I like Mr. Travis Gray’s sports metaphor with the younger player watching the older players…well phrased and absolutely applicable.

So I think that we’re both right. We’re right in the fact that you pointed out because there ARE great film makers, photographers and the new breed of imaging and cinema pioneers who havent had a lick of formal study; but, I also will never concede to the belief that the same influences that would have been applied to their new-age work through careful study and analysis, can’t still find their way into their current work through observation. The impassioned artist identifies and digests the material differently allowing these observations to be more useful to them, than say the average movie-goer.

(Hypothesis….antithesis…and then the synthesis….look the cycle is complete :-D)

“the study of past masters is not only essential…it is unavoidable for the artist that takes their work seriously.”

I like the “unavoidable” part. If someone’s really serious, it stems from a curiosity if anything, and not necessarily a need to force yourself to learn. If I see something I like, I’ll watch it multiple times to really study it, and then seek out other things like it to get different perspectives.

But you can’t really watch something just to force yourself to learn. I used to work with someone who seemed to take filming very seriously, but was very formulaic in his style, and using quick cuts just because “that’s what’s being done”. His productions were disjointed and hard to watch. He never understood why he was doing it, just was doing it because that’s what he had seen. Occasionally you can see stuff that people have done that’s very good with very little formal training.

And going on the sports metaphor, good players, in any sport, even if they are naturally skilled, still have grown up watching older players and studying their style. It just comes naturally because they love the sport and see a player they idolize and naturally start to learn from that.

I love your passion David. But one could easily make the argument study the masters is not “essential.” There are lots of successful young filmmakers and videographers with booming businesses who don’t know the masters. As much as that might frustrate people like you and me, if we’re honest, we can’t say it’s essential for them to study their works. Just sayin’

Thanks for your comments and passion. Love having your voice in the conversation.

You mention the popularity of the quick cuts between shots that have become so popular; I bet not many of those young film makers would know the origins of this quick cut aesthetic. (See: “Man with a movie camera” ~Vertov There are very few takes longer than 5-7second, cinema previous was treated much like the theatre, LONG takes and the plot unfolded before the camera)

I couldnt imagine trying to make work without looking at even other photographer’s work- Even the self taught artist must find the aspects they wish to teach themselves. Those aspects must be found other artists work.

If it is the very formalized study of film/cinema in the academic sense, or the self taught indi-film maker wishing to emulate something that evoked an emotional response in them, and wanted to recreate that in their viewer, the study of past masters is not only essential…it is unavoidable for the artist that takes their work seriously.

What about the long opening shot of “Boogie Night’s”. No pun intended.

Or, “Lawrence of Arabia”.