• No results found

Matched-Exit/Entrance Cut

Chapter 4: Cuing a Cut

4.1 Experiment 1: Introduction

4.1.2 Occlusion as a primitive editing cue

4.1.2.2 Matched-Exit/Entrance Cut

The cut cued by an object’s occlusion by the screen edge will be referred to as a matched-exit/entrance56. An object is depicted exiting the screen from one screen edge, a cut is made, and the same object is shown re-entering the screen from the opposite screen edge (see Figure 4-3). The direction of the object’s motion must be the same across both shots. This constraint ensures that the matched-exit/entrance cut maintains the directional continuity enforced by the 180° Rule (see 2.1.1).

Figure 4-3: An illustration of how to create a matched-exit/entrance cut. Taken from Katz 1991; pg 155.

55 Stage exits via the wings of a stage or doors in the set were an established part of theatre (Nelmes, 2003) but even if these exits indicated the end of a scene the new scene could not be presented instantly as it can in film.

56 This name was devised by the author of this thesis. This type of cut is referred to in the editing literature in various ways, such as “frame cut“ (Bordwell et al., 1985), but there exists no consensual name. Matched-exit/entrance was chosen as it represents the cut’s status as a match-action cut whilst specifying that the action is a screen exit followed by a screen entrance.

114 Description of this type of cut can be found in many film theory and editing textbooks. For example, “a figure leaves the shot, and, as the body crosses the frame line, the cut reveals the figure entering a new shot, with the body still crossing the [opposite] frame line.” (Bordwell et al., 1985; pg 51). This definition also suggests the correct timing of the cut: “as the body crosses the frame line”. Matching the edit half-way through the screen departure seems to be an established convention (at least in the film literature57) and can be seen in more recent editing hand books such as Steven Katz’s popular Film Directing: Shot by Shot: “it is common practice to make the cut while the subject is still partially within the frame.” (Katz, 1991; pg 155; see Figure 4-3).

After the cut the object should re-enter the screen from the opposite edge. In the frame immediately after the cut the object should be located half on the screen (Bordwell et al., 1985; pg 51, and Katz, 1991; pg 155). It will then be seen to move back onto the screen at the beginning of the new shot. If the object does not appear on the screen immediately after the cut a discontinuity is believed to occur (Katz, 1991). Any expectations the viewer had about the new shot are erased and a new scene can begin. Leaving the screen empty either at the beginning of the new shot or at the end of the previous shot is a technique known as Clearing the frame (Figure 4-4; Katz, 1991).

57 One of the difficulties of identifying the conventions actually employed by film editors is the prominence of Reisz and Millar’s The Technique of Film Editing (Reisz & Millar, 1953) and Bordwell and Thompson’s Film Art: An Introduction (Bordwell & Thompson, 2001). There is a tendency for modern editing handbooks to reproduce the editing conventions as they appear in these two books without acknowledging the original source. The general acceptance of the conventions cited in these two books has been taken as indicating that they are actually what are used by editors without this assumption being explicitly tested.

115 Figure 4-4: Two forms of “Clearing the frame” (taken from Katz, 1991). If the empty frame is held after the principal object has left the screen it is believed to enable the editor to make a usually discontinuous cut to a new shot in which action is not matched exactly (“Incoming shot B”). Holding an empty frame at the beginning of a new shot can either slow the pace of the film (“Incoming shot A”) or weaken the impact of an unexpected cut (right film strip).

Clearing the frame is believed to be most disruptive to the viewer when the shot continues after the principal character has left the screen (Katz, 1991). As the shot is old the viewer has already had the opportunity to extract all useful information from it. By comparison, starting a new shot without a visible principal character may still be disruptive to the perceived continuity of action but the new scene will give the viewer something to look at (Katz, 1991). This explanation of the significance of a shot based on the number of places left to look at has previously been described as visual momentum: the rate at which attention shifts across a visual scene (Hochberg & Brooks, 1978a).

Attention is a recurring theme in descriptions of the matched-exit/entrance cut. Edward Dmytryk identified a “rule of thumb” used by film editors to find the right point to cut during a screen exit: “Good editing practice rules that the cut away from the first scene should occur at the point where the actor’s eyes exit the frame” (Dmytryk, 1986; pg 437). Dmytryk believes the actor’s eyes are important because this is the most probable point at which the viewer’s attention is focussed (Dmytryk, 1986). The significance of a person’s eyes is a long established fact in social

116 attention research (Yarbus, 1967). Dmytryk’s recommendation that the cut should be timed to match the point at which the viewer’s gaze crosses the screen edge suggests that at this point attention undergoes a shift that will enable the cut to be hidden. Belief in such an attentional shift seems to be shared by Katz who attributes the effect of Clearing the Frame to the detaching of viewer’s attention from the principal object and erasure of any expectations the viewer had about where the object would appear in the next shot (see Figure 4-4; Katz, 1991). This shift of attention has been explicitly stated by Dmytryk:

“At the point of the cut, two things happen: (1) the exiting actor’s eye or face – usually the viewer’s centre of interest - leave the screen and, as a result (2) the viewer’s eyes, which have been following the actor’s movement, encounter the darkness at the edge of the screen. These two actions cause a reaction: The viewer’s eyes swing back toward the centre of the screen, then continue to its right edge where they find the continuation of the actor’s movement. All this happens in a fraction of a second, not nearly long enough for the viewer to be aware of the passage of time, to be conscious of his eye movement, or to notice the cut has slipped by in the interim.” (Dmytryk, 1986; page 438)

Therefore, the convention of using occlusion of an object by the screen edge to cue a matched-exit/entrance cut is well established. The conventions, almost immediate development during the early days of film and status as the founding technique of the continuity editing style, seems to suggest that it is in someway primitive. The mechanism by which it is assumed to function is an attentional shift accompanied by expectations of the content of the new shot (Dmytryk, 1986; Katz, 1991). Both of these have been shown to have the potential to hide a cut (see chapter 3). However, there is no empirical evidence that such an attentional shift exists or that the viewer develops expectations across a cut. The empirical study to be performed in this chapter will examine the distribution of attention across a matched-exit/entrance cut. Before this study takes place the conventions of 50% exit and 50% entrance described above as the best way to create a matched-exit/entrance cut should be examined. Does any evidence exist supporting the view that 50% occlusion before a

117 cut will lead to the construction of perceptual expectations compatible with the perception of “continuity” across the cut?

To begin investigating how a matched-exit/entrance cut might create the perception of “continuity” the perceptual consequences of normal occlusion should be first examined.