‘mechanical
reproduction emancipates the work of art from its parasitical dependence on
ritual…From a
photographic negative, for example, one can make any number of prints; to ask
for the “authentic” print makes no sense.’
Despite Benjamin’s theory covering a broad range of the types of art in
this essay I will be drawing my focus on film as an art form and exploring
whether digital technology has emancipated art or if digital advancements have done
the opposite. Living in a time where technology is highly accessible and always
has been it’s hard to imagine life without it. Therefore in order to understand
the context in which Benjamin was writing I will explore film from its roots and go
through a brief historical timeline of films existence to have a clearer
understanding outside the mind of a digital consumer. Using Benjamin’s views
from his essay (ESSAY TITLE)I will apply the concept of authenticity and “aura”
in reference to film in both the past and present, documenting any cultural or
technological changes that may have influenced the growth of Film. Using this
research I will place Benjamin’s theory of mechanical reproduction in a forwarding
point in time, using John Berger view’s from his 4 part series ways of seeing
(BBC, 1972) to highlight how our perception and reaction to film has adapted as
a result of digital production, marketing and exhibition. To summarise these
findings I will contrast Benjamin’s view with the views of Adorno and Horkheimer
in relation to my personal experiences with digital advances in film and the
effect of the internet.
Film started out as a
photochemical process, an advancement of photography that gave still images the
power to become moving imagery to tell a narrative. The first film ever made The Horse In Motion (Muybridge, 1878)
portrays the basics of film shooting and despite being unimpressive in comparison
to the contemporary films it revolutionised perception. “With the invention of
the camera everything changed. We could see things which were not there in front
of us appearances could travel across the world.” (Berger, 1972) Given the
context the short film was produced it can be assumed in terms of the ‘aura’ audiences
could feel a magical sensation wherever they saw the film as for the first time
their perception can be ‘freed from the boundaries of time and space’ through
the looking of a ‘mechanical eye.’ Taking Benjamin’s view into account this can
be seen as the bench mark of the emancipation of art as authenticity is no
longer a factor, as it was with paintings, because “from a photographic
negative… one can make
any number of prints; to ask for the “authentic” print makes no sense”
Films were shot, and
edited, in this analogue format, “for almost one hundred years” (Side by Side,
Reeves, 2012), and started as a silent means of production that was reliant on images
filmed only in black and white. These films would then be exhibited in the
cinema for audiences to enjoy and In relation to Benjamin’s concept of the ‘aura’ it places focus
on the relationship the audience makes with art and within film this can be
seen as almost a religious ritual, everyone is silent in the dark allowing
themselves to subjectively make a connection to what they are viewing. However,
as time progresses and technology advances the aura has to adapt with these
changes to understand modern means of mass production. In terms of art being
freed as a result of digital technology the introduction of film can support
this as Benjamin believes reproduction is missing its presence in time and space,
its unique existence at the place where it happens to be
yet film detaches itself from this concept. Film can exist anywhere and
authenticity isn’t a factor when it comes to shooting on film.
Side by side is an American documentary that investigates
the progression of the film industry and how digital technology has revolutionised
the way in which we watch and produce films It explains the process of film
being “ shot, edited and projected using photochemical film.” (Side by Side,
Reeves, 2012) Alongside, taking an “in-depth look at this revolution through
interviews with directors, cinematographers, film students, producers, technologists,
editors, and exhibitors” (Side by Side, Reeves, 2012) It examines all aspects
of filmmaking — “from capture to edit, visual effects to colour correction,
distribution to archive… at a time when digital and photochemical filmmaking
coexist (exploring) what has been gained, what is lost, and what the future
might bring.” (Side by Side, Reeves, 2012)
The technique of reproduction detaches the
reproduced object from the domain of tradition. This appears true
in a digital age of film making as very little remains manual, unless chosen to
be, which has revolutionised cinema and how films are made as “Digital technology
opens a door of possibility that you can’t do with film” (James Cameron) that
can be viewed as either something “scary or liberating”(Side By Side.) Whilst
shooting Danny Boyle’s 28 days later they had to “stop traffic which we didn’t have
the money to do” however, with the power of cheap digital cameras they “could
use 10 of them because they were so cheap and hold the traffic briefly to get
the shots needed and from all angles.” This is something that supports the democracy
of film in the digital age as it means more is possible with a smaller budget
such as being able to “shoot illegally, do unconventional things and disrupt
the rhythm of things.” (Boyle, Side by Side, 2012) The fluid use of these cameras
allows everything to become much more voyeuristic and makes the cinematographers
job much more exciting this revolution comes with a required level of “Technical
expertise (that) can be seen as a new form of craftsman shipment in an age
where digital technology dominates over analogue technology. The visual language
of digital cameras differs away from the static-ness of film, taking
cinematography to a new level” (Rodriguez, Side by Side, 2012)
Digital technology “comprises certain factors of
movement … of the camera, not to mention special camera angles, close-ups, etc.”
