Every now and then a discussion breaks out on the Frameworks listserv that is worth reading. (the daily trading of information is good, too, but less so for the outsider.) Last month there was a long discussion of a “cultural boycott of Israel,” which was good, if not always film-centered. (find it HERE and read the Replies.)
But there is a better example of the listserv in the recent talk about film preservation. In response to some of the activities of the Chicago Film Group (discussed last month), someone raised questions about the politics of grants and preservation. (read it HERE.) It’s nice seeing both the opinionated and the practitioners on the same list. Below are two excerpts from the thread:
(in response to celebrating the work of Anthony McCall)
But if you take a look at the recent critical work on McCall, . . . you find a complete erasure of McCall's radical political/ideological critique of the artworld. He's now been safely ensconced in the gallery and museum artworld as a formalist, after denouncing it in Argument.
(and then, in the same thread but on the issue of how much it costs to preserve film)
We can currently scan 2K at 16 fps, and 4K at 5 fps -- and 1600 x 1200 (a good choice for regular 16mm) at 32 fps. This may change radically in the near future, with very fast high resolution scanning -- 24 fps or greater at 4K. . . . Of course, there's the issue of data storage. Storing uncompressed 4K scans (at 12 bits, each frame would take over 18MB, or 27 gigs per minute). But the second you are dealing with 4K scans, wavelet compression -- JPEG 2000 or Cineform -- can be very helpful, and visually lossless -- about 40MB/second, or 2.4 gigs per minute. On a 400 gig LTO-3 tape, costing $65, holds 166 minutes, or a cost of forty cents per minute -- 2x that -- 80 cents -- for two copies.
You get the picture. Some of the listers can be snippy, but the list remains a valuable resource for both filmmakers and -tourists.
Posts
