I think Tim was confused and didnšt realize that you always have your links
as part of your digital signature and that the links donšt have anything to
do with your post and are not related to łmaking film.˛
On 10/7/11 1:04 PM, "Matt Helme" <dcinema2134_at_yahoo.com> wrote:
> I meant you could always make film.Not sure what would be involved in doing
> that.
> Matt
>
> http://www.youtube.com/user/oscarthepug1234
>
> http://www.youtube.com/user/matthelme007
>
> From: Tim Halloran <televisual_at_hotmail.com>
> To: dcinema2134_at_yahoo.com
> Sent: Friday, October 7, 2011 10:03 AM
> Subject: RE: [Frameworks] Forbes editorial about Kodak
>
> Interesting little videos, but what do they have to do with "making film?"
>
> When I saw your message I thought I was going to be linked to something about
> actually hand producing film stocks. Does anyone know of anybody who is doing
> this, or has thought of doing it?
>
> I guess you meant "you could always make a film. No?
>
> Tim
>
>
> Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2011 11:17:20 -0700
> From: dcinema2134_at_yahoo.com
> To: frameworks_at_jonasmekasfilms.com
> Subject: Re: [Frameworks] Forbes editorial about Kodak
>
> I guess you could always make film?
> Matt
>
> http://www.youtube.com/user/oscarthepug1234
>
> http://www.youtube.com/user/matthelme007
>
> From: Pip Chodorov <frameworks_at_re-voir.com>
> To: Experimental Film Discussion List <frameworks_at_jonasmekasfilms.com>
> Sent: Thursday, October 6, 2011 10:22 AM
> Subject: Re: [Frameworks] Forbes editorial about Kodak
>
> These are my sentiments exactly, and I also use Eudora.
> But let's see what happens - maybe film will surprise us and survive.
> Let's have this discussion in five years or so when instead of 6-8
> companies making film perhaps there are only 2-3.
> -Pip
>
>
>
>
> At 10:18 -0700 6/10/11, Aaron F. Ross wrote:
>> >It's OK, I always wear a flame-retardant vest while on the Internet. ;)
>> >
>> >BTW, as I said before, I'm not a hater. I just think critically about
>> >technology. Cases in point: I don't have a smartphone. I still have
>> >my collection of vinyl records. And I'm still using the same email
>> >program, Eudora, that I used back in the 1990s during the first round
>> >of "Flameworks" posts that forced me off the list. And why do I cling
>> >to these old ways? Not because they're old, not because I resist
>> >change, but because I have evaluated my needs and decided that these
>> >older technologies are better for me. New is not necessarily good,
>> >and old is not necessarily good, either. But in the case of celluloid
>> >film, very soon it will be a moot point, because you won't be able to
>> >buy it for love or money. --
>> >
>> >Aaron
>> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________ FrameWorks mailing list
> FrameWorks_at_jonasmekasfilms.com
> https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
www.decodawson.com
_______________________________________________
FrameWorks mailing list
FrameWorks_at_jonasmekasfilms.com
https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
Received on Fri Oct 07 2011 - 13:01:07 CDT
