--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Brook Hinton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >
> > 3. The manifesto/project does become problematic in some respects in > that making a Lumiere is now, at least in the videoblogging world, > seen as connected with the Andreas and Brittany's project, even though > the maker may have their own reasons for working in a form that dates > back to the dawn of cinema. Cheryl should be able to make Lumieres if > she chooses without it being seen as an endorsement of a manifesto she > doesn't agree with, and she should be able to CALL them Lumieres, as > the use of the term to denote work that is inspired by and works > within limitations similar to that of the of the original Lumiere > Brothers films predates videoblogging. let alone the manifesto. This > is not, however, the fault of Andreas and Brittany, nor of any > videoblogger at all. But Lumieres are already being associated with the manifesto, which IMO is extremely problomatic. What happens if Andreas and Brittany's manifesto for Lumieres become the top result in searches for Lumieres? Would the Lumiere brothers or their family members (if any are still living) be happy with their work being associated with this manifesto? What happens when vloggers no longer want to create Lumieres because they don't want to be associated with Andreas's and Brittany's manifesto? Those are real issues and concerns and it does have a reflection upon Andrea's and Brittany, they are using the Lumiere vidoe's to further their own "version" of videoblogging. So they do bear responsability. You can say do all the research you want but perception does become reality at some point and if the perception is that Lumieres are a product or byproduct of someone else manifesto...that is a big deal and something that needs to be considered by those involved.. Heath http:\\batmangeek.com > > __________________________________________________ > Brook Hinton > film/video/audio art > www.brookhinton.com > studio vlog/blog: www.brookhinton.com/temporalab >
