Donate

Amateur Film-Making: History of Visual Modes and Creative Practices

Amateur film is a phenomenon directly related to the technology of small-format shooting. It dates back to the end of the 19th century, but it acquired a mass character in the middle and second half of the 20th century. For many, filmmaking has become a means of creative self-expression, a tool for remembering and capturing important events in life, as well as an opportunity for leisure and interaction between people. Kilometers of film shot by amateur filmmakers still remain unreviewed due to the decline of technology and the private nature of filming. The legacy of amateur filmmakers is a huge layer of visual sources that witnessed the past from  a creator’s personal point of view.

The amateur filmmaker and his work can be viewed from different perspectives. You can look at this phenomenon from the perspective of academic metaphors, such as “a man with a movie camera,” “a movie buff,” or a film amateur. These words imply certain institutional practices and indicate how hegemony is constructed: if there is an amateur, on the one hand, then there is a clearly defined professional, on the other hand. Furthermore, historically, technology and media have constructed a new type of thinking, and so the film camera and the narrow film are also a problem of philosophical epistemology, or how we understand what we see through certain media. How does a person visually think about time, history, or family relationships?

The amateur filmmaker is also the story of how a film camera functions socially, if it is not designed to make the “real films,” how the power is reflected in this practice of private visuality. The film camera was a rather expensive treat, and therefore amateur cinema served as a way of social distinction. After all, a person with such a device had a special status and capabilities that most people without a camera did not. Each media has its own cultural and social status in a particular group. What did it mean to be able to film a birthday or a trip to the sea? How did such films work? Who were they shown to? Were these records shown off or kept in the form of family “prosthetic devices” of memory?

Discussion
Lecturers:
Dr. Iryna Sklokina
Dr. Iryna Sklokina
historian, a researcher at the Center for Urban History. She has participated in several collective international projects on historical memory and cultural heritage. At the Center for Urban History Iryna Sklokina’s research focus is on historical heritage, in particular, industrial and Soviet heritage of Kharkiv and Lviv.
Oleh Chornyi
Oleh Chornyi
director, screenwriter, media artist. Member of the National Union of Cinematographers of Ukraine, the Ukrainian Film Academy and the Nomadic University for Art, Philosophy and Enterprise in Europe.
 Oleksandr Makhanets
Oleksandr Makhanets
historian, archivist, project manager of the Urban Media Archive project at the Center for Urban History. The research interests include: amateur, vernacular and home movie, documentary photography, urban planning, digital humanities, social history.
Anna Onufrienko
Anna Onufrienko
Film critic of the Dovzhenko National Film Center, culturologist, journalist, co-curator of exhibitions about cinema and art of the 1920s, co-director of the films “Atomograd. Montage of Utopia,” “Intervision-Lviv,” program coordinator of retrospective film programs.
Dr. Yulia Kovalenko
Dr. Yulia Kovalenko
PhD, program coordinator at the International Human Rights Documentaries Festival Docudays UA, member of the Union of Film Critics of Ukraine.