Meaning in terms of perspective we can “discover something about ourselves and
the situation in which we are living” through entering this fictional world which
“permits the audience to
take the position of a critic, without experiencing any personal contact with
the actor” as a result of the free movement of digital cameras creating
an almost intimate relationship with a stranger. This enables a new reaction to
films which we never had before with the only downfall being that with films
shot digitally “quality wise if you put it against an exact copy
on film, film would be superior” (Boyle, Side by Side, 2012) However, as previous
stated digital technology requires “craftsmanship” therefore if the resolution
of digital technology is an issue disguise it through the films content.
This style was utilised
within the making of Paranormal activity (Oren Peli, 2007) that took the concept
of digital cameras being the ‘re-invention of a social medium that has
worked its way through our culture and brought it onto another level’
(Scorcesse, Side By Side, 2012) into the hands of the public which wasn’t accessibly
possible 10 years ago. The film had a limited budget of $15,000 according to
IMDB and managed to gross over £107,918,810 (Box Office Mojo) as result of high
demand on social media site Twitter. “The
film received 1 million hits on the Internet where people “Demanded It” (Marisa Porter, 2007) to be exhibited in their town. As a result
conglomerate
Paramount decided to
financially exhbit the films into cinema and DVD/BLU-RAY format. This
emphasises the emancipation of art as a result of the internet as without this
powerful form of viral marketing, that was unavailable ten years ago, it is
unlikely to film would have never been seen to an audience this broad. Since
the release of this film it has had four sequels and has set off a chain
reaction of films similar in cinematic style including The Devil Inside (Bell,
2012) and The Last Exorcism (Stamm, 2010.) This revolutionary achievement allows
hope to be given to aspiring film makers as what was once seen as an “Amateur
way of shooting” (Ambrosi, Side by Side, 2012) can now match the achievements
of “the gold standard of making movies” (Ambrosi, Side by Side, 2012) film. “Paranormal
Activity marks one of the first films to successfully use viral marketing and
integrate social media into their advertising” (Marisa Porter, 2007) and has
made the cinematic style favourable and inspirational to others.
However, what comes after cinema is reliant on
reproductions which are produced to benefit the audience as well as the
producers. Without reproductions the profit of a film would stop at cinema
which would force producers to make more films faster to ensure they stay in
business which could be very expensive to do and lack essential pre-production
planning that can determine the creative outcome. With reproductions it grants the
film an eternal life which could potentially bring in a profit forever meaning the
copy of the original can be placed into situations which would be out of reach for the original itself
as a result of digital technology. Having been spoilt by the power of modern technology
and having witnessed the power of digital technology when reproductions emerge
there is currently a choice to purchase DVD or BLU RAY. In a time where quality
is highly valued according to the BVA in 2012 there was a ‘10% rise in Blu-ray Disc spending’ and a ‘year-on-year increase in the value of the
video market of 0.5% (that) effectively maintain(ed) the overall market value
as consumers shift their viewing habits.’(BVA, 2012)
This same year the highest grossing films were The Avengers grossing $623,357,910
(Box office mojo, 2012) and The Dark knight Rises grossing $448,139,099. (Box
office mojo 2012.) Aside from the obvious reason for this profit being the fact
they have both evolved from comics, making them franchise property with a
pre-sold audience, they we’re both shot using IMAX cameras and the closest way
to replicate this cinema exclusive viewing is on BLU RAY.
From this image its clear to see blu-ray allows the
highest resolution however, with DVD not coming close to this high quality it
can be argued that domestic sales destroys the authenticity of film. This
challenges Benjamin’s view that digital technology ‘emancipates art’ as it
appears, unless the consumer has a high disposable income, to do quite the
opposite through stripping down the authenticity of a piece through the removal
of its original resolution , and
replacing it with something that is released in two different formats, both with
very little originality remaining.
Being at what most claim to be ‘the peak of digital
technology’
