In the 1920s, filmmaker-theorists such as Germaine Dulac argued in favour of what today would be called low-definition images. Dulac, for instance, advocates leaving behind cinema’s ‘unquestionable accuracy’ to pursue blurriness and superimposition. In order to create a strong affective impact on the spectator, cinema would have to find ways to avoid simply copying physical reality. But it would also need to pursue this path to establish itself as an art: indefinite images are above all aligned with claims for specificity that seek to establish the autonomy of cinema vis-à-vis other art forms and physical reality alike. The notion that cinema might simply copy was thus rebutted by recourse to a very traditional definition of art, precisely as this definition was being challenged by the historical avant-gardes. Taking a bifocal perspective on two historical moments roughly a century apart, this chapter questions what relevance the 1920s’ endorsement of low definition might have for our time, when such images have become a notable fixture of filmic practices, from blockbusters to the avant-garde