Viewing the Film - Text 2
This method made it possible to avoid producing too many prints of a film, and thus to reduce costs. Note that it was not necessary to make a single print to check the synchronization of sound and image before making the master print in advance of distribution.[2] This latter copy was used to make prints for future screenings, as McLaren explains: “Except for movement tests (which the artist may wish to make), the original should never be screened; only prints should be projected.”[3]
Pierre Hébert describes a similar method, based on the use of a 16 mm film viewer:
It doesn’t have to be a high-quality or motorized device. A small manual film viewer, the kind that is commonly available, is quite sufficient. This device is kept on the side of the drawing table and is used, second by second, to check the work just done. One can do without it, but that makes the work more difficult.[4]
We can see that Hébert does not necessarily advise the use of a moviola, a more costly device, to the point that in theory one can even do without any kind of viewing machine. For him this, moreover, is also where the interest in this kind of animation technique lies:
Because you are drawing directly on the film, it is possible to see the action unfold on it directly, to see its equilibrium, rhythm, emphases. Simply by taking the film between your two hands and seeing at a glance several seconds of film. The film’s continuity is thus materially accessible to the animator. It is also possible to write rhythmic marks directly and to spot at a glance their position on the film strip. It is not only possible to see the succession of images directly on the film stock; you can also see the results of your work on the spot, second by second, and evaluate the result. The use of a simple viewing machine or projector thus makes instant feedback possible. This advantage is certainly one of the virtues of working on film stock.[5]
McLaren and Hébert have thus employed two methods bringing different forms to bear: one offers more precise continuity and the other is deliberately variable, playing on the partial discontinuity of the images and their typical jumpiness.
