Hello Everyone, I’ve been following this discussion on the projection speed of Frampton’s film and I honestly think the beauty of experimental film is precisely this: that it can leave even us seasoned makers baffled… I actually love that there is no real answer to this question and that we as projectionists, presenters and sharers of Frampton’s legacy can make decisions such as how best to interpret the artist’s intention. I’ll be curious to see if anyone can actually find a route to Frampton’s original intention, but in the meantime let’s trust ourselves as artists to engage with the work using our instincts and allow for the fact that the film may have evolved over time into a versatile “dimensions variable” time-based work that can be enjoyed in two different versions. Just my thoughts… greetings to all. I rarely post but i read you all daily <3
Dinorah de Jesús Rodríguez Filmmaker, Artist, Writer On Mon, Sep 7, 2026 at 11:25 PM Scott Stark <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Fred, why doubt the label? Well as you know films are often mislabeled > by someone other than the artist. But it was more a question of insight - > why HF would shoot at 16 or 18fps knowing he was going to project it at > 24fps. It’s an interesting question and this seems like the best place to > find someone who might know. > > Scott > > Sent from my iPad > > On Sep 5, 2026, at 7:17 AM, Fred Camper <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > I didn't reply earlier because I have no actual information, but why > should we doubt the 24fps on the Coop can? My instinct from having seen > this film and related ones a few times is that Frampton would not have > planned any part of *Magellan* for anything other than 24 fps. > > If someone comes up with actual evidence, please post. > > Fred Camper > Chicago > > > On 9/4/2026 1:10 PM, m b wrote: > > 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 > > -- > 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
