[Frameworks] Saul Levine/Harvard Film Archive

[visionarydata]

Official Visionary Data Communique Regarding Events Surrounding Massachusetts 
College of Art and Design’s Treatment of Professor Saul Levine

In an effort to speak the language of our current antagonists and be better 
understood herein, we’ll utilize that so blandly Obamian turn of phrase, LET’S 
BE CLEAR: Our publication, Boston Film Thing’s initial beef with the Harvard 
Film Archive was with regards to the glaringly low percentage of female 
filmmakers in its programmed schedule. We raised questions and provided 
statistics to point out this lack in the best way we knew how. We didn’t 
necessarily expect a response from such an illustrious institution to our small 
publication. That said we do feel that some response or general dialogue with 
or without our involvement would have been productive.  We fully acknowledge 
that there are things we may have missed or gotten wrong and welcome push back 
and civil debate.  Apparently, and despite the lack of response to that issue 
the HFA has in fact been paying attention to us, perhaps more than seems 
healthy or normal for an organization affiliated with the powerful hedge fund 
known as Harvard University.  Some of us have known all along what Harvard and 
the new model of neo-liberal universities and adjacent institutions are all 
about at their core. Some of us had to go within and walk such hallowed halls 
to finally notice the stench.  As a result, we fled the elitist incubators of 
the literal destroyers of worlds long ago.  That said, no organization is a 
monolith and attending screenings at the otherwise lovely HFA has been a 
highlight of our time in this at times culturally frustrating city. Boston Film 
Things has from its inception enthusiastically promoted events at HFA to its 
readership.  We recognize that sometimes the prettiest flowers grow in 
excrement.

LET’S BE CLEAR: What the fug happened between Boston Film Things and the 
Harvard Film Archive?  Perhaps we ‘fugged’ up? We said ‘fug’.  HFA got mad. U 
mad, bro? U seem mad.  We have been told that the Harvard University Police 
have opened an investigation into our activities for aiming the word ‘fug’ at 
members of Mass Art’s film faculty and at a provost whose maneuverings against 
our friend Professor Saul Levine - who has nothing to do with the creation of 
this statement - have angered us greatly. Yes, ‘we mad’, but when we mad, we 
admit it, bro.   When we’re mad, like much of humanity, we cuss. As a result, 
HFA has officially accused us of ‘hate speech’ and ‘incitement to violence’ for 
our use of the word ‘fug’ and for clearly hyperbolic and humorous reference to 
a Situationist motto: ‘Destroy all bourgeois institutions. Under the sidewalk 
is the beach!!’ Firstly, let’s all try and be more aware of our counter 
cultural history.  Secondly, one can etymologize ‘fug’ with a quick online 
search and yes the word has a sadly hateful, misogynistic history.  However, 
outside of the academy, that’s not how words work.  Unlike the word’s literal 
historical meaning, the agreed upon vernacular use of ‘fug’ is inarguably 
neutered to the point of having lost almost all meaning except ‘I am mad or 
otherwise emotional right now and wish to emphasize that feeling’ or, of 
course, to signify sexual intercourse, and increasingly, any manner of 
non-sexual engagement. To pretend otherwise and claim such great offense is so 
disingenuous that it’s almost awe inspiring, even for the academy, even for 
Harvard.  As for questions about the latter meaning, please, rest assured none 
of us have or have ever had the slightest desire to engage in sexual relations 
of any kind with our newfound adversaries (we hold fast to the notion that sex 
should be fun). HFA knows darned tootin’ well what we meant and perhaps if 
given a chance, we’d have apologized for being momentarily impolite.

LET’S BE CLEAR:  We see the recent actions of Mass Art and HFA as illustrative 
of a tendency of what has been broadly termed the ‘professional managerial 
class’.  When a member of the professional managerial class gets mad it doesn’t 
look like it does when the rest of us get mad.  They don’t cuss like we do.  
They don’t talk with their hands like we do.  That would be too ‘ethnic’.  They 
certainly don’t seem to want dialogue like we do.  That would require 
self-examination, which is not a particularly useful habit for gaining and 
maintaining power in this most narcissistic epoch.  When the professional 
managerial class gets ruffled, ties in a twist, they fall back on whatever ad 
hoc, arbitrary jumble of ‘policies’ they can and then cower behind desks and 
the physical threat of security guards (who they no doubt secretly disdain and 
who no doubt privately snicker in turn at their white collared colleagues' 
frail sensitivities) to avoid engaging with ideas.  To do otherwise would be 
far too educational and thus dangerous to them. And then, of course, when we 
get justifiably mad, raise our voices or 

Re: [Frameworks] Developing Tanks for 16mm

[Rob Gawthrop]

