I recently watched the Brian De Palma film “Sisters”, which uses a “split-screen” as a visual storytelling device in a really interesting way. In film making this is a convention which has been well utilized particularly in the 60s and early 70s, and these days in commercials (and some films). Thanks to digital technologies, its now something that is relatively easy to do. Back in day, all of this had to be done with an optical printer.

The notion of juxtaposing multiple images in photography is not a new idea. Diptychs and triptychs or grid presentation of photographic images are all commonly used. But watching several films which use, usually two, simultaneous images within the same frame, I started to think about if there is anyone working in photography with this idea in this sense. I find that there is a big difference in the thinking of filmmakers who use this technique and photographers who use multiple images. In film, this breaking or dividing of the screen disrupts the illusion of continuous space, by providing the viewer with multiple points of view. In “Sisters” the split screen is utilized to show us two simultaneous perspectives of the same event. The interaction between the two perspective builds the suspense of the scene and as the action evolves in each space, there are juxtapositions that occur in gesture and dialogue which can be harmonious or create a discord between the two scenes. In film, this is one way that the split-screen can be utilized, to show simultaneous action. Probably one of its better recalled uses would be in depicting a phone conversation between two people, such as that between Rock Hudson and Doris Day in “Pillow Talk”. However, in photography I had trouble thinking of photographers who used the idea of the split in quite the same way. In photography the use of diptychs or images that work across a pair of images, refer to time in a different way. Perhaps it is the difference between the moving image and the still image, how we perceive time relationships across images, that changes how the split functions in different mediums.

Probably the most common use I can think of in photography is using the split screen to create twin-ing effects, such as in the work of Kelli Connell who composites multiple negatives together in Photoshop to create the story of a relationship between two people (who are the same person). In both these cases the split is intended to be invisible, we are intended to believe that we are seeing two different people.

There are a lot of great films, usually dealing with twins that use this type of split screening. Films such as the 1946 thriller “The Dark Mirror” which tells the tale of two twin sisters, once innocent and one a murderess. There is also one of my favorite films “Dead Ringers” directed by David Cronenberg that tells the story of the two twin gynecologists who have a relationship with the same woman, and one goes a little nuts.

Perhaps there is such a difference in our perception of the photographic pair and the moving image pair because we are used to seeing still images divided from each other. Where as the moving image (which already consists of multiple frames appearing in quick succession) disrupts the perception of the “reality” of the screen, by breaking it down, and away from typical human vision. So Perhaps it is not possible to create a similar suggestion with still photography because we already accept that the frame is broken and events exist across multiple frames.

Another interesting example from film is Andy Warhol’s “Chelsea Girls” which is shown entirely in split screen, and combines both color and black and white images.

One of the differences that I also thought about was that when we see too simultaneous moving images, we are in a sense asked to choose. In photography, we can go back and forth between the images, they are static, but we have trouble giving our attention to two actions happening at the same time. In both cases however, we as viewers are getting more from the multiple images than we could physically see with our own eyes. Be it the perspective of two different participants, or a perception that extends outside of our normal view. In this respect David Hillard comes to mind.

I think with the internet and television we are becoming faster at reading images, particularly multiple images presented simultaneously. Even as I work now, I have several windows open on my computer, all of which I am working with. So I think that this idea of multiple screens or images, still or moving, is still evolving and I’m curious to see if anyone uses it in a significant way in photography in particular, in a different sense that breaks outside of the more conventional pairings and groupings of images.