: John Knecht jkne...@colgate.edu
To: Experimental Film Discussion List frameworks@jonasmekasfilms.com
Sent: Wed, 23 Apr 2014 20:39
Subject: Re: [Frameworks] query for those who teach filmmaking
Tim,
I would hold their first projects to one minute in length. Talk to them up
front about each
. Worked well.
Nicky.
-Original Message-
From: John Knecht jkne...@colgate.edu
To: Experimental Film Discussion List frameworks@jonasmekasfilms.com
Sent: Wed, 23 Apr 2014 20:39
Subject: Re: [Frameworks] query for those who teach filmmaking
Tim,
I would hold their first projects
If you want to piss off students, wasting their time and money, then
by all means, make them learn some specialized, anachronistic subject
that has little or no application in the real world.
Aaron
ten years ago at art school I went to, this was the argument from
management about 16mm
...@flickharrison.com
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2014 12:29:52 -0700
To: frameworks@jonasmekasfilms.com
Subject: Re: [Frameworks] query for those who teach filmmaking
On Apr 18, 2014, at 15:26 , Tim Halloran televis...@hotmail.com wrote:
Slow=bad?!
Bah.
Tim
It's nice to work slowly if you are trying to do so; it's
just terrible--so much junk.
Shoot slow, edit slow, experience slow. ;]
Tim
--
From: fl...@flickharrison.com
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2014 12:29:52 -0700
To: frameworks@jonasmekasfilms.com
Subject: Re: [Frameworks] query for those who teach filmmaking
On Apr 18, 2014
Of course. Well stated.
Tim
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2014 15:39:10 -0400
From: jkne...@colgate.edu
To: frameworks@jonasmekasfilms.com
Subject: Re: [Frameworks] query for those who teach filmmaking
Tim,
I would hold their first projects to one minute in length. Talk to them up
front
--
From: fl...@flickharrison.com
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2014 12:29:52 -0700
To: frameworks@jonasmekasfilms.com
Subject: Re: [Frameworks] query for those who teach filmmaking
On Apr 18, 2014, at 15:26 , Tim Halloran televis...@hotmail.com wrote:
Slow=bad?!
Bah
--
From: fl...@flickharrison.com
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2014 12:29:52 -0700
To: frameworks@jonasmekasfilms.com
Subject: Re: [Frameworks] query for those who teach filmmaking
On Apr 18, 2014, at 15:26 , Tim Halloran
mailto:televis...@hotmail.comtelevis...@hotmail.com wrote:
Slow=bad?!
Bah.
Tim
It's
Forget this story telling stuff. That is something else.
For a class or assignments defined by an experimental' rubric, sure. But for
any general motion-picture production class story is essential, though not,
of course in a Bob McKee Hollywood formula kind of way. Which is to say that
You, sir, are obviously neither an educator nor an artist. ;]
Tim
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2014 13:02:39 -0700
To: frameworks@jonasmekasfilms.com
From: aa...@digitalartsguild.com
Subject: Re: [Frameworks] query for those who teach filmmaking
Damn you kids, get off my lawn!!
This argument
On 4/23/2014 4:21 PM, Tim Halloran wrote:
You, sir, are obviously neither an educator nor an artist. ;]
There is just about never a reason for an ad hominem attack such as this
one.
Fred Camper
Chicago
___
FrameWorks mailing list
Lol.
Alright, was just kidding around, but apologies to any delicate flowers who
took offense.
Tim
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2014 16:30:37 -0500
From: f...@fredcamper.com
To: frameworks@jonasmekasfilms.com
Subject: Re: [Frameworks] query for those who teach filmmaking
On 4/23/2014 4:21 PM
But you _can_ reject the technology. Not at all times, nor throughout the
whole program. But, just because oil painting exists does not mean that
art students shouldn't learn how to make frescos.
--scott
___
FrameWorks mailing list
It's true, professors with tenure can ignore the changing times.
There's no accountability and no consequences, so tenured professors
can be rigid, inflexible, and anachronistic, and get away with it.
But of course, that is doing the students a disservice. There's a
huge disconnect between
Then again, with all the dross out in the world, some people/students
should never be allowed to make a film/video.
Peter
(Perth)
On 24/04/2014 8:12 am, Aaron F. Ross aa...@digitalartsguild.com wrote:
It's true, professors with tenure can ignore the changing times.
There's no accountability and
As a tenured professor who has spent the entire day meeting with students about
their work, writing page-long evaluations of same, assisting with the
preparation of a student film festival - and the entire week researching
digital filmmaking technology and contemporary French cinema (to name
Late to the conversation, please forgive.
When I was teaching (an associates degree program), I taught as I had
learned.
Tell a story visually in three minutes. Edit in camera, no retakes, if
there is a mistake, so be it, it is after all only an exercise.
Yes it is a pain if you are parallel
On Apr 18, 2014, at 15:26 , Tim Halloran televis...@hotmail.com wrote:
Slow=bad?!
Bah.
Tim
It's nice to work slowly if you are trying to do so; it's insanely annoying if
you are not.
Imagine if a painter put a stroke on the canvas and couldn't see it for 30
seconds afterwards. Not
Re below, they didn't: http://www.bolex.ch/NEW/index.php
Nicky
-Original Message-
From: David Tetzlaff djte...@gmail.com
To: Experimental Film Discussion List frameworks@jonasmekasfilms.com
Sent: Fri, 18 Apr 2014 18:01
Subject: Re: [Frameworks] query for those who teach
I teach at CalArts and we switched our editing curriculum over to Avid two
years ago from FCP 7, mainly because FCP X and Premiere were not satisfactory
for our workflows, including working with flex files and cut lists for 16mm
editing (though animation students learn Premiere to integrate
FCP X feels like it's intended for assembling TV news programs instead of
feature films. That's probably fine for some things, but it depends what
you're trying to teach.
