, quali apprezzamenti
riscuote per la qualità?
I Direttori della Fotografia
italiani, perché debbono lavorare
in stato d'inferiorità?
La RAI, organo dello Stato
Italiano, deve salvaguardare il
lavoro di tutti e non avallare
progetti unicamente nell'ottica
della ristrettezza economica che
non si coniuga con la qualità. Il
Telespettatore paga un canone
d'abbonamento e pertanto va
rispettato.
A restrictive economic policy does not
marry well with quality.
It is unthinkable that a "technically
unacceptable" image should be
produced in this day and age — and it
is also an insult both to cinema-goers
and T.V. audiences!
I would like to go more fully into this
"technically unacceptable" aspect,
leaving aside, of course, those instances
in which technique is used to create
special artistic effects.
It would seem to make sense to me to
analyse the moment in which the
image is actually constructed and,
therefore, speak about the negative.
The most important elements in a
technically acceptable negative are
contrast, colour balance, grain,
sharpness of the image and correct
exposure. To obtain the best results,
one has to bear the following in mind:
1° Speed
A) Working with a fine grain
negative (low speed) one can
obtain both greater detail and
sharpness in the image, as well as
greater variation in the contrast
and colour balance.
B) Working with a high speed
negative (possible because of the
tremendous progress made in the
field of chemistry and physics)
one can no longer obtain the
above to the same degree.
2° Picture Size
A) Working with a negative with a
larger picture size, the image
becomes sharper and the problem
regarding the grain is diminished.
B) Working with negatives with a
picture size smaller than that of
the 35 m/m negative (the
so-called amateur negatives)
results in a grainier image which
is consequently less sharp.
In fact, the 16 m/m negative is no
longer used in professional film-making
either in the U.K. or U.S.A., the
majority of films being shot in 35
m/m.
Way back in 1958,1 was engaged by
M.G.M. to work on "BEN HUR"
(directed by William Wyler; eleven
Oscars!) which they shot at Cinecittà.
I was part of the Second Unit
(Director: Marton; Director of
Photography: Piero Portalupi) and we
were responsible for shooting the
famous chariot race.
It was also during that period that
Drive-Ins were springing up all over
the U.S.A, with their screens three
times larger than normal cinema
screens, and their projectors twice as
far away.
In order to avoid having problems with
L'IMMAGINE E L'ANGOSCIA 65
a
a
o
o
o
o
-r-
the sharpness and grain of the image,
M.G.M. ordered a 70 m/m negative
from Kodak and gave instructions to
the printing and developing labs to
construct the necessary processing
equipment. At the same time, they
ordered ten 70 m/m movie cameras
from MITCHELL MODELS.
They also made sure I knew how to use
one (I was then an assistant
camerman) by letting me practise with
it for six weeks before shooting began!
It was also at this time that Italy
discovered the two perforation picture
size which reduced the perforations in
the photogram from four to two, and
by means of optical printing could
produce a squeeze image for the four
perforation Cinemascope. The optical
printing was extremely expensive, but
the fact that half the amount of
negative was used and, consequently,
the cost (cash price) was halved, and
one no longer had the expense of hiring
a cinemascope lens from 20th Century
Fox, made the Producers very happy.
In my opinion, the economic
advantages, even though considerable,
did not merit sacrificing the quality of
the image. In fact, the Directors of
Photography, in an effort to overcome
the problem of graininess in the image
which reduced the sharpness, were
obliged to close the aperture of the
Stop more frequently, which meant
increasing the amount of lighting
equipment, which in its turn meant
using more light-trucks, resulting in
the lighting taking longer to set up. To
keep the film within the schedule,
therefore, one had to employ more
electricians and work longer hours.
NEGATIVE
m 4h
CAMERA APERTURES
0.868" x 0.373"
Fotogramma techniscope normale e riportato a 4 perforazioni anamorfinato
o
o
O
O
a
O
The intemegative obtained with the
two perforation system is always below
average quality. The prints struck
abroad always of an unacceptable
quality. The two perforation system
has, in fact, been extremely damaging
to Directors of Photography
professionally.
As far as the quality of the image the
cinema-giers are expected to accept for
their 8.000 lira is concerned, 1 don't
think 1 need launch into a severe
criticism here, as Vittorio Storaro has
been more than through in his letter to
Dr. Bruno of A.G.I.S., regarding "THE
LAST EMPEROR".
Today, the image is most widely
exploited on television. Jvdany years
ago, RAI RADIOTELEVISIONE
ITALIANA set up a Technical
Department, whose job it was to
ensure that the image was up to
standard. The first films made for RAI
were all checked by this department,
but many of the Director of
Photography who were not welcome
there were excluded from this phase of
the work.
Because of the rigorous attitude of the
Technical Department, the images of
the films broadcast did not correspond
to the Director of Photography's
original concept for the photography. It
was only after the A.I.C. and the
Directors of the films had lodged
repeated complaints, that RAI was
ersuaded that it was not only fitting,
ut essential, that Director of
Photography intervened during the
transcription of the film onto magnetic
tape.
It is important to remember that this
transcription means a 10% reduction
in the quality of the image (not to
mention transcription onto 3/4" and
112" tape which results in a 20-30%
reduction).
One must, however, acknowledge
RAl's work in the experimental field:
the films they have shot using
H.D.V.S. - High Definition - (1250
lines) just goes to show how much of
an effort and commitment they are
making to improve the image, using
the best that advanced technology has
to offer.
As RAI set their sights so high in this
area, I fail to understand why they
have to back productions (serial and
telefilms) shot in 16 m/m.
And 1 wonder what their Technical
Department thinks of the quality of
the images of these films?
Why does RAI have these conflicting
attitudes towards quality
And, again, I wonder what their
foreign clients think of the quality of
the films shot in 16 m/m.'
Why do Italian Directors of
Photography have to work under such
negative conditionsÌ
It is RAI's duty, as a government body,
to see that the quality of our work is
protected, instead of concentrating
their efforts on saving money.
The viewer has to pay good money for
his T.V. licence, so he should,
therefore, get the best quality.