From: Michael Betancourt (email suppressed)
Date: Wed Jun 28 2006 - 12:35:46 PDT
On 6/28/06, Sam Wells <email suppressed> wrote:
> > Perhaps it's philistine to ask, but what difference does it make--
> > film/video, digital/analog--if the work isn't any good?
> Makes a difference to makers, preservers... there's usually a
> presumption of value to those who are serious (and the negative
> presumptions are often, I think, disingenuous & fraught with unstated
> subtext - as in Kafka's letters to Max Brod etc etc)
> > I'd rather hear what makes something good than what makes the
> > difference between film and not-film. (But maybe that's just me?)
> But if WHAT makes it good is what emerges from the _materials_ and
> how that happens then I think you can't dismiss these issues out of
> hand either.
So IF its made with film, then its good? Isn't that just formalism?
I really would like to know. (That just doesn't sound like an answer.)
Nevermind that when the main concern is one of preservation, we're not
talking about a "live" art form, but something that is dead and we're busy
worrying about the formaldehyde smell...
Also, what is this "WHAT" you mention? and how does it make it "good"?
Des Moines, IA USA
the avant-garde film & video blog
For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.