You have to remember that we're talking about a pre-TED-talk era--that is, prior to the boom in independent cinema and 'the democratization of film'--in which émigré directors who worked within the studio system had no real incentive to lecture in public about how they did their work, particularly if, like Lubitsch, they never achieved fluency in English and retained a heavy Germanic accent. Since Lubitsch never produced any written instructive material about his process, it's not mysterious that it would be hard to find a citation for this idea. And while it's possible that Wilder made it up, there's no real evidence to suspect he did. After all, nearly all of the anecdotes we've heard about Lubitsch come from his colleagues.
The quote is usually attributed to "Ernst Lubitsch, as told to Billy Wilder," which is entirely accurate as far as anyone knows, and was good enough for the fact checkers who reviewed the New Yorker's recent profile on Lubitsch .
I had to look up what this "Don't give them 4" was referring to, and it sounds like it means Don't give the audience the answer, give them context and let them figure it out.
But even given that knowledge, I'm still not sure what point they're trying to make and how their photos relate to giving the audience context and what the camera has to do with it
I'm not familiar with cameras but the author claim the Olympus Pen ee3 can compose two pictures into one, which is good for the 2+2.
Apparently, if you hold this camera horizontally, it shoots a portrait orientation photo of the size you say whereas a "normal" 35mm camera would shoot a landscape orientation photo that is 36mm x 24mm.
But I did notice that the number 40 was red on the counter implying significance. I quick google search revealed the same question and answer plus additional manuafacturer: AGFA
"Got an offer to buy several hundred rolls of packaged Agfa APX 400 speed film. It is all in 20 exposure
cassettes. Where have I been that I don't recall "20 exposure" rolls? Were they a special run for point-of-
purchase at some kind of strange outfit like (insert schlock discount store here) or a serious product?...."
"They used to make 20 expsure rolls before they switched over to 24 per roll. That change happened in the 70s I believe, so the film is probably pretty old if it has got only 20 exposures per roll. While thats my best guess, you could be right, and it could have been special order."
The camera is from 1961 so would have reference to 20 exposure rolls.
There's also the Kuleshov Effect which might come into additional play - "viewers derive more meaning from the interaction of two sequential shots [ie the 2+2] than from a single shot in isolation [the 4]"
I've had so much fun with this camera! The plastic lens produces a noticeable vignette, along with a chromatic aberration on the edges. This means that this camera will never produce high-quality results, but that's absolutely fine! People also react in a different way when I present the camera for taking a picture.
Some examples here: https://imgur.com/a/AyyZNDB
Of course it's more expensive than digital photography. Each film roll costs around £6-8, and it's costing around £17-20 to develop each one. The cool thing about film these days is that labs will scan the negatives, so you still get digital images ready to print.
This is the reason I (a die hard analog photography fan) finally gave up the ghost and switched fully to digital.
I love taking photos and I don’t want to be constrained by cost.
It was a modest investment in learning and money to take the next step and develop my own film. B&W at first (easy, forgiving) and then even color (sill easy but less forgiving).
I guess I was not interested in the darkroom + enlarger thing. I did that when I was young (elementary school, middle school) so I know what's involved. It could be fun but is less modest a move up in terms of cost (and space since you do indeed need a dark room — just processing the film was easy with just a changing bag).
Instead after processing the negatives, I go next to flatbed scanner and we're digital for the rest of the trip.
* I put some sample photos up: https://imgur.com/a/8CFskwN
But, yeah, for most people a decent home setup is challenging. I had the equipment so when I got an apartment after graduating from school I gave temporarily setting things up in a bathroom a shot. I quickly gave up because I found it really frustrating after having had access to real darkrooms in school--and also realized I was sort of done with the hours in a dark room with chemicals thing.
For development you either need a darkbag (glorified dark cloth bag with 2 sleeves) or a "daylight development tank" which exist since the 50s and let you develop without any additional equipment: https://casualphotophile.com/2020/08/17/leitz-agfa-rondinax-...
