http://rhizome.org/editorial/2009/jan/07/setting-the-tome/ <http://rhizome.org/editorial/2009/jan/07/setting-the-tome/>
scroll to the bottom of the article for the diagram. I’ve heard tell of this work being produced more than once, and I’ve always wanted to try it myself (with a group of stalwart cinema students). JW > On Jan 14, 2016, at 1:12 PM, Bernard Roddy <tactilecor...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I think this work by Tony mentioned by Fred is reproduced as a > diagram/instruction in: > > W + B Hein : Dokumente 1967-1985, Fotos, Briefe, Texte. > > > On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 12:47 AM, Cinema Project <i...@cinemaproject.org > <mailto:i...@cinemaproject.org>> wrote: > Jesse! > > In regards to "well-deployed spoilers," I might look into Maurice LeMaître's > "Le film est déjà commencé?" from 1952. It was a Lettrist film and supposed > staged provocation. There's some accounts/ info on it in Off-Screen Cinema by > Kaira M Cabañas. > > Might not be what you're looking for at all, but it's an interesting sort of > (delayed) response to those legendary "reactions." > > Mia Ferm > > -- > Cinema Project > www.cinemaproject.org <http://www.cinemaproject.org/> > 971-266-0085 <tel:971-266-0085> > PO Box 5991 > Portland, OR 97228 > > > On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 8:50 PM, Fred Camper <f...@fredcamper.com > <mailto:f...@fredcamper.com>> wrote: > Yes, that's right. Because it was positive film, a succession of black and > white rectangles appeared inside each other as with each new pass the > previous result was filmed. I believe it was around 40 minutes long. It was > really interesting; I had never seen anything like it before, and have not > since. > > Fred Camper > > > On 1/13/2016 11:32 PM, Gene Youngblood wrote: >> I believe Tony Conrad did some kind of demonstration or performance of “film >> feedback” in which exposed 16mm film went immediately into a developing bath >> and was projected, and the projection was filmed and projected, and so on. >> No doubt someone on this list remembers that and can describe it properly. >> Also, for scholars of early video, in the current issue of Afterimage Robyn >> Farrell has an in-depth history of Gerry Schum’s “TV Gallery” and “Video >> Gallery” projects in Germany in the late sixties, which I only alluded to in >> passing in Expanded Cinema. >> >> >>> On Jan 13, 2016, at 3:17 PM, robert harris <lagonab...@gmail.com >>> <mailto:lagonab...@gmail.com>> wrote: >>> >>> The “early cinema/early video” query is a good one, one that I’ve not seen >>> explored with much rigor. >>> >>> Kleinhans’ question of “broadcast TV or portapak” is significant. >>> >>> Early TV might have more in common with radio than with early film. >>> >>> Early video (portapak) provoked, for some practitioners, sensibilities in >>> keeping with those of the Lumieres. >>> >>> The Lumiere camera was more like video than any other camera (including the >>> Edison version) as it was, like video, a capture and playback device (and >>> lab). >>> >>> The promptness with which the Lumieres could playback their recordings (if >>> my film mythology serves me) is almost video-like (time was a little slower >>> in those days, so they say). >>> >>> Both early film and early video were made without post-production edits, >>> hence were finished in camera. >>> >>> Video’s instant feedback loop is an unequivocal distinction from film. >>> >>> To give proper attention to all origin strains of video, you have to >>> consider camera-less, raster based work (Nam June Paik, Wolf Vostell and >>> others). >>> >>> The “early cinema” equivalent might be the first people to mark on clear >>> leader, some Italian Futurists, Hans Richter, Man Ray etc. >>> >>> As to cultural “outrage”, it wasn’t uncommon for the people throwing >>> things at the artists and making big scenes to be the Surrealists >>> themselves. >>> >>> >>> >>> Some worthy writing of early video (essays you should be able to easily >>> find): >>> >>> Hollis Frampton, The Withering Away of the State of the Art >>> >>> David Antin, Video: The Distinctive Features of the Medium >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Jan 13, 2016, at 2:46 AM, Chuck Kleinhans <chuck...@northwestern.edu >>> <mailto:chuck...@northwestern.edu>> wrote: >>> >>>> An answer depends on how “early” you’re talking about film (1890s? >>>> later?), and about video (Broadcast TV or Portapak?). Probably the most >>>> significant common feature is the fixed camera position. >>>> >>>> The most significant difference (beyond the obvious one of resolution) is >>>> shot duration. Video (portpak on) allowed for remarkably long shots >>>> compared to almost all film. >>>> >>>> If you (or anyone) can find it, Noel Burch’s film “Correction Please, or >>>> How We Got Into Pictures” is a great explanation of the evolution of early >>>> films' means and style, concentrating on how the audience was shaped by >>>> the evolving formal elements of cinema. >>>> >>>> Chuck Kleinhans >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> FrameWorks mailing list >>>> FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com <mailto:FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com> >>>> https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks >>>> <https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> FrameWorks mailing list >>> FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com <mailto:FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com> >>> https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks >>> <https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> FrameWorks mailing list >> FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com <mailto:FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com> >> https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks >> <https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks> > > > _______________________________________________ > FrameWorks mailing list > FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com <mailto:FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com> > https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks > <https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks> > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > FrameWorks mailing list > FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com <mailto:FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com> > https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks > <https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks> > > > _______________________________________________ > FrameWorks mailing list > FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com > https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
_______________________________________________ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
