From: Mitsu Hadeishi (email suppressed)
Date: Thu Jul 06 2006 - 11:01:29 PDT
Actually, I can see that you were writing nuanced posts, Sam, that respected
the idea of cross-fertilization between forms. That was less the case for
other posts in the thread, however.
On Thursday 06 July 2006 12:23, Sam Wells wrote:
> Hi Kristie, please re read what I said in my posts on this / these
> thread(s) !
> I repeatedly noted the cross fertilization of these forms and not the
> just the relationships between them but the ongoing/future fluidity
> of same.
> Maybe I'm too stressed over moving etc & am not articulating this
> very well, (in fact I'm sure that's true) but almost every reply to
> what I said on this thread seems to have missed the essence of the
> points I was making.
> In any case I've got to jump off this, no time, I'll have to temper
> temptation to get the last word in !
> > The difference I have with you, Sam, is that I don't
> > particularly think it is
> > helpful to insist that filmmakers think of film vs digital as
> > entirely
> > different categories of form.
> For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.
For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.