--scott
___
FrameWorks mailing list
FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com
assembling TV news programs
what do you mean by this? Seriously, I think there is a critique of FCP X
to be made, its just that I NEVER actually hear it. Feels like it is
intended for that can't make any sense. OH, THE CHILDREN!
On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 8:54 AM, Scott Dorsey klu...@panix.com
I think I'd like to second what Scot has said here: it depends on what you're
trying to teach.
Over the last three years, I've taught at three different schools and have
instructed with FCP 7, FCPX, and Premiere. I've had good results using all
three, and I've had unimaginative, lazy projects
One view: I work in the television industry. I think if everyone is
starting fresh, you should teach them at least two editing systems, and Avid
should be one, if they are interested in working in the professional world.
Avid Premiere, or Avid and at least one FCP version.
I think FCP X is fine
I had found it interesting that no one had mentioned Avid yet. In our
program, we made the switch to Avid (just as FCPX was introduced) mainly
because FCPX was largely being rejected by most post houses and we wanted
to make sure our students had *some* kind of industry standard software
After considerable discussion at my institution we chose to migrate to
Premiere. While there were some amongst us who were quite comfortable and
enthusiastic about FCPX, the consensus was that it was not flexible enough to
accommodate the experimental work we wanted to support nor compatible
not flexible enough to accommodate the experimental work we wanted to
support
this doesn't mean anything either. is a steenbeck flexible? Is a guillotine
splicer and rewinds flexible? Do you really think experimental work has not
been made on FCP X?
On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 11:39 AM, Esorp
We spend a lot of time with the learning curve of the software, and not as
much time as I'd like with the conceptual aspect of creative work.
BINGO!!
Frankly, I don't understand why anyone would abandon FCP7. When Bolex stopped
making the H16, schools using film didn't rush out and buy Arri
Thanks for the query, Irene. I am also interested to see what is happening at
other institutions. I teach at two schools in Nashville that were both using
FCP7 a couple of years ago, and they have adopted two different solutions. At
the Watkins College of Art, Design Film, they have largely
for what it's worth, FAVA (a film and video coop based in Edmonton,
Alberta) recently switched over all digital editing systems to
premiere with external drives ready and loaded with FCP7 and FCP X
should any user prefer or require what those programs offer. i think
even AVID is still available.
David, all your arguments are reasonable (and I always love reading your posts)
but gear wears out, updates break things, and cameras and tape break down.
I've seen whole computer labs lose firewire because one person plugged a
shazzed-up cable into all ten cameras in a single day.
That's the
Slow=bad?!
Bah.
Tim
Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 18, 2014, at 1:16 PM, Flick Harrison fl...@flickharrison.com wrote:
...will sloow you down, and that's bad creatively...
- Flick
___
FrameWorks mailing list
Dear Frameworks,
This isn't strictly an experimental film query, but I know many people who
teach read this listerve. My department has delayed for years the decision
about what to do about the transition away from teaching Final Cut Pro 7, and
result has been increasingly chaotic and
I disagree with $4000. A 21 iMac - what a school would likely be running
Final Cut on - starts at $1299. I assume there are bulk discounts for
schools, but they likely already have the computers.
I'm not a teacher, but I graduated four years ago and kept in touch with
teachers at my old school.
As a general rule of thumb, don't listen to anyone's opinion on Final Cut X
unless they've actually taken the time learn and understand it... Same
advice should be used for most things in life ;-)
On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 7:11 PM, Chris Freeman
christopherbriggsfree...@gmail.com wrote:
I
@jonasmekasfilms.com
Subject: Re: [Frameworks] query for those who teach filmmaking
I disagree with $4000. A 21 iMac - what a school would likely be running
Final Cut on - starts at $1299. I assume there are bulk discounts for schools,
but they likely already have the computers.
I'm not a teacher, but I
I am teaching at Dongguk University in Seoul now. I brought over
eight super-8 cameras and all the raw products needed to mix together
BW reversal chemicals, 60 rolls of Tri-X, a few viewers and
splicers. The school switched to digital five years ago, but they
still have a couple of Arriflexes
I would steer clear of iMacs for video editing,
they are underpowered. If you want to render HD
video, it's going to be slow and painful on even
the high end iMacs. The Mac Pro is very fast, but
very expensive. It is only available with small
solid state drives, so you have to buy additional
On the original topic of editing software, I’d throw my weight behind switching
to Premiere. At the University of Florida, I experimented for a semester with
FCPX, and I found it buggy dumbed down in ways that made it hard to do things
that I’ve come to expect from my editing systems. The
I really don't get this idea that FCP X is dumb? What do people mean by
that? FCP X is obviously not dumb, are you referring to features? Clip
tagging with keywords, for example, is totally innovative and forward
thinking (it seems to me) and allows an editor to navigate through more
footage more
Apple is very direct in their intention to make FCPX more favorable
to the consumer and IMovie user. They recognize that the professional
market is too small for their bottom line. Therefore, yes, they are
dumbing it down. Why, otherwise, is every professional editor I know
either
iMovie isn't dumb either. In 2000-2001 ish there was a major move away from
FCP 3 (at the time) to iMovie, and a lot of professional editors edited
exclusively on iMovie, including Zach Stiglitz and Art Jones, I believe.
So, yeah, the iMovie as derogatory slur doesn't make much sense to me
42 matches
Mail list logo
