In week 1 we got a concept which is photogénie. To be honest, I can’t clearly explain the meaning of this word even so far.  It should be said that this thing can be understood but cannot be said. In Epstein’s article,  “On Certain Characteristics of Photogénie”, one of the most interesting things is a definition of the term, ‘What is photogénie? I would describe as photogenic any aspect of things, beings or souls whose moral character is enhanced by filmic reproduction. And any aspect not enhanced by filmic reproduction is not photogenic, plays no part in the art of cinema.’. So just interpret this concept from the definition of Epstein himself, I might be able to understand it as: Objects that have gained life, or a biomass has been reborn in the dimension of film can be defined as photogénie. In general these things can make a big change in the film and produce breakthroughs that can be called photogénie.

Well, I know my personal explanation sounds weird, but this is what I can get from the text definition for now. Maybe just like what Delluc said, photogénie was beyond explanation. And Epstein in his understanding that photogénie requires both aesthetic and rational judgements. He stated that photogénie had to be discovered through experimentation’ (Farmer, 2010). Therefore, maybe what we need to do in the film industry is just to accumulate experience in the future practice process, and then we will slowly realize the real meaning.

Reference

Farmer, R 2010, Epstein, Jean, Sense of Cinema, viewed 27 July 2021, <https://www.sensesofcinema.com/2010/great-directors/jean-epstein/>.