I agree with Pip about the use of the adjective "analogue". However, when I try to explain what I'm doing, or I teach in classes or workshops with young people, I find myself to use the word "analogue" too, also because other people I'm working with use it, or because who's presenting the class I'm going to teach uses it. And I also have the need to use a common code to make things easier to be understood, at least at the beginning.
But I always immediately state that that word is not correct, and I would use the word "silvery" instead (translated here from Italian "argentico"). To tell the truth neither "silvery" completely satisfies me: film is film, "a narrow transparent ribbon of any length you please, uniformly perforated with small holes along its edges so that it may be handily transported by sprocket wheels. At one time, it was sensitive to light." (Hollis Frampton, "A lecture"). Is color film silvery? It uses silver to form colors, but then silver is then completely removed. Film can be "silvery" or can be painted with something else, or even with nothing. But the use of the word "silver" is surely suggestive: "oh, is it really silver, like granny cutlery?". The use of the word "celluloid" can be another even if not perfect solution. But, again, I feel the need to be understood in all this digital pervasiveness, so pardon me if, sometime, I use the word "analogue" myself. Best, Livio Il giorno gio 2 mar 2023 alle ore 07:18 Pip Chodorov <p...@re-voir.com> ha scritto: > > Dear LIFT, > > I completely support your gathering. However, I take issue with the word > “analogue.” > > As I mentioned at the film labs meeting in Riga last summer, and also > probably on this list, the use of the words “analog” and “digital” refer to > signals, analog being a continuous signal of infinite variation and digital > being a discontinuous signal of two possibilities (zero/one or on/off). Audio > can be transmitted as an analog or digital signal, and so can video be analog > (hi-8, VHS) or digital (Mini-DV, DVD). But film is not a signal, film is a > material, and therefore film is neither analog nor digital. > > In film, silver halide crystals are either touched by light and become > metallic silver, or they are unexposed and are washed away by the fixer. > Although they can be different shapes and sizes, they react “digitally,” they > can only be sensitized or not; they cannot be variably sensitized. > > Ultimately it is very confusing to refer to film as analog or digital, > because films can be transferred to analog or digital video and shown on > analog or digital video monitors or projectors. But film projectors are not > transmitters of signals. The word “film” refers to the thin layer of emulsion > on the film base; film projectors are simply enlarging this image, and > providing the flicker allowing for the perception of motion. This is an > important distinction because video projectors do not use flicker. Therefore > I would name the event “Film Resilience” or “Flicker Resilience” and avoid > the analog/digital debate. > > Thank you, > Pip Chodorov > > > > > > > On Mar 2, 2023, at 6:47 AM, LIFT Special Projects > <specialproje...@lift.on.ca> wrote: > > The gathering is centered around the theme Analogue Resilience. Analogue, to > invoke the material qualities of the film medium, as well as an embodied way > of working. > > -- > Frameworks mailing list > Frameworks@film-gallery.org > https://mail.film-gallery.org/mailman/listinfo/frameworks_film-gallery.org -- Frameworks mailing list Frameworks@film-gallery.org https://mail.film-gallery.org/mailman/listinfo/frameworks_film-gallery.org
