In light of moving images: technology, creativity and lighting in cinematography. Alexander Nevill Title Page A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements of the University of the West of England, Bristol for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Supervised by Prof. Jon Dovey, Prof. Andrew Spicer and Prof. Terry Flaxton Funded by the AHRC 3d3 Centre for Doctoral Training Digital Cultures Research Centre Faculty of Arts, Creative Industries and Education June 2018 2 Light Did you say it’s made of waves? Yes, that’s it. I wonder what the waves are made of. Oh, waves are made of waves. Waves are what they are, Shimmeringness, Oscillation, Rhythmical movement which is the inherent essence of all things. Margaret Tait (1960) 3 Abstract This practice-led doctoral research examines lighting techniques used by cinematographers and more widely amongst practitioners working with moving imagery. The widespread adoption of digital technologies in the film production industry has received a good deal of critical attention from practitioners and scholars alike, however little specific consideration about changing lighting practices can be found amongst this discourse. The control and orchestration of lighting have significant aesthetic connotations for moving image work, so it is surprising that this practice remains an under-explored area in the digital age. Informed by a series of research-driven experimental installations and collaborative cinematography work on independent films, presented in a separate portfolio, this thesis offers an understanding of how light is orchestrated during the production of moving imagery through direct creative inquiry. The contribution to knowledge made through this doctoral research is distilled into three areas. First, understanding lighting in moving image production through a relational, new-materialist perspective which foregrounds the flow and energy of light as a generative force and a cultural and creative process. Second, providing a more detailed first-hand investigation into lighting processes than is currently available that uses autoethnographic methods to capture practical knowledge that is deployed in situ during moving image production. Third, offering a new approach to the relationship between a cinematographer and his/her equipment by applying 4 the actor-network theory framework to the consideration of moving image, and explicitly lighting technologies. The new-materialist perspective outlined in this thesis provides a strong foundation for further studies of lighting in emerging forms of moving image production because of its emphasis on process and a practitioner’s correspondence with light. This theoretical framework offers an effective way to understand and analyse creative lighting work across changing technologies, while the insight into practical processes captured during this enquiry can be employed directly in cinematography education. 5 Acknowledgements I am honoured to begin by acknowledging the tremendous support that I have received during this doctoral research, both financially and academically, through the Arts and Humanities Research Council’s 3d3 Centre for Doctoral Training (CDT). This generous scholarship made my research contribution possible but moreover the forward-thinking nature and practical emphasis of the scheme introduced me to a network of fellow artists, designers and filmmakers that have inspired this enquiry through their own innovative work. I would like to extend heartfelt gratitude to my supervisory team at the University of the West of England (UWE) whose thoughtful guidance has been fundamental to this doctoral enquiry. I have been fortunate enough to benefit from the supervision of three exemplary researchers: Jon Dovey, Andrew Spicer and Terry Flaxton. They have challenged and mentored me during the past several years with a great deal of patience and enthusiasm along the way. It has been a pleasure to study as their PhD student. My enquiry would not have been possible without a handful of likeminded directors and artists that have trusted in my abilities. Harald Hutter, Freya Billington, Rob Daglish, Ben Mallaby, Peter Stray, Nathan Hollis, Alexander Stevenson, Claire Byrne and Robert Telezynski. The importance of these collaborators cannot be overstated as their creative ideas and patience during production ultimately allowed me to explore cinematography. Similarly, fellow 3d3 students Adam Laity and Dani Landau, 6 whose work is closely related to this enquiry, have both been incredibly generous with their time and willingness to exchange ideas. I’m grateful to the new communities that welcomed me during the course of this research. The Bristol Experimental and Expanded Film (BEEF) collective helped me exhibit practical projects for wider audiences while the Screenworks editorial team, as well those working in the closely affiliated Digital Cultures Research Centre at UWE, taught me a great deal about academic research. I’m also grateful to the Video Data Bank at School of the Art Institute of Chicago for hosting me in an extended research visit during the summer of 2016, which was financially supported by the 3d3 CDT, and helped significantly during the contextualisation of this research enquiry. Finally, and most notably, I am thankful for the immense encouragement that my family have offered throughout this doctoral research and for Charlie’s unwavering support. 7 Contents Written Thesis Title Page ............................................................................................................ 1 Abstract ............................................................................................................... 3 Acknowledgements ............................................................................................. 5 Contents .............................................................................................................. 7 Written Thesis.................................................................................................. 7 Portfolio of Practice ......................................................................................... 8 Chapter 1: Introduction ....................................................................................... 9 1.1. The Impact of Digitality ........................................................................... 11 1.3. Cinematography as a Sub-Field of Film Studies ........................................ 17 1.2. Thesis Structure ...................................................................................... 22 Chapter 2: Methodology ................................................................................... 28 2.1. Practice-Research .................................................................................... 29 2.2. Interpretivist Approach ........................................................................... 33 2.2. Personal Knowledge ................................................................................ 37 2.3. Layered Writing ....................................................................................... 40 2.4. Audience Engagement and Feedback ...................................................... 42 Chapter 3: Light and/as Material ...................................................................... 45 3.1. Experiencing Light ................................................................................... 46 3.2. Moving Image Materiality ....................................................................... 56 3.3. Optical Metaphor and Epistemology ....................................................... 65 Chapter 4: Sculpting Light ................................................................................. 77 4.1. Lighting the Frame .................................................................................. 78 4.2. Passages of Light ..................................................................................... 93 4.3. Affordances ........................................................................................... 109 Chapter 5: Technologies of Light ..................................................................... 120 5.1. Technological Determinism ................................................................... 122 5.2. Apparatus ............................................................................................. 127 5.3. Social Constructivism ............................................................................ 133 5.4. Non-Anthropological Vitalism ............................................................... 140 5.4.1. Connecting Technology and Poiēsis .................................................... 144 5.4.2. The Essence of Technology Through Art ............................................. 147 5.5. Actor-Network Theory........................................................................... 152 5.6. The Incident Light Meter ....................................................................... 159 5.6.1. Functionalities of the Incident Light Meter ......................................... 160 5.6.2. Development of the Incident Light Meter........................................... 163 5.6.3. Material Implications of the Light Meter ............................................ 172 5.6.4. Interweaving Social and Material Considerations ............................... 176 Chapter 6: Conclusion ..................................................................................... 180 6.1. Lighting as a Creative and Cultural