From: scott nyerges (email suppressed)
Date: Thu Jul 23 2009 - 07:46:07 PDT
A very good question, Brook. As a filmmaker who works with analog and digital media, I'm conflicted about this.
On the one hand, I put all of my work online for the very reason of making it easy for curators, programmers and viewers to access. That's what makes the web great. On the other hand, the nature of my work -- a lot of very detailed handpainted filmstrips, sometime overlaid with live video -- means it inherently will suffer compression issues no matter what codec I use (h.264 seems to work best, but even so). And a 320 x 240 image just cannot convey the power that my imagery has on the big screen (or, for that matter, on a decently sized TV or monitor). Ideally, I'll steer people to my website for a first impression and typically follow up with a DVD for pre-screening purposes.
And, if you're curious,
you can see for yourself: www.nyerges.com (ongoing projects) and www.nyerges.com/video (works previously screened at Rotterdam, Tribeca, etc.)
Best,
Scott Nyerges
--- On Wed, 7/22/09, Brook Hinton <email suppressed> wrote:
From: Brook Hinton <email suppressed>
Subject: The whole online submission thing, sort of, again
To: email suppressed
Date: Wednesday, July 22, 2009, 10:48 PM
Howdy Frameworkers.
I'm thinking about this whole question of online viewing vs. dvds for
submissions, not so much for festivals who will obviously determine
what works for their process, but curators, venues, etc.
Here's my particular bias, and I wonder where others stand on this now:
First, I hate dvds. Hate them. Sometimes, though
not usually, more
than VHS. Even for previewing work that is video to begin with. So
much that I prefer seeing other people's work in some other way
whenever possible, and that I am loathe to send them out myself. But
until recently I was reconciled to this plastic disposable glitchy
unreliable motion destroying landfill fodder as a necessary evil.
In the last few months, I have come to feel that - with the exception
of work that is dependent on an interlaced display for whatever reason
- a well encoded h.264 standard def file at a DSL data rate is so
close to (and at higher rates better than) "dvd quality" that it seems
just silly to automatically send out screeners on DVDs, the majority
of which will be thrown away. h.264 is now viewable on 90% of
computers since it is supported by both flash and quicktime. And
frankly, unless I'm watching a piece of interlace-dependent video art
or have access to a very
high quality large calibrated broadcast
monitor, I find most laptop screens - while technically lacking - more
conducive to a cinematic viewing experience.
I have a couple of curatorial projects coming up and I know I'm going
to strongly encourage that people who can set up previews of their
work for me to see online rather than sending screeners. My "cinema
brain" is now activated pretty strongly when clicking on a file on a
computer - far more than it ever was inserting a tape or a dvd (though
still not nearly as much as it is in a dark room full of strangers
with good projection).
How are others feeling about this nowadays? And again, I'm talking
about non-festival submissions - I understand the difficulty in
insisting on online submissions in any open call situation or where
there is no access to broadband.
_______________________________________________________
Brook
Hinton
film/video/audio art
www.brookhinton.com
studio vlog/blog: www.brookhinton.com/temporalab
__________________________________________________________________
For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.
__________________________________________________________________
For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.