SCREEN-L Archives

July 1995, Week 2

SCREEN-L@LISTSERV.UA.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Donald Larsson <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 7 Jul 1995 09:13:05 -0600
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (24 lines)
Mike Frank asks:
" . . . now, these comments on comments on comments get really unwieldy so let
me respond very briefly and put the question as brutally as possible: while
there's no doubt that film gives more resolutiuon than video, why is that
important?  exactly what information does that extra detail provide?  (i
don't doubt that there's more PLEASURE in watching a good film version . . .
but is that really all that's at stake?"
 
 
For some films, perhaps many (although it may be heresy to say so) I don't
know if the difference is all *that* important.  And--again--a good video
on laserdisc especially can often beat out a crummy 16 mm. print.  But in
some films (perhaps many), the difference can be important in conveying the
overall tone and look of the film.  This is especially true of films that
 make extensive use of elements of mise-en-scene (settings, props, lighting)
with details that can be fuzzed or lost in a video image.  Von Sternberg is
a director whose work should always be seen in new 35mm. prints!
 
Don Larsson, Mankato State U (MN)
 
----
To signoff SCREEN-L, e-mail [log in to unmask] and put SIGNOFF SCREEN-L
in the message.  Problems?  Contact [log in to unmask]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2