SCREEN-L Archives

August 1993

SCREEN-L@LISTSERV.UA.EDU

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

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

Print Reply
Sender:
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
Date:
Sat, 14 Aug 1993 12:35:43 EST
In-Reply-To:
Message of Fri, 13 Aug 1993 09:32:00 CDT from <[log in to unmask]>
Reply-To:
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (13 lines)
Many people working with video, particularily with single camera production, ie
. ENG/EFP began as filmmakers. I for one worked with both formats and still
  prefer to work with film. The language reflects concepts that were for the
  most part developed in film. It might be argued that the differences in the
  formats is less and less all the time. We often shoot on film, transfer to
  tape and edit electronicaly; we might shoot on tape and transfer to film etc.
  I find that film has a definite advantage as an originating format, but this
  will change in time. We are making images with sound and in the long run the
  format will not matter. The production process is much the same, more depend-
  ant on budget, than format.
 
                        Garrick

ATOM RSS1 RSS2