Re: Dialogues between film and digital

From: Myron Ort (email suppressed)
Date: Thu Feb 04 2010 - 11:16:48 PST

I am curious about how film telecine machines work. What is the scan
rate of a telecine machine? If one wanted to "slow down" a film,
analogous to say printing every frame twice with an optical printer
which would be 12fps if projected at 24fps, is there an "optimum"
slow down speed in the telecine process which would minimize digital
"artifacts" (frames that did not reallly exist on the film). Are
there some speeds with the telecine process which are exact multiples
of its scanning rate such that there would result a minimum of these
"artifact" frames. I am not sure how to articulate this question, but
hopefully I have conveyed it.

Myron Ort

On Feb 4, 2010, at 9:40 AM, Mark Toscano wrote:

> Fred Worden's brilliant and hilarious video 'Amongst the
> Persuaded' (2004) is, among other things, all about his uncertainty
> about what it is to make movies on digital video versus film.
> Bill Brand made some films that combined optical printing with
> computer generated travelling mattes, a very unusual aesthetic.
> Works in the Field (1978) and Split Decision (1979)
> Michael Robinson's And We All Shine On (2006) treats a filmed
> landscape and a computer generated landscape in certain terms.
> You could look at certain flicker films as, in a sense, breaking
> down film into binary digits of on/off, especially Arnulf Rainer by
> Kubelka.
> Many of John Whitney's computer generated films (beginning in 1967
> with Hommage to Rameau) used monochrome computer animated, optical
> printed with color filters and occasional changes of speed to
> create the final films, which are ultimately hybrids of the two
> forms (though they were finalized in film). Might be not
> interesting enough an interaction of the two for you, though.
> (Other main titles in this vein are Permutations (1968), Matrix
> (1970), Matrix III (1972), and Arabesque (1975))
> Ken Jacobs has been making dozens of pieces in the past several
> years that would be well worth considering. There are digital
> "animations" of stereoscopic still photos, digital manipulations of
> early film footage, digital manipulations of his own earlier
> footage, and even pieces which attempt a sort of (visual)
> stereoization of nonstereo (non-3D) footage. I would contact him
> directly rather than try to suggest specific titles myself.
> I'll try to think of some more...
> Mark Toscano
> --- On Thu, 2/4/10, Kim Knowles <email suppressed> wrote:
>> From: Kim Knowles <email suppressed>
>> Subject: [FRAMEWORKS] Dialogues between film and digital
>> To: email suppressed
>> Date: Thursday, February 4, 2010, 5:19 AM
>> Dear all,
>> Apologies for yet another question. This time
>> I'm looking for experimental works that involve a
>> dialogue between film and digital technology for a looped
>> film programme at the Scottish Gallery of Modern Art.
>> I'm thinking of films that go beyond simply shooting on
>> film then transferring to digital, but rather where the two
>> formats somehow comment on each other, such as Shambhavi
>> Kaul's 'Scene 32' that screened at Rotterdam
>> this week, and Thorsten Fleisch's 'Wound Film'.
>> Any suggestions would, as ever, be greatly
>> appreciated.
>> Thanks!
>> Kim
>> We want to hear
>> all your funny, exciting and crazy Hotmail stories. Tell
>> us now
>> __________________________________________________________________
>> 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>.