Response #3: Rush, Pg 18-35

At the start of cinematography, there was a sense that many people didn’t necessarily know if it was going to be a success. The idea of having still art become something like a “Motion Picture”, had never been thought of or seen before. The idea was at the time fresh, and people didn’t have much expectations. Sometimes, in fact, I would have imagined that those even diving into the field of cinematography wouldn’t have been too optimistic. To the point, in the chapter read, what was very interesting to me, was the thought that David James had surrounding the effects of having the new means of technology on artists coming into the cinema world, from other platforms. What he came to learn, was the technology was starting to come first, rather than letting the artist make his piece first, which was the initial practice that was known a more “pure” or “Traditional” method. James then goes on to state, “n the technology improved when the artist adopted it, but the technology came first.” (Rush, 28). This to me, was an indication that the craft was to be possibly second guessed, when the practice or approach was different than usual. The artists, who took this approach could have been in a state of experimentation, for the craft that again was new to begin with. It opened up the world of art, with new modes to film or to shoot still images. My favorite of the chapter happens to be EAT, by Andy Warhol, which capture expression In a single motion by the individual getting some food in his mouth.