Maybe bill brand would know?
www.mbillyou.com @mbillyou_film <https://www.instagram.com/mbillyou_film/> On Fri, Sep 4, 2026 at 12:47 PM Scott Stark <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks for the suggestion Dave. After catching a recent wonderful show of > films by Nathaniel Dorsky at ‘sacred’ speed I’m inclined to show it at > 18fps. > > Best, > Scott > > Sent from my iPad > > > On Sep 2, 2026, at 9:11 PM, Dave Tetzlaff <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > I have no knowledge re: that particular film, but IIRC Frampton made at > least one orher silent film I've seen shot at 'silent speed', and > apparently intended to be projected at that speed, but it might have been > 16fps. I don't remember what film though, and it might not even have been > Frampton... My (limited, in truth) experience with work from that era is > that you can only guarantee 24fps is the intended speed if It has an > optical track, or the maker left explicit instructions. > > > > However, one thing that characterizes the exhibition of 16mm prints is a > high degree of variability and even randomness. The environments of > screening spaces vary dramatically, as do the conditions of prints, and, > honestly the conditions of projectors. Each projection is a unique specific > 'text', involving choices by the projectionist. My suggestion: embrace > that. If you have a two speed projector - like an old Pageant maybe - > preview it at both speeds and choose whichever you think makes the piece > more interesting. Which might depend on those other variables... > > -- > > Frameworks mailing list > > [email protected] > > > https://mail.film-gallery.org/mailman/listinfo/frameworks_film-gallery.org > > -- > Frameworks mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.film-gallery.org/mailman/listinfo/frameworks_film-gallery.org >
-- Frameworks mailing list [email protected] https://mail.film-gallery.org/mailman/listinfo/frameworks_film-gallery.org