Color printing old school style basically disappeared though.
I’m a bit surprised that the author doesn’t explain how the camera prevents out of focus photos (but mentions the auto exposure feature instead).
For example, it’s common to buy a “prime” lens, i.e. one that doesn’t zoom. But you wouldn’t describe that as taking away choice; it’s an intentional choice to prioritize size and other parameters (sharper images due to fewer elements, faster apertures).
There’s also always been manual focus lenses if you want, so I struggle to see where the problem is.
Here's a diptych of a salt mine I shot when I visited Peru: https://www.instagram.com/p/BsjB07glcXs/
this is a BALLER shot amigo
And yes, I took it apart to look for other faults. even tried a recipe to reionize the cells, but it was completely dead. If you buy one a good sign is if it still has the cap.
I can see the rabbit hole expanding before me…
Would travel to Tokyo.
Would spend excessive time in vintage camera shops.
Would buy this camera.
Would be disappointed if selenium is expired.
How to be sure?
How to fix?
How to replace?
What else to buy?
OG LED watch shop!
Or roller skating in front of the Musée d'Orsay: https://i.imgur.com/2kIlWSK.jpg
Imagine a camera with a three-way switch, mode A, mode B 'normal', and mode C.
Flick a switch to ModeA and then stack multiple exposures until I flick the switch back to normal at which point the camera composites the images into a single photo.
Or Flick the switch to mode C and then take a slices of photos and then arrange them as diptychs, triptychs etc etc. until I flick the switch back to normal at which point the camera composites the images into a single photo.
With screw on camera filters for IR, colour tints etc.
The problem would be to put this in a camera for kids. If I judge by my own, kids are expert at breaking things. So the camera would have to be super strong, and super cheap, so that replacing it when it inevitably breaks isn't too painful.
I own a Pen F (the SLR version of the author’s camera), and they are indeed wonderful little bodies (and lenses, given their size). Having 72 (80 if you’re careful) frames per roll makes shooting on film a little interesting — it’s still fundamentally scarce, but not nearly as scarce as 24/36.
See also Inc's writeup: "This Hollywood Director's 2+2 Rule Will Make You Instantly More Persuasive and Charming. This incredibly simple rule for better storytelling is also incredibly powerful."
"We would call this the unifying theory of two plus two. Make the audience put things together. Don't give them four; give them two plus two. The elements you provide in the order you placed them in is crucial to whether you succeed at engaging the audience."
Aerogramme Writers' Studio: "Pixar’s 22 Rules of Storytelling"
> Once upon a time there was ___. Every day, ___. One day ___. Because of that, ___. Because of that, ___. Until finally ___.
One of the more oblivious grass-is-greener statements I can imagine.
That said, modern devices feel magical in their own way, which is why I'm an engineer!
It's like how every other tech-bro thinks they want to become a woodworker. But if you offered my dad (a woodworker) $300K a year to not breathe sawdust and hurt his back, he'd do it.
Lots of car enthusiasts prefer manual shifting even though it offer worse performance. Watch lovers will buy a rolex over a casio quartz watch even tho the casio will be infinitely cheaper and more accurate. Art people will buy a physical painting over a NFT, &c.
Mechanical cameras always have been regarded has magical, you press a button on a box made of coils, gears and springs, and you get a picture. It's a technical marvel that make people dream in a way a "made in china" pcb based camera doesn't
In a world that is completely parasited with electronics it's a breath of fresh air
You really don't need to point out that its impractical and can't be had all the time, because that wasn't the point.
Let people enjoy things.
Edit: now I remember what it reminds me of—stock photo books. Where the most graphic and interesting photos are buildings and garages or toys and this has nothing to do with anything that’s a Non-Stop server. LOL or Service and Support packages…
This is the good Internet. The type of content that nowadays I will not be find in the first page of a Google search result.
If you google it you will see it is not from Pixar, it's a common story telling approach.