Photography and Cinema

culture, and much of it has made use of photography as a medium at once

distinct yet connected to it. By the 1990 s it was clear that just about all art

forms were going to have make their peace with a world dominated by

the moving image. As Jeff Wall put it in 1996 , ‘no picture could exist today

without having a trace of the film still in it, at least no photograph’.^11

The early 1970 s was a turning point in this relationship. Many cinema

chains and distribution companies were off-loading their holdings of

publicity photos onto the second-hand market. There was little use for

the material, since television had taken up the function of repertory

cinema. These informal archives were thought to have little cultural or

economic value. Cut loose from their sources, the images were left to fend

for themselves, their meanings up for grabs. New audiences of collectors,

film fans, historians and dealers emerged. Collections were assembled

not just by film title, but also by actor, genre, director, studio, period and

individual photographer. Out of these significant new archives of film

history were established, such as the John Kobal Collection.

Others were attracted to less obvious meanings: a mood, an oddness

of gesture, a compelling composition or an inexplicable situation. What

sense do we make of an image when we do not know where it has come

from? What does it mean if we cannot recognize the film or if it barely

resembles cinema at all? The beauty and craft of the image are robbed of

reason, but a new fascination may fill the void. In this regard the fate of

the film still embodies the potential fate of any photograph. Made for one

purpose, it is easily detached and redefined elsewhere. Several artists were

drawn to those discarded glossies. For example, John Baldessari in theus

and John Stezaker in theukbegan to invent their own poetic and allegori-

cal uses for them. Their collages and juxtapositions are full of enigmatic

associations and unspoken subtexts. To classify his informal collection of

stills, Baldessari invented his owna–zwith little to do with film industry

categories. ‘A’ was for ‘Attack, Animal/Man, Above, Automobiles (left),

and Automobiles (right)’. ‘B’ was for ‘Birds, Building, Below, Barrier, Blood,

Bar (man in) Books, Blind, Brew, Betray, Bookending, Bound, Bury, Banal,

Bridge, Boat, Birth, Balance, and Bathroom’. No stars, no titles, no dates.

Before he began working with film stills John Stezaker explored

oldphoto-romansfrom continental Europe. These were cut up and 127