Riaan, Russ: yes, a lot of Italians at the end of WW2 found themselves taking steps into the brave new world both in stills as in film. There was freedom, politically (well, sort of), and not too much money around to corrupt aesthetically. Most importantly, from my way of looking at the thing, there was a burgeoning marketplace and cross pollination about to happen with both magazines and Italian movies, (a long-established practice in America), all of which gave work and a workplace with few Roman rules as to how it should be done. Creative minds flourished and everbody found some niche within which they could find themselves doing their thing. The photo book became possible even if folks might have had to look a bit further abroad for that pearl. Venice was subject of one such seminal production, shot by an Italian who couldn't find a publisher until financed from Switzerland, if I recall. But hey, Robert Frank and William Klein were not alone in finding the domestic US a tough market to crack, both getting books published abroad before the States would take a chance...
Rome was vastly important within the movie structure, with big foreign movies being made there, both because of talent and far lower labour costs. Hollywood stars were as at home on the Via Veneto as they would have been at Ciro's. A spate of inspiring directors took their turns at making movies like they had never been made before; the fashion industry, mainly up north, also put Italian creative talent most firmly on the world map. But, nothing stays the same, and the movie industry is today but a soft shadow, more memory than reality, with tv shows keeping bits of it alive. It's easy to blame Hollywood, but hey, people vote with their wallets.
Rob