Introduction
In True Lies, Stephen Prince argues that with the advent of CGI, the ‘indexical’ or causal connection between what is filmed, and the real world has been broken. Today, digital imaging can make unreal things (e.g., dinosaurs, orcs) look real, and can make unreal things fit into worlds that we recognise as real. He goes on to give many examples from films like Jurassic Park, Forrest Gump and True Lies. Prince claims that the advent of CGI challenges traditional film theory assumptions about realism.
He begins by stating that realism in film theory is associated with the concept of indexicality; meaning that there is a relationship between the photographic image and the referent (or the actual thing that was photographed). This idea of indexicality is what separates realism and formalism in film theory. The use of CGI challenges some of the assumptions of realism. Charles S. Pierce argues that photographs ‘are exactly like the objects they represent … they … correspond point by point to nature’(Wollen 1976, cited in Prince, 1996, p 28). Bazin claimed that the ‘photographic image is the object itself freed from the conditions of time and space’(Bazin, 1967, cited in Prince, 1996, p 28). Stanley Cavell claimed that film was a projection of reality because it recorded what was placed in front of the lens (Cavell, 1979, cited in Prince, 1996, p 28).
Clearly these notions of realism were developed before the advent of CGI, or the more subtle ways that film and photographs can be manipulated with post-editing software. This ability to now digitally manipulate a film challenges the idea of indexically on which realism is predicated. Prince gives the example of computer-generated light and shadow, explaining that there is no need for a ‘real’ source of light to create shadows or intensity of light, but rather that it can be determined by the artist manipulating the image.
Prince (1996, p30) then asks if the ability to manipulate film has broken the link between the photograph and its referent, can films that include elements of CGI or manipulation still be contained within the ideas of realist film theory? And if it cannot, where do they fit? Film theorists such as Rudolf Arheim, Dziga Vertov, and Sergei Eisenstein use the term formalist to emphasise that one of films defining characteristics is the ability to reorganise, counter and possibly even falsify physical reality through film editing and other techniques.
Correspondence based modelling
To answer this question as to whether CGI can be contained in realist films, Prince first describes how correspondence based modelling works. He explains that there is a lot of evidence that viewers understand a film by making connections or ‘correspondences’ between what’s being displayed on the screen and their actual experience of the visual and social world they inhabit. According to Prince (1996, p 32), it is important to understand that ‘cinematic representation’ operates through the way the correspondences are structured, and the cues they produce, to connect with the viewers visual and societal experiences. Whether a viewer considers the film to be realistic, or not, is determined by how they understand these correspondences.
Prince’s key point is that instead of asking ‘whether a film is realistic or formalistic, we can ask about the kinds of linkages that connect the represented fictionalized reality of a given film to the visual and social coordinates of our own three-dimensional world’ (1996, p 32). The discussion is more about whether the viewer considers the film realistically believable in its own environment, as opposed to reflecting real world reality. So, the question can apply to both “realist” and “fantasy” films. This means that there is no need to establish or even ask if there is indexicality as a proof of realism, since images that do not exist in the ‘real world’ (have no indexicality) can be perceptually realistic.
Perceptual Realism
Perceptually realistic images appear this way because filmmakers build them to be so. This is achieved by structuring the display of light, colour, texture, movement, and sound in ways that match with the viewer’s understanding of these elements in normal life. Therefore, perceptual realism is not about the image’s indexicality, but rather about its structural correspondence to the viewer’s experience of the world. Correspondence-based modelling serves this purpose; to make the digital elements of a film appear as if they belong in the same environment as the live-action elements. Today, even more so than when this paper was written, there are a wide variety of techniques and technologies that enable filmmakers to connect unreal elements with real world film that are perceptually realistic. They include:
- Camera tracking: The motion and position of the ‘real world’ camera are tracked throughout the scene. This tracking data is then used to synchronise the CGI elements with the ‘real’ live-action footage. The aligning of the digital camera in the CGI software with the real world camera, so that the CGI elements fit realistically into the scene is called match-moving.
- Object tracking: This is used to track specific elements in a scene. This helps ensure that the CGI elements interact correctly with the real-world objects and each other. Object tracking makes sure that CGI elements don’t inadvertently run through solid objects in the ‘real’ world, or fail to react to elements in the real world.
- Lighting and shading: This is matching, or enhancing, the digital lighting and shading to matches the real-world lighting.
- Compositing: The final step involves compositing, where the digital and real world film elements are combined in post-production.
- Top of Form
Prince concluded that with the advent of digital imaging, film theorists are shifting away from the idea of indexical realism to focus on how a film’s particular message or meaning is constructed through the intentional use or design of language, narrative, visual elements, structure and arrangement, irrespective of whether this is real or unreal. He argues that it is not necessary to make a distinction between whether a film ‘indexically records the world or stylistically transfigures it. Cinema does both’ (1996, p35).
He maintains that film theory has not fully explored the importance of perceptual correspondences, but technological advances in digital imaging have made clear how important it is to understand the perceptual correspondences viewers make when watching a film.
Relation to own work
In relation to the film I intend to make, this paper has relevance. It is inconceivable that the film will not have some form of manipulation of almost all elements – lighting, colour, texture, speed and so on. It is also quite possible that some elements of 3D animation will be included (not quite CGI on the Lord of the Rings scale 😊). The key point to take way is that whichever editing choices are made, they should be in service of perceptual realism, not indexicality. However, I do need to be very careful because on the one hand, the narrative film needs to serve both an educational and entertainment purpose but on the other hand, the content cannot stray so far away from the reality of the world that I will portray (the air traffic management world) that the viewer will connect with the perceptual reality of the story but not the real world reality it takes place in.
Reference:
Prince, S. (1996) True Lies: Perceptual Realism, Digital Images, and Film Theory. Film Quarterly (1996) 49 (3): 27-37.