PDA

View Full Version : Experimental Filmmakers/Video Artists????



Jay_Blanchard
02-06-2004, 12:41 PM
Just wondering if there were any experimental film/video makers who wanted to discuss how they've utilized the DVX in their productions. I've used mine to replace most of the 16mm work I used to do, and I've found it's flexibility in achieving all types of film-like looks to be astounding. Now if only there were a way to scratch and paint on video tape....

Neil Rowe
02-06-2004, 12:50 PM
the beautiful thing about it being video is that you can "scratch and paint" digitally in post to your hearts content.. pending your software, you can do just about anything

Jay_Blanchard
02-06-2004, 01:30 PM
true...but scratching and painting with a digital pen just isn't as tactile as taking an exacto & a sharpie to celluloid. it's really tough (if not impossible) to get the same type of rough, organic aesthetic (see stan brakhage's late works) you get from direct manipulation. however, it is scary how close programs like corel painter & others are coming.

that will always be video's biggest limitation in my mind--you can't experience the medium in the same physical way that you can with film. you can't hold it up to a light & see the little pictures & scratch off the emulsion, etc. i'll never abandon film for precisely that reason.

but video's got a few big benefits--it's clean, it's easy, and it's cheap.

David Jimerson
02-07-2004, 09:03 PM
I'm sure the same was said of quill pens.

Taylor Moore
02-07-2004, 09:06 PM
Jay,
Having started cutting film on a flatbed, I hear you on missing the tactile aspect of the process...

kai
02-08-2004, 09:57 AM
"'640K is more memory than anyone will ever need...."

-Bill Gates, 1981

vovka
02-08-2004, 08:27 PM
It is not exect words, due to transletion english to russian and back to english.
"Color monitors never will be used, becuse they distract at work place" Peter Norton 198x

David Jimerson
02-08-2004, 08:43 PM
It was frequently said among the chattering classes in the 1890s that everything which could be invented had been invented.

Jay_Blanchard
02-09-2004, 07:22 AM
I think it has less to do with "accepting new technologies" (which i obviously have no problem with considering i gave up my bolex for the dvx on most shoots). But I'm guessing most people who are taking the technophile view have never done a paint film. It's just not the same doing it on a computer--aesthetically or physically. Video doesn't offer the same kind of comraderie between artist and tool that film does--no hand processing, no scratching or chopping up the physical tape, no paint under your fingernails & fingerprints and hair in the celluloid that gets projected...

it's a beautiful thing & anyone who hasn't tried it definitely should. i love video, but to consider using it as a replacement for film is like replacing a violin for an sythesizer, or oil painting for sculpture--they're just two incredibly different mediums, with extremely different uses.

Mike_Donis
02-19-2004, 08:24 AM
I know what you mean about the "physical aspects" of cutting and painting on celluloid. But the practicality of using a computer to rotoscope and edit is so much more beneficial in the long run; it may not be as fun, but it gets the job done quicker and easier.

That said, I've personally never used motion picture film before, but have done MANY video projects, and regardless of the ease of use, there's something that makes me want to give film a try. It just seems so much more...cool!







the DVX rules though! :P

Jay_Blanchard
02-19-2004, 12:13 PM
Mike--give film a try. it's expensive & a pain in the ass, but it's great too. don't get me wrong--i'm first and foremost a video artist, but i just find it ridiculous when people try to present video as a replacement for film. I'm positive a day will come when video can mimic the frame rate, motion, resolution, contrast, etc. of film exactly, but it will always be a magnetic tape electronic medium vs. a celluloid and emulsion based chemical medium. this may be just philosophical mumbo jumbo to people who just want to shoot a cool looking music video or something, but in that case, why be in a forum about experimental film?

i've made 4 films on 16mm (2 without a camera) and about two dozen on video. they're both great formats to work on, but if you're truly a formalist, you'll realize that comparing one to another is the proverbial apples and oranges game.

Jay_Blanchard
02-19-2004, 12:21 PM
also mike, if you're really interested in experimental film (and video to a lesser extent), join the Frameworks listserv for some great discussion. Just do a google search and it should send you to the sign up instructions.

Mike_Donis
02-19-2004, 02:01 PM
Thanks for the info!

David Jimerson
04-20-2004, 05:57 PM
Mike--give film a try. *it's expensive & a pain in the ass, but it's great too. *don't get me wrong--i'm first and foremost a video artist, but i just find it ridiculous when people try to present video as a replacement for film. *I'm positive a day will come when video can mimic the frame rate, motion, resolution, contrast, etc. of film exactly, but it will always be a magnetic tape electronic medium vs. a celluloid and emulsion based chemical medium. *this may be just philosophical mumbo jumbo to people who just want to shoot a cool looking music video or something, but in that case, why be in a forum about experimental film?

i've made 4 films on 16mm (2 without a camera) and about two dozen on video. *they're both great formats to work on, but if you're truly a formalist, you'll realize that comparing one to another is the proverbial apples and oranges game.

Film will always be around, and blessedly so. Painted portraits certainly didn't disappear when photography became commonplace. Same can be said for so many artforms. Digital may well replace the *common* film, but the same as music still comes out on vinyl every week, there will always be emulsified motion picture.

Jay_Blanchard
05-02-2004, 07:16 AM
Has anyone here done any experimental work using the DVX? If so, please post it.

daveagain
05-02-2004, 04:25 PM
The digitial process has not arrived comparatively to the purist regarding "film" but it is not far behind. *If you get a chance, read, "The Printing Revolution in Early Modern Europe". *We are along the way in the digital revolution and the speed at which it is accelerating is astonishing. *I dont' want to discount the benefits of film but, for example, digital cameras are overtaking "film" cameras due to their ease of use and clarity. * This is developing not only at the consumer level but at the professional level. For an independent film producer to fool around with film (especially considering the expense) is unrealistic. *But, for you independently wealthy guys--go for it....
Dave

Jay_Blanchard
05-03-2004, 07:17 AM
dave--agree with you on the commercial side of imagemaking (including standard narrative filmmaking). digital has come a long way, but unfortunately, video just doesn't have the tangibility that film does--you can't directly manipulate the material itself. I think that is one of the key reasons why film will never disappear.

And film can be expensive, but not the way i do it. I've completed most of experimental film works for under $100--either painting and scratching directly on clear leader or by hand processing shot film myself.

But enough on this--back to my original question: who's using the DVX for experimental work?

Jay_Blanchard
05-04-2004, 06:24 AM
Great! I'll look forward to seeing your work.