From: john porter (email suppressed)
Date: Thu Jun 29 2006 - 22:20:19 PDT
--- john porter <email suppressed> wrote:
Here's the thread Cari. What did you mean by saying
after it all that "distribution is not transmission.
Look up the word"? And which of those 2 words did you
think I didn't know?
We discussed transmission vs "transporting", and
distribution vs "transporting", but not distribution
vs transmission, so I couldn't have even implied that
I thought they're the same thing. I just wanna know
--- Sam Wells <email suppressed> wrote:
traditionally film was _projection_ and video was
you are now transmitting film and projecting video.
(I mean literally you can scan a film send it by
satellite to the other side of the world,
take the data and make a film print if you want).
> To elaborate, you would be scanning a film to create
> VIDEO for transmission, then making a film print
> the transmitted VIDEO.
> You can't transmit film, until they invent those
> Trek devices ("transponders"?).
> John Porter, Toronto, Canada
> email suppressed
> > >--- Cari Machet <email suppressed> wrote:
> > >
> > > transporters
> > > still wouldn't be a transmission
> > No? I don't know how transporters work, but
> > they move a film around the world like they do
> > humans & aliens? That would help film
> > John Porter, Toronto, Canada
John Porter, Toronto, Canada
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.