From: Nicholas Hamlyn (email suppressed)
Date: Mon Oct 01 2007 - 03:52:46 PDT
It's also happening with old video art, not least in terms of finding
CRT monitors to show work on. A lot of older video art, specifically
that by David Hall, was created to be shown on domestic TV sets.
On 1 Oct 2007, at 03:05, John Matturri wrote:
> I used to think that the notion of a vintage print in photography was
> nothing but a marketing scam, which it largely is. But that might not
> be so where the materials for the original print weren't available for
> the later print. That will happen increasingly in both photography and
> film as materials disappear. It may be the even a beat up print might
> have historical importance in suggesting what an ideal print might be
> like (perhaps in anticipation of possible future digital processes
> that will be able to reproduce the effect of a particular print stock
> perfectly). Whether that historical importance, if it exists, is worth
> the extra cash, I have no idea.
> Fred Camper:
> "Vintage prints" do not mean the same thing in avant-garde film as
> they do in the photo world. There, the photographer has typically made
> a "vintage" print her- or him-self, and near the time the image was
> shot. Many avant-garde filmmakers did not even check the prints that
> came back from the lab very carefully. Also, a "vintage" film print
> may have been projected dozens of times, and have scratches and
> splices and coffee stains and more.
> Fred Camper
> For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.
For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.