From: Nicky Hamlyn (email suppressed)
Date: Thu Jun 04 2009 - 11:05:05 PDT
Add the LFF and Media City to the list,
On 4 Jun 2009, at 17:43, Roger Beebe wrote:
> We might also start a list of festivals that go out of their way to
> accommodate odd formats and difficult requests. For example, at the
> PDX Fest recently, the organizers were able to help me set up three
> projectors so that I could show my new film in the Invitational.
> Framework Steve Polta just made the same thing happen in my absence
> at ATA for their N.E.W. show last week. I've been making a lot of
> semi-annoying requests lately (often with double system sound with
> 16mm or super 8 prints), and I've been surprised by how many
> festivals have been willing to make those things happen. (Most
> recently, CUFF, the $100 Film Festival in Calgary, ICEFest in Iowa
> City, and Boston Underground all did this for me.) So as bad as it
> is to have festivals out there screening work from DVD, there are
> still more than a few conscientious festivals who are working hard
> to show these films as they were meant to be seen...
> 2 cents,
> On Jun 4, 2009, at 12:31 PM, Adam Hyman wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> I actually think it might be of use to start listing festivals with
>> abhorrent screening practices. It's just wrong to screen from the
>> But mea culpa: One time I had to ask as it was international, and we
>> couldn't afford the shipping. My request was rejected, as it
>> should have
>> been, and we didn't screen the work. I learned my lesson. But the
>> economics of the situation forced me in that one case. I hope I
>> will have
>> the money to afford the shipping to screen it in the future.
>> Programmers who don't realize the difference between a print (of a
>> work shot
>> on film) and VHS or DVD dub of it shouldn't be programmers.
>> On 6/4/09 8:44 AM, "Anna Biller" <email suppressed> wrote:
>>> I have had the same experience: not hearing that a film was selected
>>> and finding out only by looking at the website. Also, yes, they
>>> will screen from the preview DVD when you applied to screen on
>>> film. I
>>> used to bring my own 16mm projector sometimes to screenings when I
>>> found out they wanted to screen on video; sometimes I've hired my
>>> projectionist for 35mm in another city when the festival didn't want
>>> to bother although they had a 35mm projection booth. But of course
>>> this is ridiculous. Once I applied to a festival and sent them a
>>> print, and found out they were screening from the preview VHS
>>> tape. I
>>> traveled to the festival and asked that they use the print, and they
>>> (the programmers)! were unaware of the difference between a print
>>> a tape, so I had to explain it to them and they seemed put out by my
>>> request. We had to dig around in the office and locate my print,
>>> dug up an extra projector, and we got a really surly volunteer to
>>> it. I used to think it was not worth it to screen if I couldn't
>>> on film and would withdraw my film if possible if they said they had
>>> to screen it on DVD, but it increasingly is a losing battle. The
>>> thing is that the programmers often don't seem to recognize an
>>> important difference.
>>> On Jun 4, 2009, at 1:58 AM, Peter Snowdon wrote:
>>>> Here's what worries me, tho: roughly half the festivals that have
>>>> screened a film of mine this year have asked me whether I am happy
>>>> for them to screen from the preview DVD -- and one or two have even
>>>> insisted that this is the only thing they can do, even tho they had
>>>> seemed to offer other screening formats when I applied. Has anyone
>>>> else noticed this trend?
>> For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.
> For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.
For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.