Thanks Lindsay & Ed

Best Wishes

Rob

> On 20 Apr 2018, at 23:20, Ed Inman  wrote:
> 
> FWIW I found these original instructions online: 
> http://etienne.collomb.free.fr/morseg3/morseg3.html 
> 
> Ed
> 
> -Original Message- 
> From: lindsay mcintyre 
> Sent: Apr 20, 2018 5:05 PM 
> To: Experimental Film Discussion List 
> Subject: Re: [Frameworks] Developing Tanks for 16mm 
> 
> Hi Rob,
> 
> In the G3 tank I've used several developers - these numbers are per 100ft of 
> 16mm - if I loaded 150-200 ft on the reel I would increase the times.  2L of 
> each solution at room temp - might need more for 35mm.  Its important to make 
> sure that you are winding emulsion OUT at least half the time.  I've done it 
> many times with other timings as well, based on the temperature of the 
> solution or whether the film was underexposed.  It always seems to work 
> pretty well.
> 
> D76 for 7222 
> dev 12 min (usually takes 1 minute to wind from head to tail so 12 winds)
> wash 6 min
> rapid fix 6-7 min
> wash 7 mins
> 
> D19 for 7363, 7231 and most other B+W stocks
> dev 5-7 mins
> wash 5 mins
> rapid fix 5-6 mins
> wash 7 mins
> 
> Best, 
> 
> Lindsay McIntyre
> 
> 
> 
> On Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 9:24 AM, Rob Gawthrop  > wrote:
> Hi Lindsay
> 
> What developer & dilution do you use? I’ve been getting rather poor results 
> and it takes ages.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Rob
> 
> 
>> On 11 Apr 2018, at 18:13, lindsay mcintyre > > wrote:
>> 
>> Just in defence of the Morse G3 tank, I have several of these and I did all 
>> my black and white neg processing in these tanks for many years and always 
>> got beautiful results.  They're not as good for reversal processes, 
>> particularly if you are using permanganate bleach (even with the little 
>> exposure window) but for negative work they are great.  The process involves 
>> winding back and forth to achieve even processing and takes longer than say 
>> bucket processing, which is what I do now, but the G3 tanks have always 
>> worked well for me. I think depending on your developer, it can be about 12 
>> minutes of winding. 
>> 
>> Lindsay
>> 
>> 
>> On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 3:11 PM, Scott Dorsey > > wrote:
>> I'm saying the results will be so uneven that you'll have long sections
>> that aren't developed at all.  A five-gallon bucket will do garbage can
>> development of 100 ft of 16mm well enough that, although it'll be severely
>> uneven, it'll at least be developed all the way through.  Folks used to
>> do motion analysis films that way.
>> --scott
>> ___
>> 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 
>> 
> 
> 
> ___
> 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 
> 

___
FrameWorks mailing list
FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com
https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks

Re: [Frameworks] Kodak 7363 - exposing and developing

[Chris G]

Generally when I want to get a broader tonal range with 7363 I process it in a 
paper developer like Dektol. I used Sprint paper developer sometimes too. Never 
tried this with reversal though. The film is process to completion so you can’t 
really overdevelop it. For less contrast you could also try a lower 
concentration of developer. 

Chris Gorski

> On Apr 21, 2018, at 01:57, Dominic Angerame  
> wrote:
> 
> I use this stock all the time I have it processed as reversal and rate it 
> anywhere between 10 or 12 asa i send processing out to a lab the stock is 
> tricky because it has very few greys if you want to sell any let me know I 
> still film with it contact me off sight for other tips domi...@cinemod.net
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>> On Apr 20, 2018, at 3:52 PM, Isaac Brooks  wrote:
>> 
>> For the D19 treatment/negative I've rated it at a 25 ASA with consistent 
>> results. If you have sealed D19, use it with that film. 
>> 
>> Isaac 
>> 
>>> On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 5:30 PM Colin Brant  wrote:
>>> Dear Frameworks,
>>> 
>>> I am having trouble finding consensus on how to shoot and process Kodak's 
>>> now discontinued 7363 hi-con stock. I bought a bunch from the last run they 
>>> did (2015 I believe) and am now starting to shoot it. I know that there 
>>> have been threads that address this in the past (one even came up in a 
>>> google search) and that this issue, or similar ones, are touched on in 
>>> books like Kathryn Ramey's textbook -- but even so, I'm still left 
>>> wondering how to rate it, and how to leave it in developer. 
>>> 
>>> My desire: shoot 7363 in daylight, develope in Lomo tank without push/pull 
>>> in D19 as B Neg.
>>> 
>>> In the first test I did, it was shot at 6ASA and developed for about 6min 
>>> and this resulted in a mostly overexposed negative. Also, I'm most familiar 
>>> with D19 so am not sure if there might be other equivalent developers 
>>> requiring the same timing that could give me an idea of where to begin. 
>>> 
>>> Any insight y'all may have would be greatly appreciated!
>>> cb
>>> 
>>> ___
>>> 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
___
FrameWorks mailing list
FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com
https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks