Hi Fred,
my argument is not related to how much film and video may or may not
resemble each other.
My argument is that they are of a different nature completely.
It is not like comparing two wines. It is like comparing an aardvark
and an artichoke.
I don't think results matter - I think the thing itself matters.
It just so happens that both can be used to make images, but the
resemblance stops there.
Regarding profit - preserving American Film Heritage for 600-2000
years, as the article states, could be the most valuable asset for
the country's future.
As an anecdote about the potential profits of investing in film stock
and developing, this is from the Wikipedia entry on Lucille Ball. In
1951, before reruns and syndication, TV was aired live from New York
- Ball prefered to live in Hollywood. The time difference meant the
show could not be live and in prime-time.
>Sponsor Philip Morris did not want to show day-old kinescopes to the
>major markets on the East Coast, yet neither did they want to pay
>for the extra cost filming, processing and editing would require,
>pressuring Ball and Arnaz to relocate to New York City. Ball and
>Arnaz offered to take a pay cut to finance filming, on the condition
>that their company, Desilu, would retain the rights to that film
>once it was aired. CBS relinquished the show rights back to Desilu
>after initial broadcast, not realizing they were giving away a
>valuable and durable asset. Desilu made many millions of dollars on
>I Love Lucy rebroadcasts through syndication and became a textbook
>example of how a show can be profitable in second-run syndication.
-Pip
At 18:18 -0500 19/08/11, Fred Camper wrote:
>I don't think using film or video or digital are moral issues. What
>matters is results. For a few filmmakers, there will be things that
>only film can do, but I suspect that this is not true of for most. You
>can even get filmic "flicker" with DLP, right? I don't think we should
>have mystical, or fetishistic, attachments to any particular media,
>but rather, explore the possibilities of whatever media we are able to
>use.
>
>The US government actually made a profit on the bank bailout. They
>will arguably make a profit on the auto bailout if the costs of having
>let GM and Chrysler shut down are factored in. I do think someone
>should keep print stock available, but let's be clear on the facts.
>
>Fred Camper
>Chicago
>
>_______________________________________________
>FrameWorks mailing list
>FrameWorks_at_jonasmekasfilms.com
>https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
_______________________________________________
FrameWorks mailing list
FrameWorks_at_jonasmekasfilms.com
https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
Received on Fri Aug 19 2011 - 16:37:43 CDT
